I bought a Wally World 7mm.. Now Ive got to put a scope on it. I don't want to get into all the B.S. like the other thread... And for that matter... E PLEASE STAY OUT OF THIS THREAD... Ok.. So Ive got a 7mm I need to scope. Id like something in the 3.5-10 or 3-9 power range. But Im considering the smaller 2.5-8X36's as well. Id like to get a reticle like the B&C or equivelant because this gun could be used out west and I just think it makes the scope more versatile. Currently I own 2 VXIII 3.5-10X40's and 1 Conquest 3-9x40. Either one would be fine with me put I do like the optics on the conquest, but I like the size and the lens covers of the Leupy's. This gun will primarily be used for GA whitetails but I will also use it in my home state of WA for deer and elk. I want a scope that will work well at low light, but not be too hefty (thats why im not really interested in a 50mm. But if you can convince me otherwise feel free.) I don't want to be cheap, but don't want to spend much more than about $650 either. Im open to trying ebay and getting one of Dougs demo's as well to get a better scope at a cheaper price.. How about Kahles scopes? Ive never used one but hear good things. Ive also never used the small 36mm scopes in low light............ Hope that narrows this down.... BTW.. I give this a 50/50 shot at becoming a p1ssing match, but i'm hoping it won't...

If your up to a $650 scope what about one of Doug's Swaro on a rail? I had my mind decided til I saw your large budget (compared to mine).

haha.. Until my wife sees this post.. then its gonna be a $150 budget..

Leupy 2.5x8 thats all I'd need.

Keep it simple--Leupy 2.5x8.

Of course, that's what E would say too.........




Casey

Were just speaking on his behalf........

6x42 FX-III, or SIIB. Put the rest into an LRF1200, and you're golden.

At 650.00 go to cdnn and look at the Kahles. Lots of bang for the buck.

Rob

wow... those seem to be some great prices on Kahles scopes... Anyone ever compare a Kahles to a Conquest or VXIII? I don't know anywhere I could compare them..

Since you're from Washington, I thought I'd mention the Bushnell 4200 Elite 2.5-10x40. The Rainguard feature should at least count for something.

First of all let me say that I love swarovski Z6 and PH 30mm scopes, but you just can't always have the top of the line. The prices are getting ridiculous. However, I have owned Leupolds, conquest, and kahles and honestly I prefer the kahles. I even prefer them over the swaro AV line. For what I call a mid-tier priced scope IMO you just cant beat the Kahles. That is saying alot considering I like Swarovski as much as E likes Leupold. I think...

Jetjockey, you have a PM

Rob

VX-3 2.5-8x36 would be great.

I agree with the Bushnell 4200 elite or the Zeiss Conquest. I have both and last deer season I was hunting with my 7mm w/ the Zeiss COnquest 3x9x40. The last possible shooting light available I killed a nice 10 point buck at 150 yards. I believe that if not for the zeiss the shot would not of been possible, so you can see I am SOLD......

The Bushnell Elite 3-9x40 is a great scope and a steal @ $230-$250, which can be found online any day of the week. Rainguard is super.

+1.

If that Bushnell had been going for these prices back when I bought my scope, I likely would have chosen it over the Conquest. At the time, though, they were fairly close in price, & the Conquest just edged it out, to my eyes, anyway.

Both are fabulous glass.

FC

I agree FC. I prefer my Conquest slightly to the elite. Both are super scopes.

For me, there are two types of LR scopes that will match the potential of your 7 mag: those with dots or those with turrets. Combined with a rangefinder, I can use either one to make first-shot hits as far as my ethics permit (500 yards or so.) I know that many tactical scopes have both, but I think that is a throwback to the era when the mil dots were used for ranging, and the turret for adjusting. In the laser rangefinder era, I can use them interchangably, and don't need both.

So a 3.5x10 40 mm VX-III with an M1 turret would seem to me to be a perfect match (in fact, I have an old 4x12 Vari-xII with a target turret on a heavy barreled 7 mag that is a long range demon. But you could do just as well with one of the ranging reticles. And while I think the 2.5x8 is about the perfect all around scope, it is beginning to lag behind the potential of the 7 mag.

YMMV

I'd go 3.5-10 VXIII with M1 knob if it were mine. I bought a 3.5-10PR a few years ago and that is what's going on the 7mmRM that I just put together. Same scope is on my 25-284.

I'd imagine you already have a LRF if you're looking to spend $650 or so on a scope.

'magine so, but you never can tell.

I just bought my first Kahles CL last month. I only picked it up because I came across a super price, and couldn't resist. In my opinion, it is better optically than my VXIII's and Conquests, but not quite as good as the Zeiss Victory's.

Again, just my opinion, but, if you can afford the Kahles, go for it. You won't be sorry.

you answered your own question "VXIII 3.5-10X40" - a vxII 4x12 would be fine also!

Sightron SII Big Sky Series. Great glass, built in turrets, (I believe rainguard too).

Got my 6x42 for under $300 shipped.

GE

There you have it, or I could send you a PM like someone's dad and attempt to sway you.

Let me know.

I am not sure, but the syntax makes me think that is the "Steelhead is drinking tonight" seal of approval.

Dude, I'm Morman. No drinks, just lots of wives, course they ain't mine.

Don't have a rangefinder yet... But I'm going to have one. It sounds like the Leica is the way to go. I need the scope before the range finder since its going to be used this hunting season in GA, where I don't really need a range finder. The only reason I want the range compensating reticle is for versatility. I know myself, if the gun is capable of shooting to 500 yards but the scope really isn't, I won't be happy, even if I don't use the reticle. I know... I need counseling.... I plan on turning the gun into a semi/full custom eventually. Looks like Im probably going to narrow it down to a VXIII, Conquest, or Kahles. And from the sounds of it its going to be in the 3-9X40 to 3.5-10x42 catagory. I think my choice would be #1 Kahles, #2. Conquest and the VXIII last. Now ive just got to decide if the Kakles is really worth the extra coin. IMO the conquest or VXIII is all you really need, but then again, ive never had anything better...

I have the Rapiz-Z 600 reticle in a Conquest 3.5x10x44... pretty sweet scope IMHO. Worth a look. The B&C reticle in Leupold 2.5x8's also works very very well.

The B&C will get you out to 500 yards but it'll be sputtering a little when it gets there- in the sense that the 500-yard aiming point is a little... lame in my opinion. The RZ-600 will get you to 650 yards with an actual crosshair out to 600 yards. But, it's a more complex, less traditional reticle.

Not to get embroiled in the usual controversy by saying this, but the 2.5x8 Loopy has some attributes that make it a very cool hunting scope IMHO... whether or not the glass is quite as good as Brand X or whatever, it's plenty good IMHO. Great scopes. Don't write them off due to all the craziness on the Optics forum lately.

-jeff

JO.. Thanks for the advice on the 2.5-8x36. How does it work in low light??? Low light is more important to me out in Ga than it is hunting elk and whitetails in eastern WA. I have a VXIII 3.5-10 that works well, but I do need to turn it way down at the last minutes of shooting light to see. Im leaning towards one of Dougs Conquests with the rapid z.