For those of you that use a straight 6X............what are your reasons???

Had heard them spoken of as being very clear and tough. I have 3 now and am very pleased with them. I do not have any desire for any other scope on my big game rifles.
AB

I use a bunch of Leupold straight sixes, one 6x36 and several in 6x42.

For their size, weight, and cost they provide a lot of performance. Bright and clear, nice eye relief characteristics w.r.t length and being noncritical, and reliable zero holding.

The noncritical eye relief makes them fast to bring on target, so the 6x isn't too much for close work like it can be with other scopes. Trying most variables set to 6x won't give the true picture of the ease of a Leupold 6x42.

Yet 6x is plenty for for more precise work than some people seem to think. Late this afternoon I used a straight 6 on one of my 308's to test some mild target loads I put together so an eleven year old nephew of mine can try one of Uncle Mathman's "big" rifles. I fired the last six test shots into 0.62 MOA at 300 yards.

Because when I raise my rifle in the hunting fields I aim and fire. Nothing to adjust, nothing else to think about.

Turns out they work at the rifle range just as well.

I like adjustable scopes fine too, but a fixed 6 is pure hunting functionality.

Because I hate variables.

Plus, they mount up on long actions in DD's without a lot of shidtttt hanging over the loading port,and still give the right eye relief.

Target acquisition is pretty easy and enough definition for most hunting chores.They remind me of the old, long tubed Leupold 4X's I used to love but they let me see a bit better past 300 yards.

They also eliminate a bunch of internal moving parts,so should be tougher.

I still don't like them for a steady diet of heavy cover hunting but nothing is perfect.

Because I use dots and there is no way to screw up(power setting) with a fixed 6x.


That and 400-450 yards is a long shot for me and a 6x is plenty 'powerful' enough.


And they are rumored to be tougher, less parts and chit to break.

As Mattie Ross said in TRUE GRIT, "Enough is as good as a feast."

Damn tootin'!

I have a fixed 4x and a fixed 6x42. The 6x42 is a very forgiving scope for mounting on long actions and eye relief/eye position behind the scope. If only Leupold would make a fixed 4x in the 6x36 tube with at least 4" of eye relief it would be the perfect scope for me.

Rich,

Your turn. Why not?

The Leupy 6x36 is probably my fave scope of all time...for all the reasons stated above.

First off I like less schit to mess with....that is why I have hunted with a straight 4x for the last few years. I guess my biggest concern is a 6x having too much power at close ranges. Field of view is nice but I don't take shots on running deer.

I'm with Bob and if I was spending time almost exclusively in heavy cover, then it would be the Leupold 3X. However for the most part I move in and out of it. Did shoot a bedded Deer at around three big steps with one. He had no clue I was there and truth was I didn't know he was either, until I looked down. Can't figure how that all exactly came about. He was blurry in the scope, but finding the neck shoulder junction happened easily and quickly.

The 6x42 is fine for up close. It really is a non issue that somehow gets turned into an issue. Buy a used one and if you don't like it sell it in the classifieds. I've sold almost all my other scopes and have 6 or 7 of them. They are kind of an underdog champ and I always liked the underdog.

rahtreelimbs.... where do you hunt and under what conditions and how far do you have to shoot?

If your average shots are in the woods stick with the 4X...the 6X is not going to do anything for you.If you want to set up another rifle for sitting power lines or fields, fine. I've used a 6X back here for exactly that.

But in the woods it offers nothing for benefit over a fixed 4X.

Three less lenses than a variable. That is six less lens surfaces. Noticeable difference.

Same here....

I've used a Leupold 6X many times in the woods and found it able to locate game quickly, even in heavy cover, if I kept both eyes open. And I do that now on a regular basis.

And I also hunt in Wyoming for deer, antelope and elk and found a fixed 6 works perfectly at any range out there.

Quick target acquisition, very high reliability, lower cost and accuracy at 300+ yards make it a real winner.

Please don't pass this on so that we keep the price of used 6X's low!

Steve

for killing stuff

generous ring spacing & light weight, Leupold's "old" designs have it wrapped for hunters. view is forgiving & quick. low light performance for whitetail w/the HD is first rate & no dicking with apparatus...none

90% of my scopes are M8 Leupolds

I have voted with my pocketbook

You're never going to have a problem with a 6X at close range.

They're the perfect compromise in my opinion.



Travis

So, if going 6x, would it be 6x36 FX-II, 6x33 FX-2 or 6x42 FX-3?

I have a couple 3-9x42 VX-2s that I really like. The 6x42 is heavier than the 3-9x40 VX-2. Odd. What is it about the 6x33 FX-2 that makes it so pricey? At 8.8 oz there's some appeal to that. Is 33 enough to really gather the light? Also, can the CDS be added to any of the 6x's?

The 6x42 isn't as heavy as Leupold's website lists--or any other website that uses Leupold's as a reference. Instead of 13.6 ounces, it's just about 12 ounces, less than an ounce heavier than the 3-9x40 VX-2.

That mistake on the Leupold site has been there for a couple of years. I have no idea why, but will mention it to somebody who can get it changed.

The 6x33 is bright enough for most hunting, though not as bright as the 6x36 and, especially, the 6x42 (he 42 is REALLY bright). The eye relief is also a little shorter, as is the tube, naturally, so it isn't as easy to mount in exactly the right place on various rifles. Which is one reason a lot of people like the 6x36.

Thanks. I just realized the 6x33 FX-2 is an SWFA exclusive scope. The 6x42 is intriguing for elk hunting on an 84M.

rahtreelimbs,
all mine were 6x for the longest time because of, in order:

1. Brightness
2. Consistency
3. Ruggedness
4. Idiot proofing - ease of use

I saw too many guys go into the field with a variable left at max power from the last range trip playing heck due to exit pupil, small FOV and lack of brightness when it matters most.

When I finally tried another variable I bought a Sightron SII when they were the darlings of this place. It was a 3-12x42 and eye box was abysmal. Especially after being spoiled by an M8 and the likes.

Fast forward to my most recent purchase, a variable, VX3 3.5-10. I did a side by side in low light against my M8 and wrote about it here. I was surprised to find the VX3 brighter of the two and with better resolution. Nice wow factor. That tier of newer scope models by many manufacturers are truly amazing now. I learned that I like staying below 6x most of the time hunting and gained greater appreciation for larger field of view. When using a 6x I often took close shots but learned to practice the art of using the off side eye to track my target while bringing the scope side eye to bear. Doing the same with a wider field of view below 6x is an even bigger advantage to me.

So now when evaluating a purchase my priorities are a bit different.
Things like (in no particualr order)
1.reticle choice
2.quality of adjustments
3.field of view
4.weight
- play more of a role. No longer do I need to consider multi coated vs fully multicoated- or friction vs click adjustments. The competition has improved that stuff, and brightness of this tier, across the board.


Currently I love my one variable but not to the exclusion of simplicity and view I get from my 6x's. If forced to choose between an FX3 and VX3 I am not sure what I would pick and if asked the next day might give a different answer. Reticle choices become an even bigger player. My VX3 has a B and C I actually used to make a clean 400 yd shot with no practice at that range (walking hog so f- it ) but the #4 of my fixed 6's is nearest to my heart. I don't think I could have made that shot without the power or reticle. Others can.

This help?

Leupold FX3 6x42 LR Duplex.

Because it's simple. Because the dots match my handload. Because it just plain works, all the time, every time, with zero option for fiddling.

6x33 is a "compact" scope, meaning it also has the smaller ocular bell lens.

Nice for mounting low, not as great for seeing as much as quickly.

I could use a 4x or 6x for all my big-game hunting quite easily. And actually, I do that nowadays.

I cannot see a downside to a fixed scope.

I was planning on buying another FX3 6x42LR for a 270 but will probably get another 6x36LR instead....

For the country around here a 6x scope works great.


And unless you wanna have sniper hunting capabilities, the dots or duplex work fine for big game hunting.

Any particular reason to go 36 over 42?

Started out using fixed powers, and I tend to agree that as a general all rounder for medium game the 6x42mm is very good.

In my case I tried the old Leupold 6x42 (MC8?) along side a a used Sawro 6x42mm and a Meopta 7x50mm and went with the Swaro.

I used that scope on my .308win for many years and killed quite a few deer with it..I eventually went to a Swaro 3-12x50mm and while I like that scope very much also, I do regret getting rid of that old 6x42mm...

Over here, the fixed power Leupolds are not such good value for money, but in the States I would guess a second hand Leopold 6x42mm has got to be about the best bargain out there..

Extra $100 in your pocket.

A lot of scope for a very reasonable price. Tough as an anvil and so easy to get behind and acquire a sight picture. I put one on my SP-10 Turkey Shotgun. I've tried a lot of red dots and other scopes on my SP-10...I wish I would have put a 6X42 Leupold on it to start with. Birds that come in close are easy to find in the scope, and the ones that hang out beyond traditional distances are easy to hit with my 10 gauge. Additionally, if I need a scope for another rifle I can 'borrow' the 6X42 from the SP-10.

They tend to fit long actions more better.



Travis

In some cases they will mount lower.

I'd traditionally used 3-9x 40mm scopes nearly universally until I tried an old steel tube Weaver K6 on my most accurate rifle (just to keep it "period correct") and was amazed by what I could do.

Now I have several 6xs and am pretty solidly convinced, although my inteest in Leupold's B&C reticle has gotten me to consider a VX3 3.5-10x since I can't get that in the FX3 6x42mm as I'd like.

Reading this thread is making me reconsider that; the simplicity of dots in a 6x platform is preferred....

I really, really like the Meopro 6x42's. Wish I could get one with a turret.

I'm gonna have to request a significant digit check on these figures.

Why, that's just a little under 2".

Do you own a Meopro? Have been curious but have not proceeded.

I own 2 Meopros. One has the Nazi #1 and the other the Nazi #4.

Here's the #1 on a 308.

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

Just the optics on the FX3 are worth the extra coin to me.

Just get one and try it and then you too will know

I have a couple questions.

One, is the 6 x 36 or the 6 x 42 better for mounting on a long action rifle? Is it do to the tube lenght,ring mounting area spacing, eye relief or a combination of factors.

Two, is the 42 that much better than the 36 in low light conditions.

I usually have my scopes mounted farther rearward to get the eye relief I need and either use a rail to get the ring placement or extended rings, i.e. Ruger M77 Mark II and Hawkeyes.

Amen brother.

There's more straight tube to put the rings around so the 36mm version is more flexible for mounting.

I've had both and IMO the 42mm is noticeably brighter. Although the likelihood of that difference making a hunt successful vs. unsuccessful is exactly ZERO.



Travis

I'm not Brad but I find more magnification useful any time I have time to lay down and shoot something.

But I love the 6X as a happy medium.

A very happy medium...



Travis

Sanchez, both the 6x36 & 6x42 will work but as already posted the 6x36 can be set back about 4.5" more. You may need medium height rings for the 6x42 but the low rings will work fine with the 6x36.

If anyone is running a Weaver K6 what are your thoughts on this scope?

I admit, I run several K6 Weavers. And I like them!
The oldest about 10 years and the newest about 2.
I stuck one on my 84M in .243, just to test the rifle and now see no reason to change. And that was 5 years ago.

It was a steel-tubed El Paso K6 I bought here that sold me on fixed 6s.

The new ones appear to me to be a great value but I've never purchased one because:

1) between lack of straight tube length and shorter eye relief relative to the Leupolds, they can be a tough fit for long action rifles

2) they don't offer a ballistic reticle

3) they don't offer turrets

Their optics are great for the money, so if you have a short action rifle and are happy with a Plex reticle they can be a great starting point to the fixed 6x game.

On the other hand, there are 6x36s that come up in classifieds regularly for $200-ish...

Here are three of my reasons. Two year old 6x36.







the Kudu and Jackal were taken at the very last moments of useable light. luckily, both were about 40 yds out.
The Wildebeest at a lazed 225 in a 20-25 mph cross wind.

rahtreelimbs- the Weaver K6 has been the overperforming best bang for buck scope for the last decade or more. Very good, bright, glass in an attractive trim package with superb adjustments. I introduced many to them and had more than one argue I HAD to pay more than I was saying I did for something so bright. I can tell you I chucked an VX-1 in favor for a K6 at half the price and never looked back.

Recently a lot of scope lines have made some dramatic improvements on lower price point models making the competition tighter but the K6 remains as good or better than anything else at its cost in my book.

Savuti, what rifle is that in your hands? Nice looking and the 6x36 fits it well. powdr

Thanks guys that helps. Sounds like I would be good either way but would have a bit more cake left in my pocket and mounting freedom with the FXII. I am wanting to go this route on my next light weight coyote/hunting rifle.

Has anyone used or still using a Burris 6x? I know they are out of production but could still get my hands on one of those.

They're really good as well. When it was in production they offered a slightly thicker plex-type reticle that wasn't as thick as Leupold's Heavy Duplex, especially in the crosshair section, but was still a definite plus in dim light. I hunted with one of those for years and liked it a lot.

Featherweight 7x57 from the 2013 run.

I bought a Burris FFII 6x 40mm plex from John and put it on my favorite varmint/long range plinking rifle after sending it in for an elevation turret. LOVE it. Though not as lightweight as the Leupold they're excellent.

I got an M8 6x36mm here for $165 and put it on my Win 70 FW 280AI and don't feel a bit handicapped.

I was going to get a VX3 3.5-10 w/ B&C till this thread (using my KISS logic) convinced me to do a VXII 6x36mm w/ LRD instead.

Thanks all.

Mule Deer & EFW thats good enough endorsement for me. If I can still pick up the Burris I will give it a try or the FXII. Thanks.

I want to keep this rifle light and simple and another 25-06, unless a certain 257 Roberts follows me home that I have been eyeballin way too long.

I think I am the only 25 cal rifle looney in the state.

Most of my scopes are Leupold, but a couple of years ago or so I saw a positive recommedation from Mule Deer about the Burris FFII 6X. As I recall, this was about the time they were being discontinued and some places had them at close-out prices. Don't remember what I paid, but it was really cheap. I put it on my 7x57 and have been happy indeed.

I have used the Leupold 4x M8,Leupold 4x33,Leupold 6x36 and they all work just fine
But so do the Leupold Variables .
I like the higher power of a 3-9x40 but like the durability
of a fixed Power.
Thing is I have never had a problem with a Leupold Variable !
So the fixed power advantage is theoretical for me.
When I go hunting I always have a second rifle(Mauser 8mm JS guild rifle with a Leupold M8 4x) in camp anyway
IF I should have a scope or rifle problem

When my Father passed he left me a Burris Signature Safari 6X and it is all that the 6x42 Leupold is and I like the duplex reticle as well if not better. It does weigh a few ounces more but it is one heck of a scope. powdr

Could not agree more.

Mathman,
Do you wear reading glasses yet?

Yes, unfortunately. Inexpensive "cheaters" off the rack.

I have one with a #4. I paid about $200 and am very happy with it. Love the reticle. Glass is excellent. Adjustments ok but a tad bit mushy. Been using it for years and like it too well to replace it. Weaver K6 is cheaper and has better adjustments but overall I prefer this one thinking that the cost differential is about what it ought to be. No reason at all I would recommend against getting one if you can find it.

I used the same logic for many years, then had a variable lose its zero while hunting. You guessed it - missed a good buck, figured it out later on target in camp. Then used backup rifle, but never saw that buck again.

Just curious what brand scope was the Variable and what ended up being wrong with it ? How was it repaired?

Thanks

I've read this thread and about every other on the 6x's. I'm convinced to go the 6x route on my next setup as I pretty much leave my variables set on 6x and love the concept of a fixed power on a no frills hunting rig. However, I'm still toying with which model.

Primary use will be treestand whitetail hunting with a mix of woods, ag fields and power lines with shots up to 400 yds. Secondary use will be the occasional Western big game trip for antelope, elk and mule deer.

I've narrowed it down to the Leupold 6x36, 6x42 and the SWFA 6x, though honestly I'm leaning toward the Leupold camp and adding an M1 elevation turret.

Anything to add that hasn't already been stated based on how this particular rig will be used (pros/cons/etc.)? Thanks

I have a Burris 6x just sitting around that I picked up in a trade.

I've tried to like a 6x but can't get used to it. I just like more power for shooting paper or steel,and less power for hunting in the timber. Most of my shots at game are less than 50 yards or more than 200;a good variable just works for me.

Anybody need a 6x Burris,could be free to a good home?

Free to a good home ?
Well then I can definetly use it !
Just let me know where to send shipping cost .

Not criticizing Leupold. Do you prefer them to the brighter, clearer optics such as Swarovski?

I have several Swarovski scopes, and the brighter, clearer aspect isn't nearly the big deal some would have you believe. BTW, I came to that conclusion before I began wearing cheaters to read small print.

One of mine is a fixed 6x42 Swarovski that's a very nice scope, but I was able to buy it at a practical price. Side by side with an M8 6x42 it does show superior resolution looking at stuff on the 300 yard board at the range. In the field it hasn't been a practical advantage.

It was a Leupold VX-III 2.5x8; Leupold fixed it, for free of course (I don't recall the specifics of what was replaced). Not a dig on Leupold here, as I'm sure they are as good as any and better than most. FWIW, I also had a Swarovski NOVA Habicht 3x9 get a case of wandering zero, though it didn't wreck an important shot.

GF1
Thanks for the info.

I hated to do today I replaced my 6x Redfield with a Vortex Diamondback 4x12x40 Dead hold BDC, it was mounted to my Pre 64 M70 264 mag, my old eyes just need more help today. I just might mount the old 6x on one of my other rifles that are mounted with a 4x.

Happily ran all models of 6x. My 6.5x47L 20" has a 33mm M1 sitting atop now. Fits nice
PRM - yes CDS/M1 will go on 6x's