I've gone through enough scopes to figure out:
- I don't like 50mm objectives
- I like lower mounted scopes
- clarity trumps magnification
- variable scopes give me too many choices to mess around with. In other words I waste a lot of time messing with magnification instead of mastering 1 single magnification.

All this has made me start thinking about getting a fixed power scope for my 338 win mag. The general use will be developing loads at 100 yards, plinking (100-500 yards), and big game hunting (50-400 yards)

I'm trying to decide between 4x or 6x. I'm leaning to the leupold FX3 6x42 but open to ideas and may drop down to 4x magnification if others have been ok at 400 yards with 4x. I want clarity in day and low light, precise rock solid adjustmets, and reliability.

Please share your experience with the fixed power scopes and how they've worked for you.

Years back I'd have said 4X but for what you want to do, I'd get a 6x36 or 6x42.

Have not killed as much game with a 6X as a 4X but I see better through a 6X today as distances get out there a ways.

I'd go 6x as well but at the ranges I'd likely be using a 338 I'd not feel handicapped with a 4x.

From unpleasant experience I feel eye relief is more important than magnification on a 338 WM.

Just set your variable on 4X for one hunt and 6X for the next hunt and see which you like better.

If you are considering the Leupold 4x33 vs 6x36 or 6x42, I would note the 4x33 has a shortish body, and would probably need an extended front base for use on a 338 Win Mag. You might also want an extended base for the 6x42, depending on your hold. The 6x36 certainly needs no extended base.

I like the 4x quite a lot when I am whitetail hunting in the Midwest, but for longer shots the 6x is nice. Really for my hunting I could have taken all my shots with any of the three.

Recently I have purchased more 6x42s than the other two, and the glass is better than the others/they are brighter scopes. You probably don't need the better glass to shoot animals, but it is a difference.

Edit: the 6x42 is noticeably larger than the other two. If you want extra low mounting I would go with either the 6x36 or 4x33. The 6x42 will fit in low rings with a standard contour barrel.

6x42

yep. 6x42.

one of my favorite hunting rifles is a Merkel K1 single shot in 7mm RMag, topped with a FXIII 6x42 with the LRD reticle.

It is fantastically simple, fast to use and removes variability from the mix. I used it in Africa last year at distances out to 282 yards and never once felt I needed more power.

Simplicity is the name of the Fixed Six and it's a beautiful thing.

If you decide on 4x and want a simple, low mounted, light scope an older used Leupold 4x28 and low weaver rings will work. You won't have to use extended or higher rings.

I've never shot an animal with a 4x past 325 paces so can't say how it would do further than that. I'd think the 6x would be better for the longer shots but if you practiced enough to know where to hold on longer shots with the 4x it would work on a big game sized target.

A fixed 6X has generally a more generous eye box than many variables set at 6X. I have a couple of 6x42's and have been using fixed 6X's since 1985 as well as variables set at 6X for hunting.
Depending on the hunting situation and cartridge you may want to consider a dial.

I'm a fan of 6x for a hunting scope.

Gohip2000;
Good morning to you sir, I trust that this sunny Veteran's/Remembrance Day finds you well.

We started out running straight 4's - mostly Bushnell, Weaver and Leupold - on our rifles in the late '70's and early '80's, but I did experiment with a 4-12X enough to know that it wasn't the best choice for the style of hunting we typically do.

Somewhere in the mid to late '80's a couple articles by Jon Sundra convinced me to try a straight 6X on my main hunting rifle which was an '06.

Since that time I've either been running a 6X Leupold Compact, Japanese Weaver 6X40(?) or a Leupold 6x42 on my main big game hunting rifles. Oh, we ran one of those TV screen 6X El Paso Weaver's for a bit on my good wife's .308 Norma too for a few years and it worked fine.

As far as useful distances, I'd say that we've used them from close to contact in close and at very low light all the way out to much, much too far when I was shooting at a first rack whitetail that I was sure I'd hit, but subsequently found I had not. In that instance I was aiming 5' above the buck with my .308 Norma, so figuring the numbers backwards it had to exceed 500 yards to drop a 165gr BT which started at 3100 and change.

Anyway sir, hopefully that was useful information for you or someone out there today. Good luck with your scope quest whichever way you decide.

Dwayne

Take a look also at the Meopta 6x42mm. I'm also a fan of the 6x42mm FXIII Leupold, which I'm liking a lot on my new Cooper .30-06.
Bob

I have a Kahles 4x36.. its the best scope I have ever looked through!

Now, I have two 6x42 Leupolds comming.. so will see what goes on my main rifle.

I would caution you, do NOT look through a Kahles, Swaro, or anything else of that caliber unless you plan to buy. My local shop had a 6x36 and 6x42 that I compared. Then, he found and old 6x Swaro. It was so far ahead of either Leupold in terms of picture, brightness, and eyebox I could not believe it. It also cost north of a grand, but I walked out wishing I didn't see how good it was, lol.

I still hope to get a chance to look at a Meopta 6x with a #4 before I make a final choice.

Chris

Since the scope goes on a long action I would get a 6x36 or 6x42. The 6x36 has the advantage of lower mounting and the tube length and eye relieve gives an edge on mounting position. I have two 4x33 Leupolds but not on long bolt actions.

I have two 4x and three 6x scopes mounted on various things. The 6x is my favorite for any shots over 200 yards. I like the bit of extra magnification and seem to have a little more confidence in them. Of the 6x scopes I have the older Zeiss Diatal-C is my favorite. It is bright and clear.

I have SWFA 6x mq and I really like it. The glass is great and the thing tracks like it has eyes. Just my 2cents worth. I realize they are a little heavier than some like but over all I think they are a good bargain for what you get.

I have a Meopta 6x with #4 reticle. It is a superb scope. I like it much better than the brand-new FX III 6X42 Leupold I just got for my Cooper.
Bob

I hunted with fixed 4's for a long time. I got my first 1.5-4.5 variable and would never go back to a fixed 4 or 6. My bolt guns have 1.5-6's on them and my combos and drillings have 1-4's. I keep them on the lowest setting until I have a critter hang up out there a ways and regularly make shots to 200 yards on coyotes at the lowest setting. Where they really shine is when you have a coyote heading in through cover as close as 10-20'.

With a fixed 6x you can't get a whole coyote in the scope at even 30' with its 1.7' FOV at 10 yards while a variable will have 7' at 1.5x and close to 9' on 1x. And you still have the option of 4x or 6x at the top end if needed.

Find a good deal on a Meopta 6X and never look back.

I became a fan of fixed magnification 4-6X scopes a little at a time over the years from 1972 until around 2000.
What I noticed was that they are very tough, never had to rezero one no matter how hard they hit the ground. That, and I didn't miss the extra magnification.
If you are considering a Leupold, if you want an FXII 4X or a 6X36, you'll have to order it with upgraded adjustment knobs if you want to rezero for extended ranges. The FX3, 6X42 comes with excellent, reliable dials so no modications are needed.
4X is plenty for big game out to 400 yds. I've made enough kills at 400 plus yards to say that.
However, a 6X will show you more detail for say shooting through an opening in cover.
Speaking of seeing detail, the FX3, 6X42 will show me .30 caliber bullet holes in the white at 200 yds. It has shown me a whole herd of elk at night that I couldn't see with the naked eye. They never knew I was there BTW. And that was on bare ground. E

I've had an FX-2 and the glass wasn't that great so I think I'd stick with FX-3. It's sounding like 6x might be the better way to go for my purposes

I've had the 3x, 4x and 6x M8's. Like them all for all the reasons already stated.
The 6 is a little easier to use at the range and I'm usually using that scope in more open country and it works as far as I am willing to shoot!

I used to be happy with 4X, but now prefer 6X. Maybe it is just age at work.

does meopta sell the straight six any more? I just read an article on it where the clarity was on par with $1000+ scopes

SWFA shows the 6X42 MeoPro on its site with two different reticles.



http://swfa.com/Meopta-6x42-MeoPro-Rifle-Scope-P62168.aspx

the #4 in the 6X meopta is what I have so far no complaints.

Love my Meopta fixed 6 with their #4. Their duplex was too light for me.

Same here NICE scope and reticle!

Gohip2000: You may not want to agree with me but I highly recommend you buy a quality 3x9x40mm or a 4x12x40mm scope!
Todays top quality variable Hunting scopes are very reliable and enhance my Hunting experience with their performance.
I don't even consider fixed power scopes anymore when setting up Big Game and Varmint Hunting Rifles.
LEARN to "mess" with the variables - it will pay-off in the long run.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

As a boy in 1953 I was given a 6X along with the rifle and loading gear. That's about all there was and we didn't know any better.

Here are the hunting rifles I brought to the range last week.

From the top:
1. Ruger Express 270W 2-7 Leu.
2. Favorite DWM w/octagon barrel 30-06 3-9 Swarovski.
3. Kimber 270 WSM 4.5-14 Leu.
4. Pre 64 M70 300 WM 3-9 Conquest.

Lefty Ruger .30-06 with a Loopie m8 4x33 to give you an idea of ring spacing and whatnot. Eye relief is right on the money for me.