Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Fixed 6x on a dedicated deer gun

Meopta 6x

Nice buck GrimJim!

While I tend to use 2x7s on my rifles, I see nothing in those pictures that would preclude me from using a 6x or having my scope set at 6x.

Sir, that is because on a beautiful blue sky morning with out a cloud in the sky. You could probably find a bird in your scope before it got over the horizon!!!! In other words you probably can shoot. Finding chit in the scope is required to be able to hit it.





Take care, Willie

All I'm saying is that I don't see why a 6x scope wouldn't work in the pictures shown. I have used a fixed 7.5x Leupold (gasp) in far thicker without issues.

Would work fine for "some" shots. Betting a sit in the stand would prove the brush is thicker than shown in the pictures. I think people are merely saying what would or wouldn't work for "them".

As I'm new to these forums, what's the difference in a leupold 6x , swfa 6x, the meopta, or even an older m8?

I'll take a shot at that question, Craig, although there are plenty of people on the forum with more knowledge of optics.

The "older" Leupold M8 6x is a lovely scope (I own and use 2 - one on a 30-06 for elk, and one on a 25-06 for antelope and deer), and for most people and most types of hunting, it would serve somewhwere between adequately and beautifully. It has the advantage of being cheap, since you can buy one in very good condition for $100-150 in my area. And as is the case with most fixed power scopes, it is also quite rugged and dependable - at least for people who don't twist turrets and use their scopes in a "set and forget" mode.

The newer fixed 6x Leupolds are more expensive, but have the advantage of better lens coatings, so light transmission is slightly improved and flare is reduced to some degree. Improvements in glass making over the years have also likely increased resolution. I'll leave it to others to produce actual figures if they have them at hand. The downside to these scopes seems mainly to be that moving the turrets is not a precise affair and turning the turret in one direction 15 clicks, then coming back 15 clicks can in some cases not return you to the same spot reliably.

The SWFA 6x may or may not have better "glass" than the Leupolds, but its glass quality is at least adequate for the large majority of users. The attraction of the "Super Chicken", as some like to call it, is that it is built like a tank and the adjustments are reliable. For those who shoot long range and like to twist their turrets rather than estimate holdover, this is a HUGE benefit - actually an essential feature for precision shooting at long range. The only downside I can see for the SWFA scope is that it is appreciably heavier and the turrets stick out from the scope body much more than any of the Leupold scopes we've so far discussed.

The Meopta is unknown to me personally (I've never owned one) but general reviews agree that it is of very high quality - very close to the alpha brands - at a price of roughly half of those same brands. The one complaint I read most often is that it is also heavier than a comparable Leupold.

I'm sure others will also weigh in, but I think you'll find this a good bare outline of the subject.

Thanks Czech that's what I was looking for.

I had the Leupold FX-II 6X36 LRD CDS on a 308 for several years. Never found it lacking. Shot deer from 25ish yards out to 200 and a bit. Killed some rocks out to 400, but no deer. The only "con", I had trouble trying to dial range with the CDS, but as a set and forget it was great. Have a Leupold VX-2 2-7X33 LRD on it right now, but thinking of going back to the 6X36.





Also use the Leupold FX-II 4X33 on a .257 Ultra light. No issues with that one either.

I've had a M8 6x36 on my .300 win mag for 14 years. Actually it's the only scope that has been on there. It isn't a dedicated deer rifle, it is a dedicated everything bigger than a coyote rifle. Besides an occasional hunt with a rifle I inherited from my grandpa it is pretty much my only big game rifle. I do hunt pretty open country. Couple things I like are the simplicity and compactness, but mostly that it doesn't move and always stays the same. I also bought it for $100 when I was a near starving college student. But now that I could afford "better" I still don't want to change.

I've killed several elk at around 400 yards. A couple weeks ago I shot a cow elk at around 200 yards. She ran over the hill. When I went over there she was laying down head down, thought she was dead. She jumped up at maybe 15 yards. I didn't have any trouble putting two more in her shoulder. Now it was a bright sunny day and in open country. If i was constantly hunting very thick country, like western or, wa stuff I'd probably do something else.

I think most guys that are good shooters and hunters can probably do pretty dang good with lots of scopes that are suppose to be inferior.

In 13 years of guiding big game hunters, in NW Wyoming, I've never seen a shot at big game (inside a little over 400 yards) that would have given me the slightest concern with my 6x. At least in the intermountain west there are much more important things to stress over than scope power.

I prefer fixed power scopes. I have variables on many of my rifles but that's because I have trouble getting the fixed power scopes that I want, so there have been times I just bought a 2X-7X and left it on low power. But about 1/2 of my rifles wear fixed 4X scopes and a few have fixed 2X and 2.5X scopes. My eyes are old now so I do like at least 2X.

I have spoken to a few optic companies and tried to get them to make a "hunters scope" and some have talked to me, returned calls, and spent some time discussing it, but so far I have seen no action in the direction I'd like.

The line of scopes I want to see (and I would buy if I could) would have 30MM tubes made from spring tempered stainless steel and have objective lenses of around 40 MM. I want them rugged as a claw hammer. I'd want them in 2.5X 4X and 6X.
The reticle would be similar to a wide duplex but the cross hair from center to 6:00 would be slender all the way down, and be marked with 4MOA increments, a dot, a small dash, a longer dash and a longest dash, then a dot, and dash ----- and so on, down to the bottom of the field of view.

That's it!
No extra cr_p and Emperors New Clothing.
A hunter's scope.

With the 4 MOA graduations and rifleman can learn his holdovers and intersection out to any distance he wants to shoot in an easy afternoon on a known distance course, or simply by pacing off distance in the field. You learn your hold-overs and hold-offs for wind with your load, and that's all you'll ever need for 99.5% of the hunting you'd ever do.

A K.I.S.S. rule scope.

I am absolutely convinced that many (maybe most) hunters are "over-scoped". I see such silliness every year. I saw it with 2 hunters just this season about 6 weeks and 2 months ago. Hunters who have troubles finding the game in the scope fast enough because they have too much magnification, and those that loose time and opportunities, screwing around with the gizmos that are so common of scopes today. One hunter made a long shot and missed, and then forgot to dial his super-duper- scope back down, so on the next deer about 3 hours later, he shot over and missed another one. That one at only 125 yards.

I will take a good fixed 4 X scope for most of my hunting rifles and instead of stepping up to a fixed 6, in the cases where I don't want a fixed 4 I am likely to want a fixed 2.5X or maybe 3X.

A little piece of truth most shooters seem to forget is this:
The high magnification of a scope DOESN'T make the target bigger and DOESN'T make the bullet bigger. They just look that way!

If you can't hold still with 3X you can hold any better with 12X. But finding your game in the field of view is WAY easier at 3X than it is at 12 X.

If you hold-over 5 feet, 5 feet over a target that looks big is NO DIFFERENT then 5 feet over a target that looks smaller. The bullet and the target don't care!

And making them look bigger doesn't help you hit them at all.

Have used the 6x36 and 6x42 more than a little and from close to my far. (3 steps out to 358yards) and haven't found them lacking. Have used the fixed 3x at around 50 on a trotting Deer in the open and the 1.5-5 close and perhaps out to pushing 100. Between the 36 and 42 I could use either and be happy, but the 42 seems better all around.

Something I see more than rarely. When winter comes and the clothes get thicker, most peoples rifles are too long in the LOP. Thus they struggle even if they have an ingrained good mount. Have a bad mount and things can GTH before you even get the safety off.

The BobinNH rifle I won here has a 6x42 on and the LOP is a little too long. I knew it would be, but didn't have the time to get it shortened. When the Deer busted out I found him, but I wasn't using all the FOV that scopes provides. Got it done, but it will be shortened before it goes out again.

Pure woods scope I really like the Leupold 3x. More than a few cried for one, but it seems few sent in.

My favorite all time deer on the 'Fire. I was just thinking about that photo a few days ago while hunting. Hadn't seen it in a few years.

I thought you were a handicapped kid.


Following your 'logic', one would shoot a better score at trap if the clays were the size of 50 cent piece than if they were the size of a Frisbee. I know you're too fugging stupid to understand, so the point is, you say all I shoot is dinks, yet I can manage to do that at 20 yards with a 6x scope, but it would be MUCH harder if the target were bigger?

Sweet Jesus, you are the handicapped kid. I've rifle hunted more days this year than 4 Wisconsin deer seasons.

6x42 10Yards, maybe.

Didn't that come with a Swarovski variable on it?

Yes it did and it shot fine with it. However, I liked the Leupold 6x42 with Post and Duplex more for an all around Pa Deer rifle.

Nice Deer Jim. PA????

I don't know squat about lens coatings or physics (other than the fact that my wee wee grows when wimminz are around) but I can tell a definite difference between the 6x36 and 6x42, and not just for 3-5 minutes a day.

I have no issue with the FXII 6x36-got one on my main coyote rifle but the 6x42 is quite a bit better and brighter to my eye. Maybe it is due to the lens coatings, maybe it is due to the extra 6mm objective size. I dunno but I do find the 6x42 easier to get onto moving critters. I sometimes have a hard time seeing really thin reticles, but I can discern brightness fairly well. Everyone's eyes are different.

I am 38, BTW.





You have a medical reference for that?