Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting 6x scope for longish range?

I'm thinking about adding a turret to my Leupold 6x, but was thinking it might not be enough xs to make it worth the expense. Can the 6x get me to 5-600 yards for big game hunting?

I'm not a long range expert by any means but I do target shoot quite a bit with 6x, 8x and 10x scopes out to about 510 yards. The 6x works fine but the 10x makes things noticably easier.
Practice(alot) with it and I bet you're good to go with the 6x.

I shoot a 308 with a 6x42 Loopie turret.

I have easily gone to 400.

If I was doing what you are thinking of, I might try this one:

http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-.../fx-3-6x42mm-adj-obj-competition-hunter/

BMT

The scope I have is a newish 6x36, thinking of adding a CDS turret to it...please don't get me started on my hatred for AO.

Biathalonman,
I'm not using the CDS turret currently, but will be soon on a VX-III 2.5-8! I have however used a Stoney Point target knob on a fixed M8 8X Leupy successfully out to 700-800 yards on antelope and at the range. It does have a fairly fine duplex crosshair which may be different than the new FX-II 6X.
I was on the phone the other day with customer service at Leupold and he said that they were considering offering the FX fixed series in other higher powered choices like 8X or 10X possibly in 2011 FWIW... sounds good to me!

I like a 6x42 to 1K,can't like the 6x36 for anything...........

You could also get a mount with some built-in MOA. Evolution Gun Works makes a Picatinney rail with 20 MOA built-in elevation.

http://www.egw-guns.com/

A 6x42 Leupie has 60MOA internal,which routinely allows 35MOA of erector travel,after a 250yd zero on a flat base.

EGW is far from my favorite way to add inclination,to pad an erector's latitude..............

500-600 yards I would want 10x

10x is largely my ceiling anymore(actually for quite a spell),for Killing...though I'll eagerly crush Critters to nearly twice the distances you cite and happily,via the 6x.

Prefer the 1",but have a MK4 M3 6x as well............

Have you tried the FX-II in 36?

Hate it.............

Why? You like the 42 right?

A wee bit.............

They call it big game because it's big 6x is plenty for big game at 600 yards, if you can correct for drop and wind. Because of the adjustment range, I'd get a Leupold 6x42 with elevation and windage knobs, M1 variant, installed. Should run you about $550 shipped from Leupold's custom shop.

Fee things crack me up more,than Hubble-esque glass............

Looking at the website specs, the 36 has 64MOA adjustment, and the 42mm has 55MOA.

I have used both, and never felt handicapped with the 36, of course I don't hunt at night.

Cannot understand how the 36 is so inferior than the 42 myself.

Funny that with supposedly both in hand,you are looking at specs.

Which undoubtedly has more than a little to do with your "critique"...............

Sir, I have owned MANY M8s and Fx's of each w/different reticles.

As I stated above, I 'HAVE OWNED' both. Not arguing with you but simply wanted to know why you dislike the 36 since you said, 'I can't like the 6x36 for anything.'

I can imagine the Tactical 6x, the MK4 may well have more adjustment since it's made for the battlefield. Perhaps that's where the difference lies. I looked at the Fx-3 vs. Fx-2 specs, not the MK4.

Have a great day sir.

Still way over your head and it can't be "fixed".

Pun intended...............

Not a long range guru by any mans standards. My personal experience with the Weaver K6 shows it to be plenty of glass for ME out to 400 yards. Havent shot any farther with it yet.

Were it a Weaver T-Series,I could sorta allow it to creep in the race.

As a Play Toy,but not for down & dirty hard use............

Good thing I was commenting on my equipment and not seeking anyones approval. That coulda been embarrassing.

I don't know that much more can be said.. the 36 is not as clear or bright and if buying for whatever reason, why would you buy less? I know any 6x L I buy is a 42.

I dont' hunt in the dark either much( I do with hogs sometimes) but thats irrelavant, there are days where the lighting SUCKS at the start or end of the day, I don't try to handicap myself from the git go.

Now if Zeiss would hurry up and do a 6x conquest....

Results never ain't interesting,please feel free to hang a pic of a Beastie that succumbed to X's greater than 6 and perhaps extoll upon why it couldn't have gone down otherwise.

That'll be funny!...........

Zeiss going fixed 6x,would nip some of their inherent scope design woes.

Assuming they gave eye-relief and tube length a thunk,as well as padded the ele erector's travel and flew .25" adjustable turrets..............

I believe youre mistaken, Im all for low magnification scopes. Realized along time ago that I never really cranked my 3-9s higher than 6 so started using fixed powers on my new rifles. MAybe if I add ... ........ ..... it may clear up the issue? .... ....

I never put any store in any high X results arriving the scene...............

Im sorry Stick or faux Stick, but that ones too much for even lowly ol me to understand.

Please elaborate, or tirade, choice is yours.

You have no critters slain with high X magnification,under your belt...................

In that case then yes I agree with you. Reread my first post, I clearly said it works for ME. What may work for fellows with longer shot options than me may be different. To be honest, I dont own a rifle that requires high X magnification in my opinion though Ive seen others that deem it necessary.

Rost, a Conquest in 6x would be WELCOME! Have you compared an FX-II to the 42s? Just curious. I realize light varies on hunts, and have yet to miss out on a deer in poor light w/any 6x Leupold, 36/42, M8/FX, etc. Whatever I used the day I was squeezing off worked well. Knocked 2 down this past year on my Dakota 6BR, Fx-II in 36, very foggy morning.

I do like the sleek lines on the 36, but I hear that Leupold may come back with their 8x and higher fixed, perhaps 10x. I could definitely see an 8x42 in my future, w/fully coated optics. Had a 7.5x non ao, 42mm, and an 8x36 (VERY bright btw, as much as resolution in low light as anything else from M8 6x42 to 2.5-8x36 side by side at dusk).

If I were running a heavy bbl rifle for stand hunting deer, a 7.5 or 8x might get the nod. In sporters, the 6x36 just looks and feels right, I know their isn't 1.5 oz diff but it's just lean and works for me. The 42 has a slighty larger as E calls it, eyebox, but eye relief fore/aft and laterally is just fine w/36 IME.

If priced equal, the 42 would win. That weaver mentioned above is said to be a great optic, even w/I believe 38 obj.

Which is why I asked YOU,for the pics.............

Could turn out nicely... but I bet they'll never listen....

I have peered through others 36s... and after buying a used 42, I'll never spend the jack on a 36. Can it work, yeah, but like I said, why handicap.. we have all kinds of game, it comes out at all times and for that reason I want as bright a scope as I can get.. I've used a couple of Z variables on 5x to kill black hogs at night, at under 100 yards, with bright stars and not more than 1/4 moon.... you won't do that with a 6x36L...

I simply don't want to get left holding the bag at some point, over a bit of money. Its not like hunting is cheap or anything. Or that I don't have time invested in it.

here is the deal... I've killed with IRON sights at 500 plus and not had any issues. Killing or hitting something at 500 yards give or take doesnt' take a lot. And if you can identify the animal you are after and then plug it, its good. I've used more X and continue to do so at times... specialty issues like longer head shots, I just prefer to see how much movement I have and see more betta where its going to go or if I'm going to attempt it. The other issue is moving animals in a herd and picking a certain one or a legal one... I tried 2.5 x on an AR for a couple of years, and then realized while its easy as hell to hit one... you could make a mistake as things fall into place. I even ran a red dot for some time and again, hitting was not an issue... So there are times and places for more X... but its not because I can't kill what is way out there with a fixed lower X... its due to target identification....and verification before the shot.

I"d have to say that at some point... and I"m still sorta waiting Zeiss out a bit... most all my average rifles will wear fixed 6x. but there are a handful of mags and specialty guns that will wear more in the way of a variable for specific chores.

Rost, I agree for your hunting you want the brightest you can have, an 8x56? LOL. Not a bad low light scope, albeit bulky perhaps.

The 6x42 S&B and Swaro are also very good glass, but I have to tell you the newest FX series have some DARNED good glass IMHO.

The 6x42 is akin' to cheatin',which is about how I like things.

The transition from bino or spotter to scope,had best be second nature...if it isn't,you are pizzing up a very long rope.

Increased X's don't shorten that rope...............(grin)

Excellent point that is often left out of the discussion. Over the years I've nailed "the wrong one" or pulled the trigger on one I wouldn't have if I had a better look at his headgear while using lower powered scopes. I hit them all quite easily. This is definitely one of the reasons I like higher powered scopes these days--I like to get a really, really good look at something before I press the trigger.

And of course as I always mention seeing mirage, etc, to help judge the wind can sometimes be a big help on long shots.

I know 6X is it for many on this board and it is a good all around hunting magnification...but the end-all, be-all, ultimate long range hunting scope? Not hardly.

Someone doing spotting/judging work through his riflescope...is pizzing up a very long rope...............

Someone digging into his pack for a spotting scope when he should be killin' is "pizzing up a very long rope."

Couldn't even fathom that happening,but admittedly alotta things are easy for me...that ain't for others............

Thing here... and stick knows this... we often have to gauge an animal to know its legal first, and then 3-4 bucks following a doe, go behind brush as you figure it out... with a low powered scope... your deer was #2 in line following the doe... you better NOT shoot #2 coming out by number.. you better verify.

Interestingly enough... 2.5 X or even 4X usually can't quite do it reliably for our regs.... but 6x is starting to be enough.

Now on my longest(to me) shot of 802 so far, it was a caribou, and it wasn't moving in a herd, by itself etc... so even though it was farther off, and I had a variable and used the 14x on it because it was there... 6x would have easily sufficed as when I lay down to shoot it was on 4.5x... and that would have been enough actually.... but I didn't look the gift in the mouth.....

6.5... I don't go the 8x 56mm simply because to my eyes a 5 or 6x is brighter when comparing X vs visible light. I have a 30 mm tube Zeiss variable... not a conquest either... Diatal IIRC... and its 3-12... for max light I still end up at 5-6 x... not at 8.. And its not for want of trying either.

My bino's have never cost me a Critter,though they surely have rewarded me with many victims..............

If you need another tool to identify the correct deer to shoot, and I don't, things are quite a bit easier for me.

Mine haven't cost me any, of course I use mine to find the game. Though plenty of the critters I have taken yours would have cost you had you been looking through them during the precious few seconds you had for the shot.

Of course you probably instead would have just shot one of the smaller bucks and in your blissful glee patted yourself on the back about what a great shot you made with your 6X....

Always disconcerting,to read of another boob on a hillside,flailing his rifle about as an observation device...undoubtedly with one in the pipe.

Gets pretty funny quick though,when they stretch to justify same.................

Binos.... this ain't about binos...its about scopes... wanna talk binos we can do another deal....

Of course I understand that its hard to comprehend the possibility of seeing 5-10 bucks in a group milling through brush and have to actually pick out the right one. Most folks are glad to see 1-2 here and there. Heck if I was lucky I could have a big oats patch where one buck would come out all by himself and you could kill him without a scope and no issues.

Killing good Critters,starts/ends with bino's.

I've seen brush and Bucks..................(grin)

A few days ago I had 15+ bucks feeding in a circle, racks down, below me. It would have been retarded to use a rifle scope to try to sort them out. My 10x bino's and my 15-45x Zeiss Spotter got the job done perfectly, and I only pointed my rifle at the one I killed. 6x42 scope.

After the shot and they had scattered a bit.. The bigger ones had run off.

I agree...And I believe I've been over this with rost before, and I just dropped the subject..But it goes like this..If your head hunting, Bino's for finding, spotter for judging, rifle scope for killing. if you want to use a rifle scope for all three, or even two of those jobs, it speaks volumes, and needs no further information to get a clear picture of "trophies" collected by said hunter.

Some folks do their best,to make easy schitt difficult.

I'm the antithesis of that train of "thought".............

Got a pic of the one you killed Calvin?

Had a kid come over last night.. He went up one of the best mountains opening weekend. He stomped across the prime habitat the night before it opened, doing some "scouting". The next morning he was baffled that he didn't find one deer up on that mountain. He come over stating "The deer aren't in the alpine!". I just smiled and nodded.. I asked him if he has binos, and he just gave me a confused look..

Wearing my "Holy" UA sweats. Those things have some miles on them.

Very nice congrats.

Had to hang a pic with Anthony in it, since he packed half of it out.. I'm getting spoiled. Anthony runs the spotter, I run binos, and the little one runs my range finder out of juice.

If your eyes aren't bolted to bino's,you are simply handing out Escape Passes..................

I remember you hammering that home with me, back in the day when I'd go a whole hunting season and only see a handful of dink bucks.

My mantra has always been: "there's a HOG hiding somewhere...I just gotta find him"...................

That high country early season blacktail hunting looks a lot like alpine Colorado summer time. And it would be a helluva good time I am thinking.

Nope.

It's more fun than that...................(grin)

My experience as well,




Yep,

Recount your best High-X count victim and how it went down................

Calvin- NICE buck! Congrats!

Here we go again.. you folks is gettin off topic..... binocs are for hunting, and locating a target... tahts a seperate topic. Personally I'd rather forget the rifle than the binocs..... without binocs and a spotter at times... its all a walk in the park praying for luck.

Back to somewhat the original topic..

Jon talked about "precious seconds". In my experience, the last thing I'd want if I only had "precious seconds" would be a high X scope. Might just be because I'm an idiot, but it takes me more than a few precious seconds to locate what I'm looking for with high x's.

Nobody said anything about an observation device of a hillside. If seeing the critter well enough to count the points and decide not to shoot worries you, it's a mental issue of your own making. If you're afraid of the boogie man under your bed I can't help you with that either.

Nobody said anything about "finding" the animal with a scope. That you need to make things up in order to confuse safety issues into the mix to justify the handicap you place on yourself with equipment choices, speaks volumes about you.

Whether you're an idiot or not, if you're unable to quickly find an animal in a scope then you simply wouldn't have gotten some of the bucks I have gotten. Maybe all your hunting experience involves a bunch of deer standing there on a hillside for you to stare at all day long. I see that a lot too but most of the time it's does and little bucks. The big fellas have gotten that way by learning not to do that.

Here on bear, just under 600, scope set on 12x. Dink down and wasn't just standing there waiting for me to shoot him.



I totally agree with your use of bins but when I pick up the rifle after spotting the bear with bins I personally need the higher X to track them in thick brush that is taller than they are. They are moving through it and I find them hard to find with a lower X scope. Now you see them now you don't and I have but a few seconds to connect. Just me bud but that's what works for me.
I don't have 20 year old eyes anymore if that has anything to do with it. My eyes take longer to focus and higher x helps that.

Shot a pretty good Buck for The Boys last year,(on the move)at a CH over 650yds. Montucky 7Whizzum/162 6x42.

I'd reckon that as being comfortably under 70% of that glass's resolving power.

Saw him in bino's first...............(grin)

Idiots with loaded rifles,never don't not concern me.............

It's obvious your and my style of hunting differs. My goal is to read wind and cover to get a good look at areas I think might hold bucks, without being detected. I know that if I don't play the wind correctly, silhouette myself, or even just move across the wrong area, I will blow out mature bucks. Getting a good look at deer without them even having the faintest clue that I am there is what I aim to do. Blowing out a deer and having precious seconds to toss the scope up and pull the trigger isn't really what I want to do.

I sit on my deck and watch bears and bucks through my spotter on the mountain behind my house all the time. One of my favorite things to do, early in the AM with a cup of coffee. I've seen bears haul ass with no apparent reason. They'll cover lots of ground, and usually don't stop for much. Mountain deer are a completely different story. They'll stay in the areas, slowing feeding. Now, if you expose yourself, I'm sure they'll haul ass too..

Not being able to find something quickly with higher X in glass, IMHO is a lot due to bad stock fit.. if the stock fits you and you use both eyes, your one eye is burning a hole in the target as you bring the gun up.. as soon as you can see through the glass, the target will be right there.... doesn't matter much to me if I'm looking at high X or 6x. Of course I practice with 6x a lot swinging on doves in flight.

Staying with a moving target at 600 yards plus.. isn't difficult, still being able to realize which buck it is as a few of them move out of sight for minutes at time and then back into sight... that requires binoc use and good timing... or if you are sure of what you want, then it takes something to verify its the same buck when it comes back out... given multiple seconds to shoot, thats a no brainer.. check with binocs.... given a fleeting second, tehre is no way in hell you'll tell at 650 yards the difference between the 12 inch wide illegal 8 point and the legal 14 inch wide 8 point. Difference between the spike and the big old buck... yeah, a child could do that.

Right at the bottom of the barrel there and on a few counts.............(grin)

Making more stuff up to support your point, I see. I never said anything about "blowing out a deer" and having to "toss up the scope." You must be thinking of E when he speaks of his requirement for a very large eyebox which makes his Leupold 6X42 the greatest scope evAr.

Maybe you've never seen a herd of mule deer "on the move" (there can be many reasons for it)? Maybe you've never seen a couple whitetail bucks sparing? Maybe you've never seen a whitetail buck stuck to a doe in heat who thinks she needs to be somewhere else? Maybe you've never seen deer leaving cover to go feed on the other side of a hill or the other side of a fence as darkness approaches? Maybe there are never any other hunters where you hunt so you can literally count on anything you see being there all day long? Boy, that must make things tough.

If every critter you've ever gotten allows you to put down your pack, get out a spotting scope, set up the spotting scope.... please do tell me how much you bribe the guards at the zoo. There are times this is the case and in those times a spotting scope is a wonderful tool to have. There are other times when it's not.

If you require a spotting scope to kill an animal that is within killing range, some animals will get away from you. You have placed a handicap on yourself. That's your choice.

Of course "killing range" can mean different things. You do realize this is the long range section, right? You are basing your statement on experience taking animals 400+, 500+, etc, right?

If not, WTF are you doing here telling us what scopes we should use? If "within killing range" means within 250-300 yds or so, yeah, a 6X will probably do you just fine. Double, triple, quadruple the range and do you might have a clue why most here use higher powered scopes.



Tell me how well you could read the wind here with a 6X scope:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB_Sxgp5Ook

How well do you think you'd see that mirage through a 6X scope? Do the think the wind where you're standing is exactly the same speed as the wind all the way to the target? Do you think you would have picked up that subtle change? Do you think you can be sure the wind won't change in the time it takes to move from the spotting scope to the rifle?

Please explain how NOT BEING ABLE TO read that wind through your scope and requiring a spotting scope to read what it used to be is somehow an "advantage."

Almost as much as idiots with rifles and keyboards concern me.

How exactly would you have judged that wind, funny schtick? You are the resident LR expert here (and all the other tactical boards you've been kicked off of) after all. Tell us your technique?

How do you read the wind through your 6X scope? After you've gotten the wind read, how do you compensate? You often run an elevation turret only and only use simple duplex reticles, right? So how do you compensate? What's you're expert technique?

Guesstimate hold off in "inches." Fantastic! Do tell us where exactly you would have held to make those shots.

Humble us with your expertise.

This is getting kinda funny..

At your expense, shortranger.

Like I said, volumes...You sound all worked up?? I'm sorry.

I've seen a few mule deer on the move, a high mag rifle scope would have done exactly nothing, in the useful department.

Fretting a dink getting away is not a concern..If your after the first decent buck, and can live with what you have on the ground, go ahead and use ur rifle scope, no skin off my nuts, but the fact you get all butt hurt over it is more than a bit funny.

love the "mirage" angle too LOL

I'm not sure I ever told anybody what scope to use. I just stated my experiences and how I do what I do. Take it or leave it, as I'm sure you have your mind made up.

Also Jon, you pulled a sentence fragment out, without reading the entire sentence and paragraph about "wind". I was clearly referring to using the wind to my advantage, as to get enough time to look over game via a spotter, before they detect my scent and head for cover.

If I were mountain hunting, and game I spotted was moving away from me only giving me "precious seconds", I'd really rethink how I was doing things.

If that was the case, I'd just shoot it with the 6X and live with whatever it was. That's what the 6X fans are advocating. Actually seeing the critter well allows me to not pull the triger on a "dink." Tough concept apparently.

If I was butt hurt, I might make something up about the safety of anybody who uses different equipment than me. Oh wait, that's what you did.

I see you still haven't learned to use your equipment. Maybe you should look into taking a class or something? Next time I'm in Montana give me a ring and I'll come over and show you what that knob on the side of your scope is for.

To be honest with you.. No, I don't have to worry about other hunters. I hike far enough in to my spots that it isn't a concern to me.

If I don't have the drop on the animal, and I don't have time to pull out the spotter and lean it across my pack to take a better look.. That particular animal lives for me to hunt another day.

Since you admitted to hunting in a place with hunting pressure, wouldn't it be prudent for you to always look things over very carefully with bino's or a spotter before scoping in on an animal? What if some guy had crept within 20 yards of that animal, and you are waving a weapon at him?

"If I was butt hurt, I might make something up about the safety of anybody who uses different equipment than me. Oh wait, that's what you did."

Is that right? Please do quote me, anything I said about safety.(dont bother looking, it aint there)
Talk about making chit up.

Do what? Kill something at 250 yds? This is the Long Range Section.

Maybe when you start shooting long range, you'll realize when you "read the wind" before a shot, what that means.

That is a gross misrepresentation and you know it. We are advocating using higher power binos and spotters to look over the game before pointing a rifle at it.

You've never shot something without a spotting scope or 15X binocs? I find that hard to believe, even if you do hunt in a zoo.

I'll pay close attention to what SU says.. But this Jon guy is just pulling stuff out of his ass now.

He's a bit sensitive.

"Finding" the animals with the rifle scope is unsafe. That was your implication "that spoke volumes."

Did you watch the video? Please post some of yours. Let's see how good a shot your ass is.

Oh, your psychic now...You aint even close to catching my drift, but thats no surprise.

Jon,

REALLY ring the bell and post some of your Huge Critters,that were sluiced due to high X's.

Thought so....................(laffin')

WTF would I watch a video? How is that going to change the fact that you misrepresent what people post, have terrible reading comprehension, and most of us don't have a gear low enough to even respond to your babble.

Anybody can put together a LR rifle and go take shots a [bleep] beyond 400 yards. My 14 year old can do it. But, if everything is running away from you at those ranges, you might want to put the "Hunting" back in Long Range Hunting.

Allow her to "quantify" her High X Results first.

It'll be funny................

A couple of the latest:




Doe only tag, nice to be darn sure she didn't have any spikes hiding next to those ears:



So stick, going to answer the questions on the wind? Describe your technique? Nevermind, in order to do that you'd need to actually have one.

Like this?

Did I say anything about shooting running animals? Or ones that are even moving at all? Knowing an animal isn't going to be standing like a statue for the next 1/2 hour from situation awareness and reading body language and shooting at running animals are quite different things. But you knew that, didn't you?

You guys are a real blast. Nary an answer to a technical question, not a single challenge on a technical point, (those would require some technical knowledge) you've conceded loss on the merits.

So let's call him "sensitive," let's call him "butt hurt" or let's call him "a 'her'." Boy, that really gets me. Yawn.

You guys need to take this 6X scope show on the road to some real LR or Tactical sites. Oh yeah, BS actually has several times where he gets laughed at and kicked out eventually. Tell them Sniper guys they need to trade in their high power NF, S&B, Premiers, etc, for a 6X42 Lupy. 'Cause it's the most bestest--or however he says it.

You nailed it.

Jon,

I apologize. We assumed you actually cared about the quality of the animals you shot. My bad..

A-Borts and Rats...a guy couldn't even make up stuff THAT funny...............

Unless it was in a field.


Oooops...............

"
I apologize. We assumed you actually cared about the quality of the animals you shot. My bad.."

I didnt..

Good thing he didn't wait to pull out that spotter.. That Doe could have gotten away!