Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Question For The Fixed 6X Guys !!!

Have two Swarovski PH 6x42s (#4 reticle) and two Meopta MeoPro 6x42s (#1 & #4 reticules). Have to say I really like those scopes. Light, simple and clear. Sold the FX-3s I bought before I put them on. Just didn't like them compared to the Euros. Wish I didn't sell a Swarovski PH several years ago...

Would you post the same basic picture setup with the #4 reticle?

They just plain work. No muss No fuss.

German please, you must know we are being watched. All my scopes are "fixed" power, whether they say it on the ring or not. When Bullwinkle steps out of the shadows into my sights the last thing I am thinking is to turn the power ring up a notch.

Give me a day or two

Just bought a 6x42 off of here a couple days ago. Will be my first one so I hope I like it as much as you guys like them. Will be putting it on my 7mm mashburn or my 338-06 haven't decided yet.

Each rifleman should select the scope he can see best with.

The eye doctor ask us which lens we can see better with and does not tell us which one.

If someones eyesight requires that they see best starting at 6X minimum then that's best for them.

I prefer lower magnifications for closer range targets and in particular if they are moving.

I start at 2X variables for woods rifles and 3X variables for open land.

The relevance of your post is stunning Don.

But can he count to potato?

I've been using the Leupold 6x36 for over 30 years now, have several, killed a lot of game looking through one. They have never let me down, I've never been in a situation with one that I wished I had something else on the rifle, they are fast and they are light.

All that I have had, and this is about 10 or so, have held zero exactly and I've never had to have one repaired. Not so with many others, notably variables.

I like other fixed scopes, and have an affinity for the older 4x28 and 3x Leupolds. The 6x42 is a very nice scope, and I have an FX3 that I like and use. But side by side, I'm hard pressed to see a real difference, even as light fades.

Some say that resolution is the end all, be all, in scope selection. I disagree. Reliability is the end all, be all. I'll take a light, rugged fixed power scope that I know will be spot on every time to the finest high resolution variable power scope ever made.

I need to see well enough to aim at a big game animal with my scope. In a binocular, resolution is king. but not in a rifle scope.

And as Flave mentioned they work a little better on long actions.

Ordered one last night, gonna try a set of the fancy Alumina covers as well.


GF1, I can't really tell a difference between the two either.

Everyone raves about the 6x42, and it is a great scope, but so is the 6x36.

Same here. To my eyes the extra 1mm exit pupil doesn't make any difference, and for me misses the point of a fixed hunting scope, which is being small, light, and rugged.

The 6x42 is obviously a fine optical instrument, I just prefer the 6x36 for the stated reasons.

To the original question, the fixed 6x is an ideal compromise between too little and too much magnification, up close and far away. For a rugged duty rifle, there's far less to go wrong. The 6X embodies the KISS principle.

So the 6x42 isn't rugged because it's a 42 and not a 36? Brilliant as usual.

I recently mounted a 6x42 on my 7mm Mashburn. I think it has slightly better optics than the 36,at least in my eyeball comparisons at last light.

It's bigger.

The 6x36 is going to go on a 270 FW.I like them both.

Heavier/larger means it's more subject to recoil forces which goes to ruggedness. And the most minor of the points I made...

The difference sure isn't much, if it even exists. I've shot rifles with dozens of 6x Leupolds over the past 25 years, probably divided about equally between 6x36's and 6x42's. The only scope I've had ANY trouble with was a 6x36 FX-II.

The campfire is known for its love of the 6x. I know I like them. But the truth is, the older I get the more I prefer a bit more magnification on the top end.

The 2.5-8x36 and 3.5-10x40 are still my two most favorite Leup scopes.

But on my backpack rifle I do like the 6x36LR.

Only scope I've ever had ANY trouble with was a 2-7x33. Recoil tore apart the reticle, but 338 WM's will do that.

Brad, for what purpose? When/where are you finding the higher magnification useful?

When you're talking the difference between a 6x36 and 6x42 Leupold I can't imagine a bit of difference. That larger objective myth regarding this conversation is moot.

Those 6x Leupolds are GREAT hunting scopes!

Picked up my first one, the 36mm variety, on a used Model 70. Sent the Model 70 packing, we just didn't get along, but had fallen hard for the 6x, so kept it and put it on an ancient .30-06 of mine. Best scope that thing has ever worn.

Treated myself to the 42mm version for my .25-06 several years ago. Zeroed it at 300 yards, and just keep filling tags. Wonderful scope, and very useful in low-light situations.

After some years of use, I find that my son and I have taken game from 20 yards to over 400 yards with these fixed 6x scopes... Really hard to find a problem with them for hunting.

Regards, Guy