The title says it all. What is your selection of the most "recoil proof" RIFLE scope (that you have used)?
Share the reason "WHY?".
Share the rifle, the chambering, and load ( bullet weight and MV).
This does NOT mean the reason " why" is "because xxx scope has lasted 600 rounds fired on my such and such chambered rifle.". The " WHY? " means specific DESIGN FEATURES of the scope you are claiming being "recoil proof" or "tough."
Well as for tough I have to say some of the old steel tube weavers could take a licking and stay sighted in. The 3 and 4 power K4's never let me down. Glass only so so.
Whatever happened to the old Burris posi-lock? Seemed like a good solution. I liked the compact Burris scopes too but they were discontinued. I recall they had steel on steel adjustment and double springs. Have a 3x9 compact on a .338 WM. Haven't adjusted since sighting in about 25 years ago. Still hits two inches high at 100.
The std Burris Signatures are battle tanks, and the Posi Lock were sure nuff a battle tank. I have a 3x12 Signature that has proven to be battle tough.
I had a Remington Model 660 in 350 Remington Mag. I had a Redfield 2-7x32 on it that never had an issue. It now sits on a Marlin 1895XLR. Both generate plenty of recoil for me.
Not truly a recoil test but I use a S&B PMII 6x42 that I did a drop test on....unintentionally. I'd venture that scopes that handle any type of "beating" well will carry over to recoil too. 6.5 CM, 129 gr, ~2750 fps....so not much on this one for recoil. Story/pics below:
I think the scope mentioned above is durable/recoil proof because of the following: 1. Quality build - well machined parts that are assembled well 2. Fixed power - less moving parts 3. No parallax - less moving parts 4. Lighter weight - compared to some, not all. Heavier scope = more moment of inertia(?)....lighter scope would be less.
I use several NF NXS 2.5-10x42 (and x32) scopes on a variety of rifles from 375 Rugers to 223's. I think they are very recoil proof due to the following: 1. Quality build - same as above, also have "bonded" lenses....I'm not sure the details on this but NF thinks it's important. I believe NF also uses a thicker tube than most manufactures. 2. Lighter weight - again, for the type of scope. 3. Short tube and OAL length - a shorter scope of the same build quality "should" resist deformation more than a longer scope 4. NF testing
I think reliability can be helped on any scope by mounting with rings spaced near the ends of the main body tube to reduce unsupported areas and make the levers "shorter".
How much any or all of these matter I'm not sure but they're my "why" on design features.
Michael McCourey, who used to be Michael458 on the AR forum, developed the 500 MDM and other heavy caliber wildcats. He has done thousands of rounds of testing and load development on these and other African-size rounds. He settled on the low-power Nikon scopes as the most tolerant of continuous heavy recoil.
From a physical perspective, the whole concept of lighter scopes being more recoil proof is actually a bit of a fallacy. What damages things is acceleration. For a given amount and direction of recoil force, a lighter scope accelerates more and a heavier scope accelerates less. Heavier scopes have more inertia, which means that they are harder to accelerate. But that also means that they put more strain on the mounting system than a lighter scope. So heavier scopes are harder on mounting systems, but are more resistant to damage from recoil. Of course this assumes that a large part of the weight increase is in the tube and not lenses or other parts that also stress connection points and fastening methods within the scope. A simple analogy would be comparing the damage done by the acceleration of a child versus a large man when an identical force is applied (like a body check). The child would go flying across the room, while the large man might stumble back a little.
In terms of the most recoil-proof scope, I agree with JCM that most of the design features he mentioned would increase resistance to deformation and damage, and would add to the list the feature of having a small ocular and objective housing. By positioning the mass of the scope closer to the center of the scope tube, there is less torque applied on the tube. So with no way to qualify this, I would guess that the NF ATACR 1-8x is probably one of, if not the most recoil-proof scope on the market.
From a physical perspective, the whole concept of lighter scopes being more recoil proof is actually a bit of a fallacy. What damages things is acceleration. For a given amount and direction of recoil force, a lighter scope accelerates more and a heavier scope accelerates less. Heavier scopes have more inertia, which means that they are harder to accelerate. But that also means that they put more strain on the mounting system than a lighter scope. So heavier scopes are harder on mounting systems, but are more resistant to damage from recoil. Of course this assumes that a large part of the weight increase is in the tube and not lenses or other parts that also stress connection points and fastening methods within the scope. A simple analogy would be comparing the damage done by the acceleration of a child versus a large man when an identical force is applied (like a body check). The child would go flying across the room, while the large man might stumble back a little.
In terms of the most recoil-proof scope, I agree with JCM that most of the design features he mentioned would increase resistance to deformation and damage, and would add to the list the feature of having a small ocular and objective housing. By positioning the mass of the scope closer to the center of the scope tube, there is less torque applied on the tube. So with no way to qualify this, I would guess that the NF ATACR 1-8x is probably one of, if not the most recoil-proof scope on the market.
I think you are correct. In my stuff above any extra stress from weight related inertia (starting or stopping) would be on the mounts.
From a physical perspective, the whole concept of lighter scopes being more recoil proof is actually a bit of a fallacy. What damages things is acceleration. For a given amount and direction of recoil force, a lighter scope accelerates more and a heavier scope accelerates less. Heavier scopes have more inertia, which means that they are harder to accelerate. But that also means that they put more strain on the mounting system than a lighter scope. So heavier scopes are harder on mounting systems, but are more resistant to damage from recoil. Of course this assumes that a large part of the weight increase is in the tube and not lenses or other parts that also stress connection points and fastening methods within the scope. A simple analogy would be comparing the damage done by the acceleration of a child versus a large man when an identical force is applied (like a body check). The child would go flying across the room, while the large man might stumble back a little.
In terms of the most recoil-proof scope, I agree with JCM that most of the design features he mentioned would increase resistance to deformation and damage, and would add to the list the feature of having a small ocular and objective housing. By positioning the mass of the scope closer to the center of the scope tube, there is less torque applied on the tube. So with no way to qualify this, I would guess that the NF ATACR 1-8x is probably one of, if not the most recoil-proof scope on the market.
Crazy talk.... you Leupold hater you.... This is what an education will do to you.... ha
Originally Posted by Judman PS, if you think Trump is “good” you’re way stupider than I thought! Haha
Jordan, as you said a heavier scope puts more strain on the mounting system because of inertia but it’s the combined weight of the rifle and scope that determines how many g’s the system (scope included) will experience.
A given scope on a heavy rifle will be subjected to less acceleration/fewer g’s than the same scope on a light rifle.
On the other hand, on the same rifle, a light scope will be subjected to more g’s than a heavy scope because of the combined mass of the rifle + scope, not just the weight of the scope.
It’s similar to a question I ask our students. “In an ejection seat, who experiences more g’s, a light guy or a fat guy?” Intuitively you would think it would be the fat guy but the light guy will accelerate faster and experience more g’s and go higher.
Last edited by navlav8r; 07/25/21.
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.
Jordan, as you said a heavier scope puts more strain on the mounting system because of inertia but it’s the combined weight of the rifle and scope that determines how many g’s the system (scope included) will experience.
A given scope on a heavy rifle will be subjected to less acceleration/fewer g’s than the same scope on a light rifle.
On the other hand, on the same rifle, a light scope will be subjected to more g’s than a heavy scope because of the combined mass of the rifle + scope, not just the weight of the scope.
It’s similar to a question I ask our students. “In an ejection seat, who experiences more g’s, a light guy or a fat guy?” Intuitively you would think it would be the fat guy but the light guy will accelerate faster and experience more g’s and go higher.
From a physical perspective, the whole concept of lighter scopes being more recoil proof is actually a bit of a fallacy. What damages things is acceleration. For a given amount and direction of recoil force, a lighter scope accelerates more and a heavier scope accelerates less. Heavier scopes have more inertia, which means that they are harder to accelerate. But that also means that they put more strain on the mounting system than a lighter scope. So heavier scopes are harder on mounting systems, but are more resistant to damage from recoil. Of course this assumes that a large part of the weight increase is in the tube and not lenses or other parts that also stress connection points and fastening methods within the scope. A simple analogy would be comparing the damage done by the acceleration of a child versus a large man when an identical force is applied (like a body check). The child would go flying across the room, while the large man might stumble back a little.
In terms of the most recoil-proof scope, I agree with JCM that most of the design features he mentioned would increase resistance to deformation and damage, and would add to the list the feature of having a small ocular and objective housing. By positioning the mass of the scope closer to the center of the scope tube, there is less torque applied on the tube. So with no way to qualify this, I would guess that the NF ATACR 1-8x is probably one of, if not the most recoil-proof scope on the market.
Crazy talk.... you Leupold hater you.... This is what an education will do to you.... ha
My experience has been best when I just keep my recoil reasonably low. Thus if I really don't need it I don't shoot shoot the higher recoil stuff. 6.5 Grendel & 6mm Arc are my higher recoil guns for the past 5 years. Then the scope choice is less critical I suppose. The area I hunt consist of whitetail maybe a mule deer if I venture out west a fair bit & as far as dangerous game Cougar / Mountain lion is a very rare sighting by nearly anyone in my stomping grounds. So 30 grains of propellant pushing projectiles generally less than 129 grains or so just gets the job done quite handily with out much fuss.
Just pick anything with a long track record of success on 50 BMGs. Swarovski made a 10x42 specifically for that purpose. The SWFA fixed power and Nightforce NXS have done very well. So has the Leupold MkIV.
I am by no means an expert on this subject, as the other posters I'm sure have more experience than I do. So, I can only comment on what I have experienced. In my limited battery of scopes, the most durable (and recoil proof) scope I own would have to be an old Leupold FX-III 6x42. It has withstood years of use on rifles with muzzle breaks (very hard on scopes) . It even survived a fall from a 20' treestand (no, the rifle was not yet loaded) where it hit a cypress knee. The main tube was scratched and slightly dented but all I had to do was resight it and it was good to go. A few years ago it finally started fogging up but a trip to Leupold solved that. I have other scopes (all fixed power like a S&B 8x56, Leupold FX3 6x42, IOR 4X and Weaver Grand Slam 4.75x40) that in theory may well be just as durable but these haven't yet seen the use of the FX-III 6x42. As you can see, I am not a Leupold fanatic but merely reporting what I have experienced. YMMV.
Just pick anything with a long track record of success on 50 BMGs. Swarovski made a 10x42 specifically for that purpose. The SWFA fixed power and Nightforce NXS have done very well. So has the Leupold MkIV.
The Schmidt & Bender has been mounted on top of the Barret Light 50 from early on. It also has a reputation for reliability by our snipers. It is a survivor also.
The scope that has tolerated the recoil of .300 Weatherby shooting 180 gr loads, .35 Whelen with 225 gr loads, and 7mm Weatherby with 150 gr loads has been a Sightron S-II 3-9x42. It is my true scope for working through accuracy issues. I’m sure there are others just as good.
Life Member NRA, RMEF, American Legion, MAGA. Not necessarily in that order.
My experience has been best when I just keep my recoil reasonably low. Thus if I really don't need it I don't shoot shoot the higher recoil stuff. 6.5 Grendel & 6mm Arc are my higher recoil guns for the past 5 years. Then the scope choice is less critical I suppose. The area I hunt consist of whitetail maybe a mule deer if I venture out west a fair bit & as far as dangerous game Cougar / Mountain lion is a very rare sighting by nearly anyone in my stomping grounds. So 30 grains of propellant pushing projectiles generally less than 129 grains or so just gets the job done quite handily with out much fuss.
Your milage may vary.
I’ve begun to see that light, not so much for scope longevity, but simple economics. A Grendel-class round squeezes about 60 more loads out of a pound of powder and barrel life should never be an issue for most. Still have a few rifles for “standard” rounds, but I’m headed towards my Grendel as my working gun, with a couple of 6mms for when I might need to go longer. Lighter guns are easier on granda’s legs too. The easy answer to tough scopes is a lot of heavy parts, but light ones can be tough too when well-designed with good innards. Obviously they’re also easier on mounts, and it’s the whole system that determines reliability.
Each Nightforce scope was tested on a big bore range at ranges from 300 to 600 yards. Reticle graduations were found to be precise and the clicks repeatable. Nightforce successfully met the challenge of building a compact high-performance scope that was rugged enough to not only stand up to extreme climatic conditions and weather, but to withstand the repeated recoil of the most powerful magnum rifles. Tests include submersion in 100 ft. of water for 24 horus, freezing in a box cooled to minus 80 degreees F, then heating within an hour to 250 degrees F. Every scope is subjected to being hammered forth and back in a recoil machine that delivers 1,250 Gs, simulating the pounding of magnum rifles. After a scope takes numerous hits, it should be good for thousands of rounds. I know of no other brand of scope that undergoes such drastic testing for ruggedness!
I suspect we are all ill qualified to answer the question. Anecdotes are the best we can provide. I had a Simmons 2.5X shotgun scope on a Marlin Guide Gun 45-70. I paid $19.99 for it on closeout. I ran several hundred (not much in the grand scheme things) hot handloads through it without any hiccups. That rig was astonishingly accurate.
The new Leupold the military is using and Scenar Shooters is testing may be in this category. If so Leupold is only about 2 decades behind other manufacturers in producing top quality reliable scopes.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
I am the original poster. I have never had a rifle scope fail for any reason, the again, I don't have true "heavy recoiling" guns. My current "big guns" are two bolt action rifles: JC Higgins model 50 (FN Mauser 98, with a long tube Leupold M8 4x, and a Win m70 Extreme Weather with a Leupold M8 3x).
I used to have a Marlin 1895 45-70, which had a newer (made in Japan) Weaver Classic 2.5x. I shot it about 200 rounds ( 405 grain jacketed, 50 grains IMR 3031 for an estimated MV of 1700(?) fps. Scope was/is fine, still have it. Weaver's website/promotions for the newer Japan-made Classics stated they were "designed to withstand 10,000 ( as in ten thousand) rounds of 375 H&H." If that is true, my Weaver 2.5x Classic Series scope has a lot of tread left on it.
Just pick anything with a long track record of success on 50 BMGs. Swarovski made a 10x42 specifically for that purpose. The SWFA fixed power and Nightforce NXS have done very well. So has the Leupold MkIV.
The Schmidt & Bender has been mounted on top of the Barret Light 50 from early on. It also has a reputation for reliability by our snipers. It is a survivor also.
I'm sure they're good too. I don't have experience with them but if S&B said it was suitable for .50 BMG I'd have no doubts.
My 378 Bee has broken 3 Leupolds 4.5-14 MK IV and a varix 3 3.5x10.
Now she wears a 2.5x10x40mm NF compact
When your leupolds died, did they all of a sudden quit holding zero, or was it when you were trying to adjust point of impact? I’m curious because I had a vari-x-III 3.5x10 fail on a 340wby after several decades, but only upon trying to adjust point of impact when changing loads. It had held zero for 20 years…. and might still be if I hadn’t started trying new loads (Weatherby discontinued the 210 partition loading and I started playing around with 225 accubonds and partitions.
The title says it all. What is your selection of the most "recoil proof" RIFLE scope (that you have used)?
Share the reason "WHY?".
Share the rifle, the chambering, and load ( bullet weight and MV).
This does NOT mean the reason " why" is "because xxx scope has lasted 600 rounds fired on my such and such chambered rifle.". The " WHY? " means specific DESIGN FEATURES of the scope you are claiming being "recoil proof" or "tough."
After reading a few posts I see they didn't necessarily follow your request. So....
The toughest scope for me is a Leupold VX 2 1/2-8X32 handgun scope. I have no idea what design features made it so tough.
My Freedom Arms .454 broke about a dozen scopes, including the first Leupold VX 2 1/2-8X32 handgun scope. The better ones lasted about 300 rounds of full throttle loads; as did the first Leupold. Some didn't last for the first cylinder full. But the replacement lasted thousands of rounds; including one time when I tripped and the scope hit a rock. It didn't even change zero. I fired many sub 2" five shot groups at 100 yards so it was very easy to verify the zero didn't move.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
I've had a Tasco on my bolt action 308 for about 20 years. Never had to adjust it. Killed many a deer. I also have a Trijicon. I've had terrible problems with Bushnell scopes and cheap Chinese scopes I put on 22 rifles.
My vote is for the Leupold LPS scope 3.5 x 14 x 50 Built like a tank when Leupold was trying to take over the European market. Glass was made by Leica. Have it on a 300 RUM and never had to move it after sighting in. I have several other rifles with LPS scopes on them. Glass is right there with Zeiss Divary The 300 RUM is shooting a 180 grain Nosler partition bullet at 3400 FPS. Recoil is pretty stout. Glass is very good for early morn and late eve shots. You can shoot while others are walking back to truck.
My 378 Bee has broken 3 Leupolds 4.5-14 MK IV and a varix 3 3.5x10.
Now she wears a 2.5x10x40mm NF compact
When your leupolds died, did they all of a sudden quit holding zero, or was it when you were trying to adjust point of impact? I’m curious because I had a vari-x-III 3.5x10 fail on a 340wby after several decades, but only upon trying to adjust point of impact when changing loads. It had held zero for 20 years…. and might still be if I hadn’t started trying new loads (Weatherby discontinued the 210 partition loading and I started playing around with 225 accubonds and partitions.
The groups went to crap and I could not sight the rifle in
My 378 Bee has broken 3 Leupolds 4.5-14 MK IV and a varix 3 3.5x10.
Now she wears a 2.5x10x40mm NF compact
When your leupolds died, did they all of a sudden quit holding zero, or was it when you were trying to adjust point of impact? I’m curious because I had a vari-x-III 3.5x10 fail on a 340wby after several decades, but only upon trying to adjust point of impact when changing loads. It had held zero for 20 years…. and might still be if I hadn’t started trying new loads (Weatherby discontinued the 210 partition loading and I started playing around with 225 accubonds and partitions.
Leupolds are meant to be adjusted.... one time and one time only
Originally Posted by Judman PS, if you think Trump is “good” you’re way stupider than I thought! Haha
I suspect we are all ill qualified to answer the question. Anecdotes are the best we can provide. I had a Simmons 2.5X shotgun scope on a Marlin Guide Gun 45-70. I paid $19.99 for it on closeout. I ran several hundred (not much in the grand scheme things) hot handloads through it without any hiccups. That rig was astonishingly accurate.
My 378 Bee has broken 3 Leupolds 4.5-14 MK IV and a varix 3 3.5x10.
Now she wears a 2.5x10x40mm NF compact
Fotis,
Would you mind sharing details on the total rifle weight, and loads, that killed those scopes?
Thanks,
Jason
Japanese Lazermark MK V about 8.5 lbs bare----(maybe 10 lbs all in with optics?) dual recoil lugs both lugs bedded from the factory. #3 contour WBY barrel. WBY Muzzle break 260 Accubonds at 3100 fps 270 Hornady SP at 3100 fps 300 Hornady SPBT at 3050 fps Leupold dual dovetail or QR bases/rings
Michael McCourey, who used to be Michael458 on the AR forum, developed the 500 MDM and other heavy caliber wildcats. He has done thousands of rounds of testing and load development on these and other African-size rounds. He settled on the low-power Nikon scopes as the most tolerant of continuous heavy recoil.
You have that correct I've sent more Leupold for repairs 3-6 every year for the past 25 +....Nikons are the only way to go they take a beating from "Big Bores" and keep on working.... Haven't sent a Leupold for repairs in 5 or 6 years but I don't own one.....
I've had a Tasco on my bolt action 308 for about 20 years. Never had to adjust it. Killed many a deer. I also have a Trijicon. I've had terrible problems with Bushnell scopes and cheap Chinese scopes I put on 22 rifles.
Had a Tasco Titan (Japanese built) on my .460 for nearly 20 years and could not damage it, alter zero, fog up or any other defect. My .460 loads were .460 loads.
When truth is ignored, it does not change an untruth from remaining a lie.
Have had a few,none were worth a [bleep] schit. Hint.....................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
It is VERY "surprising",that Reupold's Bottom Rung bullschit doesn't have a mechanical chance. Hint.
Fhuqking LAUGHING!.........................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
Some folks actually shoot and Crying Karens such as yourself,"get" to read about it...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?
The Reupold 2.5x has been a Steaming Piece Of Fhuqking Schit,from inception. Hint.
Internals matter. Hint.
Pardon my simply shooting it all and then some,as you set mired upon your couchbound kchunt. Hint.
Bless your heart.
Fhuqking LAUGHING!..................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
I enjoy the luxuries of not being forced to guess,while a guess is all that you can "do"...you "lucky" kchunt. Hint. Congratulations?!?
Do not forget,that Imitation is THE most Sincere form of Flattery. Hint. Fhuqking laughing!
Bless your heart for trying though.
Hint...................
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
Just pick anything with a long track record of success on 50 BMGs. Swarovski made a 10x42 specifically for that purpose. The SWFA fixed power and Nightforce NXS have done very well. So has the Leupold MkIV.
My Burris lasted 9 rounds on a 50 before the + became a X.
I think I have a swfa variable on it for right now...
Last edited by KRAKMT; 07/31/21. Reason: Extra indefinite article
Looks like fun. Tip o’ the hat to your son for his service.
Thanks. He's a good kid. That was during his first deployment to Okinawa. Now he's there for a third time, as an instructor at the Marine Corps Jungle Warfare Training Center. He's a helluva shot, too, and the possessor of a lot of hand-me-down rifles. But he's not perfect. I'm sure he'll become a knob-twister. He's into long range shooting and wants to settle out west when he can.
I’ve had good luck with low fixed power Leupolds. Hopefully that continues as I put a 3X fixed on a 356 Winchester 94. Les
Have had great luck with 3x20 Leupolds, both M8s and FXs on various hard-kicking rifles up to .416 Rigby.
Even fell on a rifle that had a 3x20 FX on it around a dozen years ago on Africa, while coming down a steep slope after a rain. The fall bent the front end of the scope slightly but noticeably, and I took a shot on a nearby log to see what happened. The shot was off--but adjusting the scope with a few shots got it back on zero. Killed a big bushbuck with it an hour later at 250 yards.
It's still working fine....
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
John I think I remember reading your story about that incident. I have always liked the little lightweight low magnification Leupolds. They always seem to hold up well. Although I did have a little 2.5 recently with a slightly canted reticle. About an 1/8 of a turn if I remember correctly.
Its not always easy to do the right thing, But it is always the right thing to do.
My fieldcraft 7-08 just trashed another scope. This time a 3-9 sfwa SS. The 3-9 is my favorite SS but that's the 3rd one I've trashed. The fixed ones are definitely more reliable. The little 5 pound 7-08 is tough on scopes.
One company told me I tighten the rings too much. If I don't crank them down the scope slips on this light rifle.
I put another 3-9 on it. It's good thing I have extras because the other one must be going to Japan. They've had it for months. If it toasts another one I'll have to pull a fixed 6 off of something.
My fieldcraft 7-08 just trashed another scope. This time a 3-9 sfwa SS. The 3-9 is my favorite SS but that's the 3rd one I've trashed. The fixed ones are definitely more reliable. The little 5 pound 7-08 is tough on scopes.
One company told me I tighten the rings too much. If I don't crank them down the scope slips on this light rifle.
I put another 3-9 on it. It's good thing I have extras because the other one must be going to Japan. They've had it for months. If it toasts another one I'll have to pull a fixed 6 off of something.
My fieldcraft 7-08 just trashed another scope. This time a 3-9 sfwa SS. The 3-9 is my favorite SS but that's the 3rd one I've trashed. The fixed ones are definitely more reliable. The little 5 pound 7-08 is tough on scopes.
One company told me I tighten the rings too much. If I don't crank them down the scope slips on this light rifle.
I put another 3-9 on it. It's good thing I have extras because the other one must be going to Japan. They've had it for months. If it toasts another one I'll have to pull a fixed 6 off of something.
Bb
You should probably get rid of the rifle. If it helps, you can send the rifle to me. I can send you a shipping label if needed.
My fieldcraft 7-08 just trashed another scope. This time a 3-9 sfwa SS. The 3-9 is my favorite SS but that's the 3rd one I've trashed. The fixed ones are definitely more reliable. The little 5 pound 7-08 is tough on scopes.
One company told me I tighten the rings too much. If I don't crank them down the scope slips on this light rifle.
I put another 3-9 on it. It's good thing I have extras because the other one must be going to Japan. They've had it for months. If it toasts another one I'll have to pull a fixed 6 off of something.
Bb
You should probably get rid of the rifle. If it helps, you can send the rifle to me. I can send you a shipping label if needed.
Time for a 6x El Paso Weaver, with old school Weaver rings!
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/yYDjsxrQ/IMG-0124.jpg)
![[Linked Image from imagizer.imageshack.com]](https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/923/bkX8hx.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/jTwRsYE.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/IdPFtAi.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/kl0ojCj.jpg)