looking for some feedback on these scopes , who else makes a scout scope besides leupold ?

..........I have a 2.75x Burris scout scope and use it on occasion atop my Ruger Frontier which can also can accomodate a conventionally mounted scope which I use more. It is a good and a very tough little scout scope. It is fast aiming and is very lightweight. Optics are very good and comparable to that of the 2.5x Leupold scout.

Some pistol scopes can also be used as rifle scout scopes. For scout rifles though, make sure you double check the eye relief specs. The Burris 2-7x32 is one and the 2.5-8x28 Nikon Monarch EER w/fast focus is another.

While the scout scopes have some advantages in speed and no chance of ever getting scope whacked, the real dis-advantages for some, if you can call them that, are their reduced FOVs and lack of magnification for the fixed powers. Nevertheless, a 2.5x or 2.75x fixed scope, is enough to take any deer sized animal and larger out to 250-300 yards and maybe a little more.

Junk.............

......Big Shhtick!...........If someone is of the opinion that scout scopes are junk, most would think they`d give some kind of an explanation as to why??

Junk?..............You`re a little off the mark. Way off the mark as a matter of fact.

Tell yourself,whatever you wanna hear most.

You'll perhaps be able to bullschitt yourself,but that's as far as it goes.

Do try...............(please)

.......Ya know something? You`re a damn blithering idiot. You probably have no scout scope experience either.

I don`t need to tell myself anything based on want I wish to hear the most. And I don`t need to bullschitt myself either.

Clown!

Damn that's funny! Gonna hurt some feelings!

Damn that's funny! Gonna hurt some feelings! [/quote.....Yep! Big Schmuck is funny. No feelings hurt here.

He is entitled to state what he wishes to, or the "lack" of it.

What do you say to a guy that thinks a Scout Scope is sumptin' and trumpeting a Burris version to boot?

Other than nice TRY...............

.............You apparently lack the vocabulary, skill and thought to tell us why the scouts happen to be junk. Your fingers must be lazy when it comes to explaining such things on a keyboard?

After someone typed in their one worded opinion,,,"JUNK",,,I`m sure the O/P might appreciate it more if there were some additional thought from a scout scope detractor such as yourself?

The scout scopes serve their purpose. And btw, you didn`t state whether or not you had any scout scope experience.

Scout scopes suck, all of them.

Agreed. You would be better off learning to use a good set of peep sights.

Here's why they suck: long eye relief comes with limited eye box, unless your head is properly positioned you won't get a good look through a scout scope. It is slower, for me, to use a scout scope than it is to use a conventionally mounted scope of the same magnification.

The only useful application I have seen for the Leupold 2x EER scout scope is on large bore Ruger #1's where they allow for forward mounting using the factor Ruger rings. In that application, the additional eye relief is useful, but the eyebox is noticeably smaller than the view through a conventional Leupold 2.5x.

As for the Burris scope specifically, I have seen them and looked through one mounted on a Savage scout rifle. It was inferior, to my eye, to the Leupold, which was, in turn, inferior to the standard Leupold M8 2.5x.

If you must have a forward mounted optic, check out a good red dot such as the Aimpoint Micro or Trijicon RMR. They're light, small and fast to work with.

I took some ktown coasties hunting today.. I think they learned the meaning of Junk after the trip to the top of the mountain.. (grin) I suppose the nice thing to do would be to drive them to the nearest dumpster and let them unload.

I've seen lots of guys throw out quite of a bit of [bleep] after only a few days. Seems they can't believe if it works in Vigina or Pencilvainya that it won't work in Alaska. They were wrong.

Sweetheart,I don't guess...though I see you are rather at ease in same.

Which reiterates how one should always consider the source,despite that factoid being the furthest from your intentions.

You frosted your own cake,without even knowing it!................

You forgot to touch on the Burris wickedly wondering POI..................

......Yep! Just another one who states that "scout scopes suck" right along with the other, who also has limited use of explaining "as to the why" skills.

At least Steelhead was able to come up with two more words than Big Stick.

C`mon boys, as tough as it may be, let`s go for a paragraph the next time, explaining to the OP why scouts suck and are junk.............

The glaring obvious needn't copious bandwidth,though I'm sure you'll wanna wax eloquent on your old lady's adam's apple.................

I think one of them said Alabama, and the other said Illinois. Good guys that I met in the airport shuttle on the way back from my moose trip. One of them managed to destroy an expensive Under Armour jacket on his first trip up the mountain..

Everything is equal...until you start using it...................(grin)

Here's one suckage Scout scope in use.




Waiting for the 3 paragraph dissertation from Kalifornia on why [bleep] tastes like [bleep].

...........Ore 45.........At least you explained the why.

Scouts take a little practice to get use to them. But once I did, mine serves me well when I do use it.

You're "experience" precludes you from recognizing junk.

Interesting tidbit there.................

..................You say they "ALL SUCK" and yet you have one on that carbine? Looks like you really hate them then uh?

Better look to yourself to understand why schitt tastes like schitt.

You are still such a [bleep] idiot. You get on folks cuzz you say they have no experience and then when they've proved usage as a form to back up their suckage opinion you can't connect the dots.

Yep, they SUCK, and I know because I've used the [bleep] things.


How do you know I taste like [bleep] princess? About par for you.

Oh, and please feel free to regale us with guided hunt tales.

.......But at least I have experience with them, vs one like you whom spouts off with no scout scope experience.

Since you didn`t/can`t answer my question as to your own scout scope experience, it stands to reason that you don`t have any.

Far more credible when calling something junk, IF one has some experience to back up their opinion.

Apparently not dipshitt

"...............You say they "ALL SUCK" and yet you have one on that carbine? Looks like you really hate them then uh?"

The Burris was the answer to a question I asked.

............Then you should have said so and posted your pic earlier then. If you hate the damned thing so much, then why is it still mounted on that carbine?

And on a side note. I`ll be very happy to send U a plane ticket to Calif, so that you can see for yourself first hand, exactly what this "[bleep] idiot" or "princess" as you say can do on a face to face basis. Soap in your mouth alone won`t be enough.

That is something you will never do nor accept.

Redfield FrontIER scope/mount. i keep it around to remind us Cooper diddn't invent the concept. i doubt that i'll ever own another.

Granted the Scout concept has some very big limitations - and even that I could do with iron sights in my youth what I need a scout scope for today - I have two scout scopes mounted one on a true Steyr Scout and one on a Dragoon (finer cross hairs on the .308 and heavier on the .376 - lever detach on the .308 solid as I could make it on the .376 etc.). For red dots I also use an Aimpoint red dot on a 6920 mounted forward and an RMR on a S&W M&P compact pistol.

For my own use the scout scope on the scout rifle allows me old and tired as I am to do what I want to do in the woods. Disadvantages for aiming close to glare, issues for extreme accuracy with very fine aiming points, (but the scope sight is not a binocular and using the scope as a binocular substitute is always criminal and in some jurisdictions a crime) for all the handiness lacking light gathering ability and an illuminated aiming point still for a wandering around carbine I've put my money where my mouth is - but of course those are not my only rifles. In fact I've got a Leupold conventional 2.5 (shotgun) on a double - not for Africa but maybe for kicking the brush on a north face on a hot day and that works too.

Still IMHO the Burris is entirely satisfactory as a Scout Scope - that is as a scout scope there is no meaningful advantage in the field and the Burris offers a focusing eye piece lacking on most maybe all iterations of the Leupold scout scope. Maybe that means the Leupold is better sealed but the Scout is nothing to take to war and given the end of the world as we know it somebody else will quickly inherit my own scout so issues of ruggedness and guarantee don't arise for me.

A 1MOA Eotech,solves alotta woes...............

I have used a Burris Scout for a number of years on the smooth-bore slug barrel of my Ithaca 37. It was very difficult to find a way to scope the 37 and the Scout scope in Zee rings turned out to be the answer. It has its limitations and I would not choose it if other options were available, but for this application it has served very well.

Cooper himself,set Burris EER glass on stumps and slung 45's at same.

COLOSSAL hunksa schitt...............

..........The Eotechs are great red dot sights and are certainly better in every respect than the Burris 2.75x scout for closer ranged hunting. I`ll agree with that. I sure hope so at about $420-$450 on up.

But at only 1x, they are range limited, whereas a 2.75x will do just fine out to 250-300 yards and for some maybe a little more yardage if needed. The Burris optics are fine for my use.

Maybe "Steelhead" can dump that awful scout scope that`s on his carbine which he hates so much (yet seems to keep it on there?), and get an Eotech or a Trijicon.

Dummy,

Your "use" is hardly taxing. You could raid the Bus Station,pinch used schitt paper rolls and string threaded "crosshairs",less missing a lick...............

........You are one big huge azzhole,,,,Sshtick!

Tell ya what there jerk head!..How abouts you volunteering to put an 8" bright orange circle on that useless POS chest of yours, then go down range say 300 yards. Then I`ll be happy to show you exactly what I can do.

Damn! There are laws against shooting people. Even the most idiotic and pathetic ones who are amongst us.

Feel free to flaunt your "experience"...mebbe by a few "trying" pictures or such. Be forewarned,that pics with your pants at your ankles,are not "Art",no matter the reason(s) you were told.

Like you could hit an 8" circle,you poor daydreaming dummy!.....................

..........................Your diatribe on this thread reminds me of some secluded ignorant hillbilly hack, wearing a straw hat, jeans, suspenders and who is barefoot who lives out in the middle of no-where, that never reached a 3rd grade level of education.

Maybe is spelled,,,"maybe",,,NOT mebbe you pathetic idiot.

Anytime you wish to wear that 8" circle, you let me know. The VLDs will make excellent long range work of that POS chest of yours.

Ooops, With the exception of self defense, I keep forgeting that it is against the law to shoot people....

Despite it being your only avenue,your imagination is no more force than your realities.

Bummer.........................(laffin')

..............I`ll be happy to show an imaginary 2.75x scout scope sitting on an imaginary 300 WSM, and exactly what that imaginary rig can do downrange.

You wouldn`t like my imagination to well.

Your imagination takes entertainment to new levels.

Trouble is...paltry as them connections are,you haven't the faculties to poor pizz out of a boot............................

.................Well sir! Anytime you think you`d like to back up your verbage with some action, please let me know. I`ll buy your round trip plane fare.

Bench shooting? Free hand shooting? Prone? Gongs? How about some speed shooting too? Bring your best bolt rifle, and alot of money to wager. Since I don`t have any faculties to pour piss out of a boot, then you shouldn`t have a problem. I`m laughing too!

If not, then all you`re doing is just blowing meaningless smoke out your azz.

Btw! In proper context as you typed it there Mr. Hillbilly, pizz should be spelled piss and poor should have been spelled pour. I guess that teachers, chalk and the blackboards, weren`t your strong suits when growing up. You grew up?

Dummy,

You really take stupidity to NEW levels.

Congratulations?....................

What is a bolt rifle? My best gun is a 270 Winchester Remington 740 and it has a Redfield 9x scope. It will shoot under 3 inches at 100yds!..................

Sorry, I have no semi or pump rifles. One bolt action against another bolt action. Bring your best bolt action.

Under 3" at 100 yards? If shooting from the bench, I sure hope so.

.........Why thank you sir! Anytime you wish to challenge a new level of stupidity, just let me know.

We`ll see who the stupid one really is.....

Let's try sub 3" at the 700yd line...for starters...............


Rink

You could write a book on how not to do schitt...and it WOULD sell............

I'll play hard to get...choose a color.............

Just sayin'..............

........With that 740 Remy 270 Win? Sub 3" groups at 700 yards with a 9x Redfield?...Yeah right! Sure!

Then you`re talking about a custom long ranged target bolt rifle, and not a hunting rifle. I don`t own a long ranged paper punching bolt target rifle. I own bolt action hunting rifles.

Keep the apples with the apples and the oranges with the oranges.

YOU can't even keep your stupidity under wraps.

Admittedly,I've a bolt gun or two myself.................

In fairness,I can/will Krunchentick............

...........Even though we likely dislike each other, you nevertheless have a very nice collection there. You sandbagger you! LOL....I see no Remy 740 in that collection.

Ya know though. Those rifles don`t appear to be the lighter and quicker handling rifles and won`t be quite as fast when freehand shooting on gongs or other stationary or moving targets, so I might get ya there. Nor are they rifles for the thicker brush which I hunt alot in. Hence, my "plain jane" factory bolt carbine.

I may have to throw my new 338-378 into the mix then after I find out what the best loadings are. Haven`t fired it yet!

All your rifles are custom jobs, where mine are "only" the (whoa is me) factory hunting rifles. I still won`t lose an animal though.

Got any "normal" factory rifles to compete with?

...............I now see some factory jobs? Use the one on the far left!

...........I hope you`ll forgive my stupidity.

See thru's?

Millet see-thru's and Ballistic Tips baby!.....................

You say that like it's a *bad* thing.

Holy CRAP!! The post has gone astray! Funny how everyone who ever "...looked through a Burris Scout Scope.." becomes an instant expert. Or someone like "Big Stick" (which by the way rhymes with Little...ahem...Richard) proclaims ALL Burris scopes are junk, then proceeds to show us pictures of his collections of multi-colored, plastic stocked rifles (with skulls and crossbones!! Yikes!! Soooo scary!!) all sporting (who would've ever guessed)scopes with massive objectives. "Why, you can't hit ANYTHING with a rifle wearing a Burris scope much less a 2.75X!!!"
First and foremost, if Burris scopes truly are junk, then Burris would no longer be in business. I own several of their scopes, as well as a Leupold or two, and under in real world hunting conditions, I find not enough difference in them, to spit at. Yes, compared side-by-side, the Leupolds of identical magnification seem a tad brighter, but again, in the field, it's made no difference to me.
Next, whoever said the original poster would be better off with a peep sight is a blithering idiot. And that's coming from someone who's obsessed with high quality peep sights (me). My primary High Power competition rifle sports a Redfield Palma and it truly is a fine, precision sight. My Marlin 375 and 1895, one of my Mauser hunting rifles, my Scout rifle, my wife's Scout rifle, one of my SKS's, my 1903, both 1903A3's (one with original sights, the other with a Lyman 48), my bolt .22 and both of my Mosin 91/30's ALL have receiver/peep sights. (Yes, it's possible to mount areceiver sight on a Mosin, but that's another post entirely.) My point is I LOVE peep sights, but in low light such as at dawn and dusk, a crappy scope is better than ANY peep sight for obvious reasons.
That being said, I HAVE owned a Burris Scout scope for nigh on 15 years. It's on my '98 Mauser .308 Scout rifle and it is utterly reliable. Year after year I check the zero on this rifle and so long as I don't change loads, I never, ever have to adjust the scope. 'Though I own a safe full of centerfire rifles, this rig is hands-down my favorite deer rifle. No, I don't take 400 yard shots with it, but more because to me that's unnecessary and borderline irresponsible for the average hunter. This rifle and scope was what I used to teach my daughter to deer hunt with beginning at age eleven. The main reason is that with the forward mounted scope it is so, so easy to acquire a target for those unaccustom to using a scope.
I'm currently putting together a Scout Rifle for my wife and I will without hesitation buy another Burris.
Nuff said in type. The proof is in the pudding:
[img]http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h6/308Scout/Hunting/BuckScout.jpg[/img] [img]http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h6/308Scout/Hunting/PB280045red.jpg[/img] [img]http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h6/308Scout/Hunting/Emilysdeer02-5.jpg[/img]
35WN

Granted Texas hunting is as tough as it gets, but scout scopes are still, and will always be, a compromise.

The line that if Burris were junk they'd be out of business don't wash well either. Course they likely work the vast amounts of folks sitting on their ass in a box blind hunting 3 days a year. Just cuzz more folks voted for Obama than didn't don't make it a smart.

Of course a Scout scope is a compromise, what scope ISN'T a compromise? The original question asked the opinion of the Burris Scout scope. Not YOUR opinion of Scout scopes in general.

After my last post, it occurred to me that both mine and my fathers elk rifles ALL mount Burris scopes and over the last several years these rigs have been many, many miles in saddle scabbards and carried up and down the mountains of New Mexico and never once lost a zero. Oh wait...I sit on my ass in a box blind don't I..... But owing to your 43000+ posts, I'd have to say you spend most of YOUR time sitting on YOUR ass in front of a computer.
How many Burris scopes have you owned?
35W

.........35 Whelennut,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Ask Steelhead how soon he`ll remove that "piece of crap" scout scope from his carbine! (see his earlier pic). In fact better yet, ask him how long its been on there!!!

If I had a scope that I hated, I`d certainly trade it or sell it asap.

Whelen...........Very good post with good pics.

The scout rifles do get the job done. Those real horrible Burris scout scopes keep right on selling now don`t they! But shame on us, for having those crappy and junky Burris scout scopes on our rifles.

And on my Ruger Frontier, I only use mine on a part time basis. They work just fine.

Yep it's about post count. But your pics prove that apparently retards can procreate, compelling at best. I've owned damn near every brand of scope at one point or another. I know I've run 5-6 Burris scopes. I don't need to keep eating [bleep] sandwiches to know they taste like [bleep]

You ever hunt day in and day out in rain/snow/wind/salt? Remember when I say rain I don't mean you wearing a yellow slicker in your favorite porn theater dropping another kid on the floor.

Jesus H. Christ you are one DUMB SOB. I guarantee the scout scope ain't on the rifle. I guarantee there ain't a single scope in the house. I guarantee you are proof that even a stupid sperm can find an egg.

Well I just had to make a post - most of my hunting rifles were made by my best friend Fred @ LowTech. He talked me into a Burris 2.75x a few years ago and it is by far my favorite hunting rifle. I also have some more traditional set ups with Redfield, Leupold, Zeiss, and Burris scopes. No doubt the other scopes are much better in low light and much better in magnification as well.

My scout rifle is built on a Turkish Mauser - still in 8x57, Boyd's stock, Timney trigger. I can usually group right at 1" with handloads, not too bad considering it's a 70 year old rifle with a 'good bore.'





I think what I like most about the scout rifle setup is that I seem to get a quicker sight picture. Your mileage may vary..

I saw some nice pix of a bunch of rifles in earlier threads (drool). Nice pix of the kid and her kills too (good looking kid you got there - nice kills too).

...........................Nice of you Mr. Steelhead to contribute such fine language and oratory (AS ALWAYS) to these heated debates. I didn`t know that Jesus had a middle initial. And if I`m proof that stupid sperm can find an egg, then you certainly quantify that several million times over.

Well guys! You see this clown`s (Steelhead`s) last post above to me. Please refer back to page 3 of this thread and read this following quote by Steelhead, which was placed above his pic showing his carbine.

Quote,,,,"HERE`S ONE SUCKAGE SCOUT SCOPE IN USE.",,,,Unquote........

Oh! You must have forgotten about that one. Sure looks like that scope is mounted forward enough on that carbine to be in a scout position as well as being an EER scope!!!!????? AFTERALL! YOU DID TYPE IN THE ABOVE QUOTE and you`re the one whom posted that pic!.....

LAFFIN........

In my own experience (and yes, with the Burris Scout scope, as well the Leupold version), the acquisition is NO faster than the acquisition with any properly mounted scope with a decent eye box.

And, the diminution of FOV, brightness, and magnification is not worth the trade off.

1. Leupold 3.5-10x40 w/ standard duplex & at least an elevation turret
2. Leupold fixed 6x w/ same as above

that's just a start ...

True, all scopes are a compromise.

In my experience, the two that WGM listed are the least compromise across the board, whereas the scout scopes are a far greater compromise in several key categories (brightness, FOV, magnification), and thus, inferior.

Just cuz he has a rifle pic with a scout scope on it , doesnt mean its still on there numbbnutz... Jeezus, u are dense..

Not talkin about VA, either..

Understood, completely.

Yep.

Good Lord, what did the Martini Cadet do to deserve THAT?!?

Those scopes are a compromise.

The eye relief of the 3.5-10 shortens rather dramatically with power increase.

The fixed-6 is, well, a fixed-6.

Closest I've found to a no-compromise scope is the Conquest 3-9x40. And with it- ta da!- you have to compromise on weight and ocular size.

Well the Swaro 2.5-10x42 AV removes that; it's light and trim. But then you have to compromise your wallet!

..................Yep! You were referring to me.....I didn`t read any quote from Steelhead where he states he removed it,,,,,,,,,,NUMBNUTS.

Looks who`s the dense one!

BTW! There`s only one "b" in numb, and there`s no "z" in nuts. We`ll make an exception though,,,,,,,for the denser and less talented spellers who are amongst us.

"Jesus H. Christ you are one DUMB SOB. I guarantee the scout scope ain't on the rifle. I guarantee there ain't a single scope in the house. I guarantee you are proof that even a stupid sperm can find an egg."
_________________________

OK, NUMBNUTZ, re-read that paragraph and then take the diick outa yer mouth...

I dont have to spell right to get the bulge on a tub like you...

This,..

That is spectacular accuracy from that old Martini!

"When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
She's human as you are -- you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . ."

........You can`t spell "diick" either? Only one "i"..........Oh! And you still left the "z" in nuts too!

Tub? Yep! I`m a tubby all-right. 6-7% body fat. And after nearly 40 years of instructing, I still teach a few "arts" here and there to law enforcement personnel amongst doing other things. Amazing how doing that keeps the tubby-ness off the bod.

Tub uh? Should I spell tub with two bees? You tell me!

Yes! I did read his quote. However, it`s my choice to take his guarantees with any grain of salt.

That is superb accuracy from a Cadet!

This is why it's so much fun.

In front, a CZ 452,....40 grain bullet at 1250 fps. The smaller, lighter, more accurate Cadet behind it, a 125 grain bullet at 1635 fps.

Bristoe, thats a damn nice shootin ol rig!

BigQueef, yer a twat and a half.. an ignorant one at that..

..........Well Tomahawk. May I remind you about your 1st post to me? Calling me as you stated,,,"numbnuts?"

It is quite clear that you started this fiasco, as did Big Stick and Steelhead who did the same. Nothing or any insulting of any kind were "first" initiated in any way be me on this thread.

If you had a beef with me challenging Steelhead, you could have eliminated the name calling and been far more mature in the process. Not your style.

But it is clear that between you, Big Stick, and Steelhead, you three simply prefer im-mature insulting as your way of trying to get your point across.

If that makes you feel real good about yourselves, then go for it. You can keep right on making complete and totally im-mature asses out of yourselves.....

In my experience, ANY scope with a turret is a compromise. Sure, they make for easy adjustment, but being drug out of and crammed into a saddle scabbard, or used as a support while climbing a mountain, those damned things are just begging to be knocked off. Plus the added weight of big scopes like that make trapsing around a 10,000 ft. even more difficult. Of course if they're just sitting in the gun safe while the owner pecks away at a keyboard, they're perfect.
But, if you like them and they work for you, then more power to you.
35WN

Actually, it is about post count. How on earth you find time to hunt when you make over 43,000 posts escapes me. You need a life. And as far as pro-creating, the young lady in the pictures is my step-daughter. What me having fathered children has to do with Scout scopes escapes me, but at any rate, rave on, you're making yourself look like a moron.
I don't know what your problem was with Burris scopes, but I can just about guarentee you that if there IS a problem other than the idiot behind the trigger, it was (is) somewhere in the rifle.
If you'll notice I live in NORTH TEXAS, and if you think about it, you know that I don't hunt in salt, I don't hunt in rain (we have sense enough to kill our game when it's not raining, and the game have sense enough to bed up when it is), I do hunt in wind (what the hell does that have to do with scopes?), and again, it doesn't snow much in North Texas, but I have had the occassion to hunt elk in NM and CO when it was snowing. Again, no problems with Burris scopes.
You're a big man sitting there for hours on end hammering away at a keyboard, aren't you?
35WN

Damn fine shootin' sir! I can count 10 rounds on the target on the right; were 10 rounds fired into the group on the left as well?

I think so.

I wasn't really counting.

[bleep]' phunny post! feel free to peck away with your guns sitting the safe, tho.

Curious to know which scabbard is set-up for the profile of a scout scope system, having the bulge for the scope so far down the barrel....

Or, how the scouit scout system, with the base, rings, and scope, is so much lighter than the 14 oz of a 6x42 FX-III and Talley LWs....

Or, how the fragile and easily knocked off turrets somehow manage to keep up with the "gentle" treatment they receive in use in combat situations with military snipers, not to mention the use by hunters who don't sit in boxblinds....

I can't tell you which "brand" scabbard is set up for the profile of a Scout scope "system" as you put it. The scabbards we use are custom made and they'll handle my Scout rifle no problem. But, if you'll re-read my post, I never said I carried my Scout rifle in a scabbard. It's not an elk rifle though I have no doubt it would work.
If you want to compare the weights of the scopes, I'll humor you...the 6x42 weighs close to 11 1/2 oz. while the Burris Scout scope weighs 7. Add the Ashley (now XS) mount and it's still a tad lighter than yours, I have no idea how much the rings weigh nor do I intend to weigh them .
I didn't say the turrets were fragile, I just said something sticking up like the Leaning Tower of Pisa is just begging to be damaged. But if you want to disgrace a light, trim little rifle like the one you pictured, you're the one that looks like a fool,not me. In fact, it looks like your rifle is attached to the scope instead of the other way around...
Hey, regarding the boxblind remark, maybe you can find something original, huh?
Again, the original post asked for opinions on the Burris Scout scope, NOT opinions on Scout scopes in general. So, if you own one, state your opinion and move on. If you don't, shut your pie-hole and begin work on that lofty goal of your 45,000nth post...
Think I'll go to the shop and start packing for my elk hunt.
35WN

Okay, so you knock turrets for something that you admit the scout scope isn't up for.

Red herring.

What's the Ashley base weigh? Add in rings, too, as they are required. Minimum 2.5 oz for rings, so you're at 9.5 oz for the scout vs. 13.5 oz for the 6x42 and Talleys. You've got 4 oz for the base, before the weights are equal or the scout system is heavier.

That, ain't much, and certainly not enough to write home about.

"asking to be damaged", and being so, are quite a ways apart. Again, red herring.

Haven't posted a pic of my rifle yet, any of them (at least not on this thread), so you strike out there, too.

Boxblind scored an X ring, obviously.

Post envy, as well as envy of other attributes, suits you; keep it up.

Having used the Burris Scout Scope, I can, will, and did offer my opinion. Differs from yours, and your ass hurts because of it. Sucks to be you.

Good luck to the elk....

That is spectacular accuracy from that old man!!

Brisoe.

What distance were those groups fired at?

I think in another post/thread he said 100 yards.

The Martini was shot at 50 yards.

The K31 was shot at 100.

What are you talking about?!?!? A Scout scope isn't up for turrets? You're like arguing with a 7th grader. One of those "...I may not be right but I'm DAMN sure not wrong!!"



I wasted a a few seconds at the Brownells site...the base weighs 3.2 oz. Why I did this, I'm not sure, but there it is. I'm still not quite sure why you're comparing the weight of a full-size scope to a Scout scope, but I can tell you with a great amount of certainty that I'm rapidly becoming bored with your drivel. But, I somewhat enjoy helping a fool like yourself look like a fool....



You're correct, ny bad. The post that shows the rifle mounted to the scope was by "toad". I assumed when you started your prating about a a 6x42 blah, blah, blah that it was your rifle pictured...which is further confusing. Why did pic a 6x42?



Sorry Junior. I own and hunt on my own property and there's nary a box blind to be found. But feel free to argue as you probably know more about my property than I.



Let me correct myself from earlier..you're arging with a 7th grade girl.

From now on if you want to call me names, why don't you PM me? Nah, that'd take all the fun out of it wouldn't it? 'Cause then you wouldn't receive the attention you so desperately need from people reading your childish posts.

35WN


Oh yeah...this will be mine and my fathers 7th year to hunt elk in this particular place (All d.i.y. hunts by the way) So far, the elk only win 33% of the time

If I may ask ... why are you trying to debate the "cramming" of turrets in/out of a scabbard when you are using a custom scabbard in the first place? Seems it would be rather easy to get one that fits a rifle/scope combo with turrets if you can have one made for a scout scope setup ...

and FWIW, I've done the scabbard thing a couple of times, using a rather standard leather scabbard that was NOT set up for turrets ... yet the scopes on my rifles at the time wore turrets, and it was not an issue at all ...

What size are those orange dots?

Your reading comprehension is simply piss poor.

You were knocking turrets for something that you admit the scout scope isn't set up for (lugging on high country elk hunts... your words, not mine).

That, would be a red herring (i.e., a non-starter, for argument sake).

The Ashley base weighs 3.2 oz. Lovely. That puts your scope and base at 10.2 oz, while the 6x42 and Talleys total weighs in at 13.5. That leaves you 3.3 whole ounces for rings to have the scout system be lighter than the 6x42. The point there, skippy, is to rebut your position that the full size scope is too heavy, and the scout set-up not; simple math proves your wrong.

As for picking a 6x42, well, that's easy. That's what more than one of my rifles wears, and it's one of the scopes YOU knocked earlier as too big, bulky, and heavy (see WGM's post, and your reply).

Glad you own and hunt your own property. Congratulations? You want a cookie to go along with that?

And, I'm arguing with a 7th grade girl? Well, okay... then you really ought to be in bed by now.

As for PMing, well, that street runs both ways... have at it, Hoss.

And, again, good luck to the elk; at least those not in front of your father.

They look like 3" shoot-n-see type stickers.

Not intending to get in the middle of any "discussion" but I've seen several references to the weight of the 6x42 Leupold being 11oz.
That must be for the older M8 model because Leupold lists the current 6x42 FX-3 as weighing 13.6oz.

Are the new ones heavier than the older ones?

Possible. I've got both the M8s and the FXs, and haven't noticed much, if any, weight difference. A couple ozs ain't schit.

6",..and the Cadet fires a 1" diameter bullet.

Originally Posted By: VAnimrod
Originally Posted By: Oregon45
I have to agree with JO on this one VA. A buddy took a fine Blacktail buck on opening day last weekend. Shot was 20 yards, straight down, as my buddy was on top of a rock escarpment rising above a vast scrub oak thicket on a ridge. The buck was feeding along the edge of the thicket where it met the rock wall. My buddy said when he took the safety off (Winchester Model 70, three position) the buck froze. Wrong move on the buck's part.

They can hear those things, if you're close enough and the wind doesnt'd drown you out. Personally, it's not enough for me to worry about and I use B&C caps as a matter of course and haven't missed a shot because of them.


Considering that I've shot deer STRAIGHT DOWN out of tree stands, and at a measured 10', all while snicking off safeties and/or flipping caps, I'm still calling BS. Either the blacktails are supernatural as even compared to whitetails, or someone's blowing smoke. I'd wager on the latter.


Tree stand/ Box Blind whats the differance?

Damn, I thought 35WhelenNut was a chump beforehand....

Care to say it openly, douche? Oh, wait, that's right.... you'd rather just send a couple nasty PMs, then try to put someone on ignore when they go to respond.

Your father, I hope, does well on the elk hunt... even if he should have taken matters into his own hands, and wiped them clean of the cull, years ago.

And?

Have, and will again. It ain't the only way I hunt, nor my preferred, but at times, it works.

Your point is, exactly, what?

So, Bristoe.. all joking aside, what diameter are those Orange dots ?

Figure the Cadet is firing a .311"ish bullet.

VA..

I know what diameter bullet the Cadet fires. I have owned and handloaded for 2 origional Cadets in the last 10 years.

I even cast the heeled bullets for them myself.

I was asking Bristoe about the size of the target dots- not the bullets or the bullet holes.

Thanks for your help, though.

jim62 ...

if you know the size of the bullet holes, it shouldn't be hard to figure out the size of the orange dot ...

at least, I guess that was/is the point VA was making ...

If you look at the holes, you can get a pretty good idea of the size of the dots.

Guys,

I know that. There was a point to my question about the size of those dots.

Rather than assume based on the size of the holes, or put words in his mouth , I wanted to hear it from BRISTOE himself.

Is that too much to ask?

Is it "too much" for someone to try to steer you in the right direction?

Nobody is making fun of you, or anything of the sort ... simply trying to help out, that's all. For all we know, Bristoe may never read this thread again ...

If it's that important for you to know the answer from Bristoe himself, try sending a PM to him, as the odds of him getting your question that way are better than simply hoping he's following this thread ...

WGM...

My point was I asked BRISTOE..not three other people who had nothing to do with the targets he posted.

Like I said, I asked a simple question. I was willing to wait a few hours for Bristoe himself to respond. Out of respect for Bristoe..

No PM needed.

And no "steering" needed from anyone else....

Not once did you thank people who were honestly trying to help you. No. You�d rather be a tool. That�s been the story of your posting history on this board. I hope Bristoe tells you to urinate up a rope.

Magnumdink,

If I am reading Bristoe's preceeding reply to your version of "help", I think he basically told YOU to piss up a rope.

And BTW , I DID thank VA for "trying" to help...

Hmmm...we read Bristoe's meaning differently; BIG surprise there...not.





Yes you did; I stand corrected.

Magnum..

Look, I know you were trying to help, OK?

My point was it's obvious Bristoe was /is watching this thread.

I don't see the harm in waiting for him to reply. If he doesn't I will simply ask him via PM..

It could be worse-

At least I am not asking "Bigstick" to post more pictures..

Thank you for offering the olive branch; I'll gladly accept.

Peace.

Big Stick is the only poster I have on ignore. He doesn't need to impress me; he's impressed enough with himself to account for a stadium full of people who might be impressed with him.

so the rifle fashon diva doesn't like the little knob that doubles my rifles effective range.

good! laffin'

Now THAT'S funny!!!! So you're telling me that if you didn't have those silly knobs on your scope, that your rifle would have half the range it does. Boy oh boy...the scope companies LOVE people like you!! Do you not know how to estimate holdover using duplex crosshairs? Hmmm....
So let's see... during last years elk season, I killed a bull at a lasered 355 yds. with my 35 Whelen. The rifle wears a 4.75x Weaver. That means that if I'd had a scope with turrets like yours, on my rifle, I could've killed the same bull at 710 yards? WOW!! That's amazing!! A scope that makes a rifle more powerful!!
You should PM John Barsness (Mule Deer) and tell him about your revolutionary discovery! I bet he'd love to write an article for one of the major hunting/shooting publications detailing your discovery!!
35WN

Damn! That's a good line! I wish I had thought of it.

hardly my discovery.

your 35 Whelen/250 NPT would make 710 yards with a ~21 moa adjustment to the "silly knob" and would have 1320+ fpe remaining. not like it would bounce off when you can no longer "estimate holdover using duplex crosshairs".

i used the duplex hold-over for years before i stepped up to LRF/turrets. it works to a point but is very crude. removing your "estimate" from the equation is key.

but, hey, if you'd rather use "estimate" instead of precise input so you can have a pretty rifle in the safe, have at it.

let's be fair, if only for a moment ...

The scope system is really not ever going to change the "effective range" of the rifle/cartridge ... it's merely going to allow one to be more accurate at extended ranges by removing "guestimation" and/or "holdovers" and replacing them with accurate reticle adjustments ...

I guess, if you want to play the semantics game, you CAN argue that the scope can "increase the effective range of the rifle system", but I'd rather not muddy the waters by saying that ... I'd rather point out the simple aspect of turrets on a precise, repeatable scope being a better system than using Kentucky Windage ...

i'll buy that.

lets substitute "weapons system" for "rifle" in my earlier post if that clears it up.

the optics will not alter trajectory, it can allow you to compensate for it. compensating precisely can allow first round hits to about 2x the distance vs. "estimating holdover".

the .308 has been used on elk past 900 yards, so the limiting factor is very seldom the cartridge.

There are a few things that beg arguing here:
1) I use a 225 gr. TSX at a measured 2660 fps. With a B.C. of .359. (So the bullet was the first bad assumption on your part.)
There's no way on earth I would in a million years attempt a shot at over 700 yds. even if I KNEW I could hit my target. Velocity would be so low, the bullet would not expand. What MV did you use for the 250 gr. NP? Do you know at what velocity the NP in question will cease to expand reliably?
Besides all that, I have a 600 yd. range at my house which I've shot on extensively. (I shoot High Power competitivly) I know first hand what the slightest puff of wind can do to a bullet at these ranges. Fact is, about 30 minutes prior to killing last years bull I watched a much larger bull spar with another bull at a lasered 510 yds. It never entered my mind to attempt that shot because it would have been highly irresponsible. Made for some beautiful snapshots though!
2) You have no idea at what elevation I hunt. (Second incorrect assumption)FYI it's over 10,000 ft. which affects the trajectory and terminal velocity of a bullet greatly.
3) I knew WELL before my bull walked out of the timber how far my bullet dropped in 50 yd. increments out to 400 yds. Th 225 gr. TSX drops about 16" at 350 yds. at 10,000 ft. All I had to do was hold ovre about 6". No estimating...I've shot enough at long range to have a pretty good idea of what 6" at 350 yds. looks like. All I had time to do is range him and make the decision to shoot. If I'd had to twiddle with a elevation knob and count clicks, the bull would've been long gone.
Your post proved my assumption correct: you're one of those armchair, internet ballisticians who thinks foot-pounds of energy kills game. Oh well...to each his own.

And I still maintain my assertion that your rig looks like your rifle is mounted to your scope. Must be handy to carry a trim (ahem) little rig like that through the brush!
35WN

35WhelenNut,

With regard to your below statement, could you clarify something?



Are you talking about this rifle?





Or this one?

muzzle velocity for the 250 NPT calculations was 2600 fps. ( ~60K psi and 24")

never had a NPT not expand, and i've killed more schitt than i can count with 'em.

you do know that elevation will will reduce bullet drop and velocity loss, all else equal don't you? seems not. and yes, i'm no stranger to 10k+.



LOL

when i have to get my 6'4" frame through the brush, i've never had the .75" turret make a difference. that little rifle has been with me to griz and wolf infested 10K+ more times than i can count and never once regretted the knob. and of course, that isn't the only rifle i've carted up the mountain sporting similar knobs less issue.

'Dood, the 600 has taken bear with authority, but i much the M7 for utility.

toad, what are the specs on the M7's scope? I like the looks of that setup.

Only scout scope I ever used was a Springfield Armory 2x on a SA Scout/Squad. The short .308 would put Fed 168s into .75 at 100 yards, and it could bust an MGM rifle target at 300 yards, but never hunted with that setup.

It didn't strike me as particularly fast to acquire a target with either. I sent the scope back, bought the rifle and used it with irons or Aimpoint until I foolishly sold it.

I have a Frontier .358 that I used a Micro T1 on to shoot a doe in a field about 100 yards away. Worked great in the open, but the green tint and lack of magnification kept me from shooting a big buck 60 yards away in heavy woods at daybreak on another occasion.

I am going to put Leupold 2.5X LW or a Weaver 1-3X on it for woods hunting this season. Or maybe copy Toad's system; it'd be kind of cool to spin a turret on a 2.5 or 4X and hit way out yonder with a .358.

CC'84,

that's a Leupold VXIII 1.5-5 with a M1 knob intalled. MontanMarine has one similar, 'cept his has a target elevaion knob.