Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Tell me about a fixed 6x in the woods....

Today the wife and I were cuttin' and packaging a dink OK buck I drilled at about 40 yds in the woods with a 6x Leupy recently, same rifle/scope combo accounted for an antelope out at 350 or so earlier this year, I didn't feel handicapped either time.

Let us know if you need some advise gettin started...

I've carried the 6x36 FXII on a couple hunts now. One was a wide open Coues hunt where I had no problem seeing critters way out there. The other was an elk hunt where I took my bull at about 60 yards. The only reason I didn't take him at about 35 was because the woods where so thick I didn't find a window to shoot through until he walked a little. I could see the elk just fine though at 35 (just not vitals). This big thing for me is I wanted the size/dimensions and weight of something like a 2.5x8 Leupy, but wanted to spend about $100 less. Plus, I wanted to be a little different. Thus, the 6x36.

I'll take ALL the help I can get,as per always................

I hate the '36............

Well, I hope I was not being dishonest in my original post, but I'm thinking about setting up a rifle for my soon-to-be 12 year old son. I had originally mentioned this in the first sentence of my post, but then I deleted it before posting. Because he will be hunting close to me, the intended use and conditions still apply.

I wanted honest opinions based on the merits. It seems that often when someone asks for advice on outfitting a kid, some responders feel the need to recommend gear that they would not recommend for an adult. That's okay, I guess, if the recommendation is based on fit, but often it seems as though people feel that kids have not yet earned the right to use the good stuff. Or, maybe they think that a variable scope is too complicated for a kid. If the latter is the case, then I figure he deserves to make some mistakes and learn from them. Using a variable scope is not rocket science, IMO.

I'm a working class guy with a limited budget, but I figure that this rifle/scope is something my kid may have for life, and I want him to want to take it out of his safe to go hunting 50 years from now because it's decent gear and works well.

Give him good stuff that fits, the rest will fall into place for him.

I bought a FX-III 6x42 last year, hunted with it 1 time, removed it and sold it.

It's a great scope but IMO the FOV was too small and power to great for still hunting, thick brush and close range shooting.

I went with a 2-7 and like it alot more.

You're about to hear great tales of running shots made through thick brush, spitting distances and two eyed open sniper techniques, the likes of which will leave you feeling woefully inadequate.

I've used fixed 4 and 6 power scopes. I also have used variables from 1.5 x 6 all the way to the much hated 4.5 x 14.

Fact is EVERYTHING can and will work.

I hunt with a variable 99% of the time these days. To me fixed power scopes dont offer any advantage. When I hunt in thick country I like the option of turning my scope down. If I have a longer shot I like the option of being able to turn it up.

Obviously a 4 or 6 power scope can be used for close shots, and it can be used for long shots as well. However with the modern variables being very rugged why not have the best of both worlds? For me thats a variable.

Lately there is a thread in the Africa forum discussing scopes. Lots of folks use variables. I put a 2 1/2-16X on my .375-.416 Ren Mag. Huge field of view plus lots of mag on the top. Like so many have asked, "Why limit yourself?"

My 270 has worn a Leupold M8 6x for about 28 years now. I can't think of any case (too close or too far) where that scope cost me a shot.

Dale

I don't doubt it.

On the other hand I've never had a variable cost me a shot. They ALL work, one just has to find what works best for himself.

Take it for what it is worth as most of my rifles have variables on them now that I use the upper end only to test loads with but set down to 4 to 6 power in the field and don't think I am missing out on anything from years ago when a fixed 6 was as good as it got Russ

CoalCracker,

May I make a suggestion?

I have a little hunting experience - since 1947. Have used a variety of scopes. Most of my hunting and scope use has been in NY State, North of you from the Adirondacks to the southern tier. I like scopes better than iron sights. Have used some variables and some fixed.

My favorite is a Leup VXIII 2.5-8X36. It is very light, great eye relief, clear, good light transmition. It sits on it's third rifle. 300WSM, 30-284, 6.5X55 The 6.5 will eventually belong to my grandson. (Nothing is too good for the grandson)

I always hunt with it set at 2.5 and only turned it up once for a shot - in Newfoundland on a Moose. Looooong Shot. Got'im. A 6X would be way to much magnification for 99% of my hunting. It is good to be able to keep it turned down and turn it up if needed.

My suggestion for a do everything, go any where scope that will will not break the bank and still give you quality, longevity, and endurance is the new Leupold VX3 2.5-8X36.

You are getting a lot of advice from some experienced hunters. My input is based on my favorite scope and years of experience in the North woods and I readily acknowledge my bias.

Have fun with your selection.

Jim

I have 4 different 6x Burris scopes mounted and used for the hills and prairie country I hunt in .Also 3 of the M8 6x36 Leupold's from 243 to 30-06 they work well for me and fairly inexpensive as all were purchased used. My early model 700ADL in 30-06 wears an M8 4x. They are all dead reliable and lighter in weight than most 3x9 varibles. At about 325 yds the sight picture for deer and antelope is about it for me with 4x. 375-400 with the 6x .Just my eyes and sight picture,I am sure others see better than I do. I put a Vari X3 1.75x 5 on my 375HH and I have others that wear Vx 2's in 3x9 and Vari X 3's in the 2.5x8. If I had to settle for just 1 choice it would go to the Vari X 3 in 2.5x8 they work very well and again are very reliable. Keep it simple for the kid, last thing he needs is to be screwing around with his power selector when he should be shooting. Magnum Man

Wow- 55 replies, well - killed 3/4 of all deer using either a 4x or 6x, both successfully in woods. Never did NOT get a deer using a 6x, woods or not. Shot them at 15 yds - centered shoulder - done.

Yet if one had a running shot, a 4x might be good. Other times, the 6x was nice as I had to find a hole the size of a grapefruit at 80 yds, 6x36 w/duplex did the trick.

I think you will be happy if you go 6x unless you feel running shots are expected.

I've come to a couple of conclusions about these sorts of things over the years:

1) Eyes can be pretty different from person to person

2) A guy's eyes can learn to adjust to an awful lot of conditions/circumstances.


Conclusion #1 means that the people who love 6x42's are absolutely right. And so are the people who hate 6x42's.

Conclusion #2 means that a guy who's spent his entire optics budget on X scope, can learn to become awfully proficient with that scope. Scope Y may, or may not, have been better for his particular eyes at the time of purchase, but he got used to using scope X as he spent more time with it.

For my part, I started with a cheap 4X Tasco, & hated it. I couldn't wait to graduate to a 3-9X, and was oh so happy when I finally did so. I then learned (the hard way) about proper mounting systems (Yeah, I did the "see through" thing - and I'm not even from Wisconsin!). Then I upgraded to a "nice" variable, and thought I was on top of the world.

This is where I should have left this site, & left well enough alone.

After acquiring a few more rifles, I got the notion that some of them might look "period correct" with a fixed scope. After reading the Siren Songs of Conquest 4x32 owners, I took the plunge, and I was absolutely amazed by the scope. The FOV worked perfect for my eyes, the clarity was amazing, I found the duplex to be "A1" for my eyes, and it was a touch more compact that the variable I'd been using. I quickly bought several more of those scopes, even though I didn't have rifles for them.

Again, I should have stopped reading the 'Fire!

So much was made of the 6x42's by their proponents, that I bought a Monarch in that setup from the classifieds. From the moment I held it to my eye, I knew I'd be selling it. The FOV seemed far, far too small for my eyes. The clarity lagged far behind (IMO) the Conquest. I later found more things that I didn't like about it.

So what's it all mean? I've always thought that optics were like shoes: you've gotta try 'em on, & see what fits. The winners of marathons may swear by 1 brand of shoes, but if they don't fit me well, they're not worth a darn to me. There are plenty of folks on here who wax orgasmic about all of the offerings from their favorite scope maker, but those products do nothing at all for me. It's not the end of the world - it just means I have to go find the things that I happen to like best.

So look through some scopes, and see if anything "pops out" to your eye. If so, then buy it, & shoot a bunch with it. Pictures of dead game trump all scope discussions.

FC

KCBighorn,

Unlike you, I have had several variable scopes cost me game animals, though not because they were set on the "wrong" magnification. Instead they failed in various ways, and no, none were cheap scopes. All were in the $500-$1000 range.

And I bet a few of them were not even Leupolds...