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

That says alot right there. Most here are always thinking of ways to make it easier.

One thing to consider is if you're hunting steep back country, bushwhacking over dead falls, climbing, side hilling steep loose rocky slopes, wet or icy rocks you are bound to fall from time to time. I sure do and its nice having a durable scope on my rifle. SS 3x9, NF or Bushnell

I usually try to lose 2 or 3lbs of excess fat before venturing any distance afield, desert, woods or mountains.

10X is great for anything over 3-400 yd. 3-9X for less.

If you can shoot, a 1-4X works well.

I don't care about how flat shooting it is or isn't. Match the optics to the accuracy and purpose for the rifle. "Over-scope" for load workup, then when you've found the load, choose a scope that matches its accuracy and purpose. If a fixed 10x is the right answer, then you have the wrong rifle under it. IMHO, of course.

Tom

Me either. I have two seven-pound rifles (OK, maybe 7 1/4). One has an S&B PM II on it, the other an NXS. The weight of the total package depends more on the rifle you start with than the scope:

It's true, the fixed 10X is great for stuff over 3 or 400 yards. The thing is, it's great for less than 300 too. It all depends on where you're hunting and how much cover there is.

Picking up an antelope on the prairie at 100 is no sweat with a 10X, same as picking up anything out in the open at less than 300, like a sheep above timberline.

^^^^^^ this.

I have NF SHVs on 2 SA Kimber Montanas and 2 Burris Veracity on my LA Kimbers. The SA still weigh less than 7lbs and the LA weigh an ounce or 2 over 7lbs. The total rifle weight is not an issue.

Bwinters:
How good is the Burris glass? Clear and bright compared to others?

Please explain.

Thank you.

I find Burris glass entirely acceptable for hunting legal shooting hours - 30 minutes before after sunrise/sunset. I'm not much on having the absolute 'brightest' low light scope. I hunt 2-3-4 states every year from western elk/deer to whitetails in a couple states. I've used the Burris Fullfield II, e1, and Veracity and have managed to shoot more than a few animals throughout the day.

I think upper end Leupolds are a bit brighter than Burris glass. Same with Zeiss Conquest line. I'll trade a few degrees of brightness for repeatable tracking and holding zero.

I've also found Burris scopes to be pretty darn hardy, meaning they can take a bump without losing zero. I've run several tall target tests with the Veraciry and SHV side by side and found them almost identical with respect to tracking and repeatability. I dont do alot of turret twisting so cant comment on longevity of the consistency in tracking. I also dont shoot past 400 yards on unwounded game so cant comment on long range repeatability.

Long winded way of saying, I find them entirely acceptable for hunting.

No.

Yes, it makes a light rifle top heavy--especially with the RR trestle spanning the action with med rings to accommodate the 42mm lens adding even more to the weight and leverage-- and making it harder to carry. And slower to use when elk are encountered at hair burning range. And slower to use at ranges when dialing is not necessary but the dialers don't know anything but to dial.

The good news is it leaves more elk for you to hunt. So if a guy is really strategic about it, he would encourage everybody to adopt such a hunting rig.

I could care less what anyone wants to use - there's no "right" answer, just personal preference.

My one close friend here that hunts how I do (solo, mult-day backpack elk hunts on public land) uses light rifles with heavy, dial scopes. I like Dots/B&C, or a CDS at the most on a smaller, light Leupold scope body. If anything, I'd prefer all my rifles to have more barrel weight, not more weight higher on the receiver. In fact, I plan to turn my current MT 308 into a 23" bbl'd 6.5CM with the "Modified Lilja" pattern. Should add around 5oz's, with most of that weight being "out front" where it helps settling down the rifle.

Hike your own hike.

Casey,

No bites yet? Lols. Ya might reconsider the ole fly rod, Jk

Tight lines

Yeah, he's got to be trolling. The post is too obnoxious to be serious.

I agree with this.
I am not hyper concerned with weight, but I greatly prefer a rifle that balances properly. Putting a heavy scope on a light rifle is a disaster in this regard IMO. I also detest turrets on a hunting gun and greatly prefer a ballistic reticle, all sniper boy fantasies aside.

My Kimber Montana 7-08 had a Leupold Ultralight 3-9, it has a VX-5HD 3-15x44 now. It's still light. I don't regret is one bit, but I might above 8K feet.

do you carry a spotter

None.

ditto

A powerful scope does not have to be a heavy scope... before I ever put on a heavy 10X fixed scope I would mount a 4.5-14X40mm 1" tube scope... 13 ounces, relatively compact and the power to reach out when necessary.