Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Scpe for a Savage 99

I've got some Christmas and birthday money burning a hole in my pocket so I think it's time to put a new scope on my 99 in 358 Win. It's currently wearing a Bushnell Scopechief VI from the late 70's. Primary use is deer hunting in mixed farm/forest area of westcentral Pa. It's also been my bear gun in the past and could be that again. My Dad's 84 year old knees aren't so good anymore and I tend to do a fair amount of moving while trying to push deer past him. I'm not a last minute of daylight hunter. Eye relief and keeping it small and lighter weight are my main concerns.

I'm thinking the Leupold VX-2 in 2-7 is about ideal. The VX-3 in either 2.5-8 or 1.75-6 would probably work but what do I gain for the extra $$? Any other options I've overlooked? VX-3 is about the top end of the budget.

Thanks,

Dale

I have Leupold 2-7x33s on three of the five Savage 99s that keep scoped and ready to go; 99F in 243, 99CD in 257AI, and 99F in 260. I like Leupold's heavy duplex reticle in my woods rifles, regardless of the make, model, or caliber.

I also prefer Weaver bases, or Tasco's old one-piece Weaver-style base, with Warne Maximas.

I have a 2-7X Leupold on my 99. I like Weaver mounts. I can take the scope off and see the irons over the low Weaver bases.

My first choice on 99Fs is a Leupold 1.5-5 (vari-x III or VX-III depending on vintage). I hunt mainly in northwestern Adirondacks where there is periodic logging, so a mix of hardwoods, softwoods, swamps and beaverflows at all stages of growth/regrowth. Never had any problem of lack of light with the small objective, and leaving the scope down on lowest setting makes it pretty fast to get on target when you jump a deer. Good eye relief, great field of view. By the way - I've also settled on weaver bases and rings - don't like the one piece bases that bridge the action.

Weaver Classic K4.

The last scope I'd put on one, well not the last, but you can't mount it back far enough to get any decent eye-relief.

The 2-7x Leupold will work.

Don't have any problems with the one on mine...got it in standard Leupold mounts. It IS just back pretty much as far as it will go, but eye relief is fine.

I couldn't even get a 2.5x Weaver to where I wanted and have never had much luck with the K4's or K6's unless on a short action bolt rifle.

I guess if I enjoyed having my ear where the comb begins I'd be golden.

Pa. has these stupid antler restrictions so one of the things I could use is bit more top end power to make counting points a bit easier. So the 4X is out. And I just don't like the looks of a straight tube scope so that's out.

It's already got Weaver mounts, I much prefer them over the Leupold STD style.

There's lots of scopes out there, I'm just checking to see if there is something I overlooked.

Thanks for the input so far,

Dale

My favorites are the 1.75-6 and 2.5-8. I think you get a brighter optic than the 2-7, and if I had to guess, a bit better eye relief. Someone with more ambition than I can verify one way or another.
My 99F 358 runs a 1.75-6.

Fx 3 or 2 six power? I think you already know the answer to your question. Binoculars can tell antler size way better than scopes.

If you're looking for a 2-7 on a tight budget, you could do a lot worse than a Redfield Revolution. Had one on a 99 in standard Weaver mounts with no issues. Only reason that I replaced it was that I had to send it in to Leupold(totally my fault, NOT an issue with the scope) and just never put it back on.

I would take heed of Steelhead's comments about eye relief. Like you I had a little extra jingle in my pocket and decided to upgrade the Bushnell Banner 1-4x20mm (circa 1973) on my Savage 99-A to a Leupold VX II 1-4x20mm.

Could not get eye relief unless I creeped up the stock. Analysis of the problem. The Banner was 10.5" OAL and 7.25" usable tube length for Weaver low detachable rings.

The Leupold is 9.25" OAL and 5.25" usable tube length. No problem, I will order Weaver extension ring, wrong. Weaver does not offer extension LOW ring so would have to order a MED extension ring and a MED ring.

I thought I would take a Leupold FX II 2-7x33 (11" OAL) off another rifle to solve the issue, wrong. That scope has the same usable tube length (5.25") as the 1-4x20.

Went to MED extension and standard rings.

I have a VX-3 1.75-6x32 on a Marlin 336 I'm very partial two. I also like the Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35. You get a whole lot of scope for your money with it.

I bought the VX2 2-7 over the weekend. It fits with the Weaver rings but there isn't a whole lot of extra tube length left over. When I shoulder the rifle, I've got full view thru the scope so it works for me.

Thanks for all the input,

Dale

I am a Big Fan on Weaver Bases and Rings, my only scoped 99F has a Weaver 2.5X fixed power. Comes up fast, good eye relief, bright and never changes point of impact after many years of hunting. Great Combination for a Woods Rifle..

A Leupold 2-7 is seldom a mistake for most purposes.

If money is tight, you can save about $80 without hurting anything but your pride by getting a VX-1. Use the money you save to buy a couple of Stormy Kromers.

Oops, too late, I see. Enjoy.

Even better, just go with a VX-1 Shotgun scope with the heavy duplex reticle. Even with "inferiror" VX-1 grade lens coatings, the VX-1 with a heavy duplex would be hard to beat, particularly in a sub-$250 price range, in a woods ranges big game scope.

I like the old one-piece Tasco #841 Weaver-style bases with Warne fixed Maximas on my 99 shooters in 22-250, 243, 257AI, 25-284, 6.5-284, 260, and 308.

I've had a few of the Leupold SG scopes, one of which was purchased by accident. There's one on my Knight Ultra-Lite right now.

They hold up under recoil and for the shooting a lot of us do, the short parallax setting is actually better than the usual 150 yard setting on regular scopes. The 1-4 is under consideration for my .45/70, but the short tube might be a problem on the Ruger ( I don't care for the appearance of extension rings). My first choice is the VX-6 1-6, but $1000 is a lot of money to an old fat man on a fixed income.