Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Which 6X Scope Would You Suggest?

hotsoup,

Since this thread started I have been out hunting on the farm in CT with the WSM scoped with a 3-9 Conquest. I set it on 6X for a time and it was good. Later I found, that for even the open areas, I was more comfortable with 5X.

Keep the 3-9 that you have.

Hotsoup---I have a 6X Nikon Monarch----polished. I just put it on my 308. PM me if your interested. CB

I just happened to look at the thread and the first picture I saw was of your farm in Ct. if I got that right?

Beautiful picture.

Dew

Why not try to trade someone straight up: Leupie 3-9 for 6x42.

The Leupold 6XLR IMO is a great scope for open areas in the west that I often hunt. I'm not so sure it would be so ideal other places. If I ever go sheep hunting again my scope will be a Leupold 6XLR. Because it rugged, enough power for 400yd. shots, and light weight. I'm planning a trip to Africa this spring and my rifle will be a 30.06 Win. Mod. 70 with a leupold 4X. I figure a 4X should be fine. Again, simple and rugged.

Smart guy.

I never advocated paying full retail for the S&B or even buying one, just that is was the brightest 6x money could buy.

And if one could find the S&B 6x42 for a good deal, why not?

Expecially if the individual might be hunting an animal that they are willing to sit in the dark for ........why not?

As to the eye relief, the Leupy FX-III 6x42 has a very generous 4.5" and the S&B 6x42 has 3.27" and while that may pose a problem for some, many don't need that much.

Options are one of the most wonderful things to have in this world and to each his own.

Nice pic Savage 99.


The 6x36FXII(LR duplex) seems to be a dandy, especially for the price.

I will suggest a Meopta 6x42. They have really perfected the click adjustments and have #4 reticles readily available. Superb service too.

Nice picture, 99

For many years, I refused to believe that any 6X scope could be considered a practical, all around scope. Then I tried the 6X42 Leupold.
Their greatest asset isn't really their extra long eye relief. Or their very bright image. BTW, they work on the very darkest nights. Just make sure you have a heavy reticle that will too. Like any other 6X42 scope, they allow you to see roughly 6X further than you can with the unaided eye.
Their greatest atribute is their large eye box. I know to those that haven't done this, that makes no sense. That's because the "arm chair esperts" have long fed us this bussiness of FOV being the deciding factor when it comes to shooting quickly at running game. Not so. With four feet of FOV at 20 yds., anyone can point well enough to get that buck in the scope. But if the eye relief is critical, i.e. that means very little eye box, you can't acquire the image easily. That can cost you the shot, or if you have lots of it, make it very possible. E

If you need more eye relief in terms of having to creep up to get into the scope the 6x42 won't help you, as it is shorter than the 3-9 in tube length.

If you are talking in terms of forgiveness like for different head placement, then it might...at 6x. The VX2 has a ton of leeway on 3x for stillhunting and the quick shots it brings.

I would have purchased an 8x Swarovski Fixed for my last rifle had it not been over $100 more than the 3-10x42mm I did buy. I have several 3-9x scopes and they all have been on 6x for so long that I doubt the power ring will move.

While my scope have greater power to access I have never once thought to change them while hunting. I do not use my rifle scope to assess animals, that's what binoculars are for. I never consider field of view either. I pick the animal I want to shoot and then raise my rifle to bring the scope into line of sight.

My fixed Leupold 6x42's have served me very very well.

Hotsoup...I tried two of the 6x42 Leupold and got rid of both of them for 3x9 vxII's. If you havn't used a fixed six, try setting your scope at 6x and use it for awhile. I found that the field of view was not enough for shooting inside 100 yards and I am very familiar with and comfortable with use of scopes on running jack rabbits. In addition, with the heavy duplex, the thing was hard to place shots on small targets at 300+. I would rather have a 4x. I thought the six was the worst of both worlds but many will disagree...there is a 6x fan club here on the forum.
A very underrated scope is the 2.5 compact...I have several and worry that Leupold is going to dc it someday.

RinB;

You biggest problem may have been that damned heavy duplex. The wide isn't perfect, but it's a helluva lot better than the heavy in the 6x42.

I guess I'm one of those 6X fans. I have Leupolds (36 and 42mm) and Burrises. I like them all but an older 6X Burris Signature is my favorite. I have one variable (2x7 VX2) and the other 22 are either 4, 6 or 10X. Just the way I learned to shoot no knock on variables.

+1 VA

Tis the damned heavy crosshair section that's the problem. The heavy posts are an asset for low light. The heavy crosshair is unnecessary. Even when it dark enough to lose a fine crosshair completely the heavy posts give you enough guidance.

The heavy crosshair is a pain to sight in finely on the HD and the German 4 for me...

But daughter thinks the 6x42 with the HD is the best outfit going...dropped her buck at 15 yards this year RinB...

VA...possibly it was the heavy duplex which is really heavy. I would be happy with a scope that was either 3 or 9. I have never used the powers in between. Many ways to get the job done.

tom...does she give shooting lessons?

Hey I practiced with a 6x at a moving target to get snap shooting down....I don't know how she does it--just a killer, I guess.