Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Backpack Hunting For what conditions would you put a heavy scope on a mountain rifle?

I have enjoyed the years but my late 1970's maybe early 80's is a Weaver steel tube 3x9 40mm. The lenses are getting a little foggy looking at the front lens.
Just though I could put something with a little better glass and shave a little weight off. I am even thinking of putting a New trigger on my Remington 700 BDL why because I did not send it in during the recall, because it shot so nice.
I'm 59 now and only have a few more years and want to make sure it's safe for my Son when he gets it or sells it.

I do it because I like the capabilities of the heavier scopes I use. Right now on my 3 lightweight hunting rifles I have Bushnell LRHS 3-12x43mm scopes mounted. All three come in at the same total weight of 7lbs. It’s not as light as could be but 7lbs is light enough for packing and I have great ability in the package for backpack hunting and fun at the range.

I have a .308 wearing a swaro z3 3-10x42 (it’s only 0.7oz heavier than the 3-9x36 z3) that weighs in at 5lb’s flat. I haven’t had any issues The scope holding zero. This rifle was built for solo back country hunts shooting closer distances.
I have a kimber MA .280ai wearing a Leupold VX6HD 3-18x44 that weighs in at 7lb’s flat. This Package was assembled for packability while still encountering lots of open plain/valley shots with longer distances.

I have a kimber SubAlpine in .280 AI wearing a Leupold VX 4.5-14X44. This last week it killed its first elk at an easy 266 yards. After carrying a 9lb+ rifle for years, this one is a dream

They’re a very nice rifle IMO and the 280 is a great all around caliber.

The way I look at it, the lightweight rifle allows you to use a little heavier scope and not end up lugging a heavy rifle up and down the mountain.

Of course, if I was expecting some close-in quick shots in timber or some such, I'd keep the scope light but you don't need the advantages of a heavy scope for that anyway.

Tikka t3x SL with heavy warne rings (the ones that use the integrated rail) and an swfa 3-9x42 HD is 7lbs 13oz. Not a lightweight scope, but not a heavy setup.

I’ve been shooting Kimber montanas with 30mm zeiss Duralyt scopes and nightforce SHV’s

It’s more in your head than any real world negative impacts of the heavier scope.

[quote=smokepole]The way I look at it, the lightweight rifle allows you to use a little heavier scope and not end up lugging a heavy rifle up and down the mountains [quote=smokepole]

^^ This for me.

I’ve paired Kimber Hunter 84’s with SWFA 3x9 MQ for what I feel are amazingly agile and flexible, hunting rifles.

I use the NF 2.5-10 compact on my lightweight rifles and never had an issue shooting at the longest distances the conditions allow. Good glass, reliable adjustments and light weight.

Yes. I’ve got SWFA 3-9’s and SWFA 6x42’s on all my hunting rifles now. Reminds me I need to sell my Leopold 6x42’s with m1’s and CDS dials.. Interested?

My last 6x42 M1 might be getting the Black Friday boot from SWFA. We’ll see how the 3x9 pans out.

Agreed. I'm always perplexed when some people are bothered by how others choose to scope their rifles (not directed at OP, just an observation). This conversation comes up quite often. I have lightweights with heavy scopes and lightweights with ultra light scopes. I have heavy rifles with heavy scopes and heavy rifles with lightweight scopes. Each has its own purpose for me and some are just convenient. My first thought when the question "why a heavy scope on a lightweight rifle" comes up is usually "it's probably because the lightweight rifle with the owner's preferred scope makes for a much lighter package than would the same scope with a heavy rifle". My second thought is, "it must be what the owner prefers".

Swarovski's Z5's are my favorite hunting optic. About 16ozs., second to none clarity, ballistic turret, 5x magnification. Reasonably priced at $1250. I even use one on my competition 556AR. It's taken a serious beating and just keeps going. I like Nightforce just as much, maybe more for bench rifles and non-sporting rifles, but they are almost double the weight.

I have a SWFA 6x MQ on my Montana. IMO - heavy scope on light rifle that ends up creating a light rifle compared to the same scope on an "average" weight rifle.

I know the "handiness" takes a hit but the scope tracks, returns to zero and doesn't lose zero - which were more important to me than having an ultimate light rifle.

I am a few years past 70 and have hunted the majority of my life with standard weight rifles, and Leupold and Zeiss , variable scopes, most 3 X 9 and 4 X12. Two years ago my wife bought a Kimber lightweight for me and I promptly mounted a 30mm leupold variable on it. My theory has always been, if you can't pack your rifle, its too heavy or your not in adequate shape for getting the job done. Most hunters stay close to roads, ride on ATV's , and never go far from the beaten path. If you can't pack a 8 1/2 or 9 lb. rifle stay home, you should not be in the woods.

thanks for all the replies. I recently acquired a 6.5 RPM Weatherby Weathermark Bronze and will scope it with the 10X SS... I look forward to putting the rifle and the scope thru its paces... managed to also acquire 3 boxes of factory 127 LRX... I figure all up the setup will be about 7.5 lb

I agree with you elkmen, but for me it's not that I can't pack an 8 1/2 or 9-lb, rifle, it's just that I prefer to pack a 7-lb. rifle.

That means I can bring more food or a thicker sleeping pad.

Exactly. This is the backpack hunting section and if you are on a true backpack hunt the total weight of your entire pack/rifle is absolutely a consideration. A pound or two less in your rifle allows you to pack other pieces of gear that can make a real difference on your hunt.

With that said I run mostly 2.5-10x32 Nightforce compacts on my lightweight backpack rifles because they have been indestructible for me and I have total confidence in them. I have never had an issue with a rifle wearing one feeling unbalanced and you can still run a fairly lightweight setup.

I cut weight in a lot of places and do without several things many folks here consider "essential", but not just so that I can add weight in other places. The weight cost/benefit ratio depends on a lot of things: personal preferences being hugely important..

I have no issue with a SWFA 6X on my Kimber Montana .223 Rem for backpack hunts, but lightening things up always crosses my mind. I just am not willing to sacifice scope reliability and confidence to save weight in said scope. I sometimes go without fire starter, and even without a tent/sleeping bag on shorter, good weather hunts to lighten up. Sometimes I regret it, sometimes I don't but I don't regret bringing a heavier scope if it is what I am confident with.