There is about a gajillion scopes out on the market today. Seems about half the new offerings are meant to appeal to the tacticool crowd but doesn't seem like much new is being built for hunting rigs.

What I'd like to see is a 30mm, light weight, compact scope, with a low profile EL turret, small ocular, maybe even a straight tube 24mm objective and I want it bullet proof and under 16oz.

So many scopes out now seem to have HUGE objectives that require a damn truss to mount it, weigh over a pound and a half, and still can't hold zero. Not to mention I dont need 24x's to shoot a fuggin' deer. I like and still use 6x42 Leupolds, but would like to see an updated compact version that doesn't have a two inch tall turret sticking out the top.

Is there such an animal out there? Does 6x and a 24mm objective make it a PIA to square up behind?

This is about the closest I've seen to what I gthink would be the perfect big game scope:

http://www.nightforceoptics.com/competition/4.5x24

No one is going to agree. That's why there are so many choices out there... Just sayin..

Absolutely.

What would you put together for a big game scope?

A Leupold fixed FX-II 6x36 already comes as close to perfect as I can think of for size, weight, clearness, eye relief, lots of mounting room, usable magnification and all at a very affordable price. I'd upgrade it with finger adjustments under the caps instead of coin slots and absolutely reliable tracking so 4 clicks up and 2 clicks right moves the bullet 1" up and 1/2" right, not 2" straight up, then 3 clicks down with no further windage adjustment finally puts POI 1" higher and 1/2" right of your first group like you originally wanted it.

I'd modify their FX-II 4x33 like that and also make a fixed FX-II 9x40 for certain other applications.

Right now, my favorite do it all scope is the 6X SS. Excellent eye relief, good usable reticle, dials like it’s on rails, and is pretty bright in my opinion. It has a lot of tube length and mounts easily on most actions.

Had two scopes take a crap on me a few weeks back. Replaced them both with SS 6x I had on other guns. Took two shots to zero and I was back in business.

I’d give the SWFA 3-9 around 4” of eye relief, a shorter, capped windage adjustment, and a zero stop on the elevation turret from the factory. Some weight loss would be nice, but not if it would in any way compromise reliability, so the current weight is just something to live with. Instead of losing scope weight, I design the rest of the rifle project knowing I’ll need to lose a little weight elsewhere to make a target overall weight and balance goal.

I am seriously considering purchasing this scope.

http://marchscopes.com/tactical-3-24-x-42-ffp.html


It has everything I could ever need and the weight is incredible at 22.6 oz! $2k street price.

I just wish Leupold had a "Fine" version of their windplex. After that, 6X42, 3.5-10, 4-12, 4.5-14, or 2-12 would all work just fine for me.

MadMooner asked, "If you were to build a hunting scope?"

Tube diameter is irrelevant to me. I've had 1", 30mm and 34mm. But objective diameter is important. I want at least a 50mm objective and as large an ocular as required for the bolt to function freely. The magnification range needs to start with about twenty-two feet field of view and to to 24X or more. Low light performance should be very good.
The weight should max at twenty ounces. Sixteen is better. If the Swarovski z5 5-25X52 was reliable it is already there.

That is really close to what I want.

The now discontinued Zeiss Victory 2.5-10 x42 in a number 4-ish reticle with lit center cross or dot, maybe some hold points on the vertical, with the addition of more internal travel and a lo-pro locking elevation turret, capped windage and .....that's all. Perfect all-rounder hunting scope.

I had one and elk hunted with it. Very nice scope. It checks a lot of boxes. The sweet spot for me was when set at 10x to 16x.

Yesterday, I put about 80 rounds through a short action Fieldcraft wearing a Tract Toric 2-10x42. I like the scope. If changing anything to make it my perfect hunting scope I'd make it in 6x fixed for less moving parts and slightly lighter. A few of the things I like about it:

Easy to use: Great glass, great eye relief, great "eye-box" (closest I've seen to the 6x42 Leupold....very easy to get behind), bold reticle.

Elevation dial with zero stop: The standard capped elevation dial can be swapped out for a taller elevation dial with a zero stop. The zero stop is a hard zero stop and the design is excellent. Raise it up, dial up to slightly less than 1 rotation (~18 MOA available, 20 per full rotation but the zero stop eats a little of the rotation), can be pushed back down at any point in that range so it doesn't change. A slightly higher cap comes with it so the user can cap the higher dial if they wish. Standard capped windage and no parralax on this model. I'll use this capped elevation dial, capping it with a 100 yard zero when hunting woods and traveling, then leaving it bare when hunting fields to dial for longer shots.

1" tube/mid-weight: I like the 1" tube vs 30mm for slight weight savings. Down side is loss of elevation adjustment for LONG rangers. I think overall it only has ~60 MOA elevation. For a hunting scope, I don't need more than 18 MOA from zero (with zero stop installed), but I understand that some may. The weight is still a little over 18 oz's with the capped elevation dial...I'd love it to be under 16, but it's still lighter than most tactical scopes.

Yesterday I zero'd it at 100, found my 200 adjustment, found my 300 adjustment, and went back and forth between the ranges many times shooting mainly 3 shot groups. Often I'd run it 18 MOA up then back down. Return to zero seemed good, but I only put about 80 rounds through it, dialing every 3-6 shots....so this is limited testing and yardages were short...but a lot of 18 up/down was done even when not needed.

I've not run this scope through the ringer enough to sing it's praises and call it all good, but for a "hunting" scope, I really like a lot of the features it offers, especially for a hunting scope that's going to be dialed. This same scope in a fixed 6x42 would just about be my "perfect" scope....assuming it stands the test of time/use. I'm planning to use it as my only scope this deer season from mid-Oct to the first week in Feb (aside from my muzzleloader). I'm planning to switch it across several rifles....but I'm liking the Fieldcraft so it may stay on it for the entire season...we'll see. It will get a lot of rough use during those ~4 months...we'll see how it does.

I'm not affilated with the company and I purchased the scope, so don't take this as me pushing the company. I think the folks at Tract put a lot of thought into how they were designing their "hunting" scopes. They seemed to have designed these scopes specifically for hunting. I think it shows in the product. They've got several models aside from the one I used yesterday and I'm not familiar with all the options, bells, and whistles that come with them so check out their website. One more thing that stands out about Tract is their business model of selling their scopes directly to the consumer to avoid retailer markup.

Toric on Fieldcraft. This is with the zero stopped elevation dial installed and capped:

As a hunter with over 5 decades of experience I have owned and used about everything at one time or another. I am 100% convinced that most hunters are handicapping themselves with too much magnification, weight and too little field of view. They get highley impressed with their scope on a rifle range or off a bench rest, and never figure out that such applications are NOT how a hunting scope will be used.

So here is my dream scope for big game hunting

it is a super strong 30MM tube made from Titanium or spring tempered stainless. The tube should literally be strong enough to pound nails with it without damage.
It has a 38MM objective. Not larger.
The glass should be the best available and the mounting of the glass in the tube should be "bomb proof".
It is a fixed power. For my use the 4X would be the best all around.
It has a vertical reticle that has 4 MOA cross marks on it going down to the bottom of the field of view but being in colors, Green Red Blue Green Red Blue and so on for ease of counting.
It should be as short and light as it can be made without sacrificing it's ruggedness.THAT'S IT and THAT ALL!!!!!!!!
No BS widgets, gizmos, and gimmicks. Just the best gun sight made. Not a machine, not a calculator, not an instrument for a vidoe-game player.....just a SUPER GOOD RIFLE SIGHT!

Such a scope can be made SUPER bright because of it's average size objective lens and 30 MM tube.

The 4 MOA marks can be easily learned as hold overs for any gun with any bullet, with just a bit of practice. You learn your weapon as you should, like it's part of you, instead of a abacus that needs constant adjustments.
You zero with your load and learn the hold overs using the marks provided. It's just a sight, light, bright and simple, and is about as resilient as an avail.

I agree with a lot of your thoughts, but I don't believe the 30mm tube will make one brighter.

I can state unequivocally the tube size has nothing to do with the brightness of a scope. Comparing a Swarovski z5 5-25X52 1" tube, Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 30mm tube, and a Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 34mm tube they all fail at the same time in my low light test. The Swarovski z8 2.3-18X56 smoked them by twenty minutes! Maybe the glass is better in the z8. For sure it has a 56mm objective.

It would look exactly like the NXS 2.5-10x42 with MIL-R reticle but with heavier wires & marks.

For me, 4.5x is not enough for long range shooting.

MM

For me it would be a S&B Summit 2.5-10x40, but wit a low profile dialing turret like on a Bushnell LRHS scope...

This but I would add 4 .25 mil hatches on the horizontal reticle and reengineer Schmidt benders (copy) low profile locking turret system and erector. Capped windage. Zero stop.

Done.

It's obviously all subjective, but why do you need need 24x or more for a big game scope? My eyes ain't good, but I found that 6x is plenty for deer and elk out farther than I have business shooting. I'll miss wind before I will lose a reticle on a deers chest with 6x.

That said, I don't try to dial in loads on a 4x scope.

I would like to see more C tube length " Front tube" in the scopes by 1". It allows for better scope adjustment especially for people with long LOP. The factory standard 13 1/2" works but not for everybody. Having the ability to adjust eye relief to personal preferences would be great.
Leupold FXII 6x36mm is hard to beat at 10 oz.'s. I would like to see the same quality of glass installed in it as their 6x42mm with 5" eye relief.
I would also like to see Leupold reintroduce their centerfire 4x28mm long tube scope with 5" eye relief and all in click adjustment.
Having to use offset rings or bases to make up for scope limitations in mounting shows lack of engineering etc...
I also went a full circle and went back to fixed power.

I took my new Tract Toric 2-10x42 to the range yesterday. I had bought it for a rifle I will receive next spring, but I had to try it out. It will stay on the rifle it is on for this deer season. I did not test it as extensively as JCMCUBIC did but I agree with "Easy to use: Great glass, great eye relief, great "eye-box" (closest I've seen to the 6x42 Leupold....very easy to get behind), bold reticle." Now I will have to buy another for next year's rifle. I still have and like the Meopta 6x42 with German #4 reticle but a couple of them have been supplanted by the Tract Toric.

1-12x42

I'd build a 6X42 FXIII with the LR reticle.

If I could make it lighter I would.



Dave

Why in the world does it need to be 30mm? You want light weight and then specify it to have a 30mm tube which it doesn't need. All the larger tube will do is add weight.

What I want is a 1.5-8X36 with a mill dot reticle with a tritium dot in the center. I want a constant 4" ER and I want it to weigh no more than 16 ounces with plenty of tube length for long actions. I don't want a trendy super shorty,or an objective bell that starts tapering 1" in front of the turret.

I really liked my Swarovski 3-9x36, but that sob didn't track for chit. I could live with a scope that size and weight, but in a 3-15x40, side focus, swarovski glass, tracking like a SWFA super sniper scope and good looks of a Leupold VariX-III. Actually something similar to my Nikon Monarch UCC here:

Now that would be the chit too, keep the weight down to 12 oz's and make it track perfectly and look good too... I'd buy one..

The 6X SS is hands down the best do all scope there is IMO and I'd not change anything. I have 2 more rifles that will be getting them.


Trystan

Thanks, I think so too. Since we are talking hunting scopes, I figure you can hunt from the thickest brush to Open country and have one scope that does it all.
I love my the field of view of my 1-4 scopes but sure like to see longer way on my higher power scopes.

I'd have NightForce build a 2.5X8X36 with an ill B&C reticle

An S&B PM II 6 x 42 with mildot reticle.

For me here in L A (Lower Alabama) the BEST scope was the old Denver made
Redfield Lo-Pro Widefield 2-7 or 3-9 with the TV objectives
I would love to see a modern version of the same scope with
the C H Peep reticle that the old Redfields had.
Until that were to happen I will stick with my Leupold FX-III or FX-3 6x42`with
Heavy Duplex or German #4

I have a 1.5-6x42 Schmidt and Bender that meets all to requirements but for weight. and objective size. I would love to have less weight, but I can manage what it weighs without problems. I have a modified #4 with windage hashes. I also have a 2.5-10x50 that I could manage with a 42mm objective and be happy.

I have 3 Leupold VX-5HD 3-15x44s with the Firedot duplex that are close to my favorite.
Like the power range, low profile turrets,two turn Zero-lock, illumination ,objective diameter, weight (19 oz).
Would like to add NF or SWFA dependable tracking, and a heavier post duplex or #4 reticle with a windage hash.or two.

Agree. Love my 10x42, there was an attempt at a group buy for a custom PMII 6x42 P3 reticle somewhere a year or two ago but I don't think it went anywhere.

It probably went into the "get a load of this" file at S & B.......

Agree 100% on this. I emailed them a while ago asking if they'd make it with an illuminated IHR but the silence has been deafening.


Okie John

The 1.5-6 Minox could use a heavier reticle, and I don’t know if it’s Bomb proof, but I also like the VXR 2-7. A fixed 4x F-XR would be cool my Kahles 2-7 is nice, too

If it were me, ... Leupold already beat me to it in the VX 3 line. For a short action hunting rifle, 2.5-8X, for a long action hunting rifle, 3.5-10X, and for a Sendero or similar, 4.5-14X. I'd go with fixed objective and B&C 'hairs in the first to and make the 2nd an AO with the VH 'hairs. The more time I spend with turrets the less I like them.

Stuff is only complicated if you insist on overthinking it. I tend to overthink things, but not my scopes.

Tom

I would love a leupold 6x36 scope with SWFA's milquad or moa quad reticle. It would be as close to the ultimate killing scope as I can imagine.

I don't really get the question. Leupold VX6 1-6x24? CDS Turret. 13 oz.

https://www.leupold.com/scopes/compact-scopes/vx-6hd-1-6x24mm?selectedSku=

How about nab a VX6 on clearance? $620?

https://www.natchezss.com/leupold-vx-6-rifle-scope-1-6x24mm-duplex-116-19-3-8-matte.html

I've got 500 rounds through an 8# (scoped) .375 H&H with no ill effects. My wife's 6.5# Merkel K3 has a VX6 1-6 illuminated circle dot on it with no issues either. As bulletproof as I can think of really.

Don't have time to build one, easier to go buy a Leupold.

I have shot way too many deer at last legal light to take a chance now at this late stage on less than a 36mm objective. I do not believe a 24mm objective will handle last seconds in heavy shadow and give me the sight picture I need. I saw one Swaro 1-4x24 that I was sorely tempted to try, and I have a leupy VX III1-4x20 on my 336 Marlin that I dearly love for what that rifle does for me, but it is not even close to being a low light scope.

I have come to really appreciate the Euro Alphas that do such a good job in very low light. I like being able to see clearly the body angle and visualize the internal targets. Where I hunt deer with my crossbow I am under a heavy red oak canopy with an under story of 6-15 foot buckthorn which makes it really dark in there well before last legal light. Those damn deer can be under that buckthorn and without something to clue me in they are there and put the scope on them they're invisible. For that work, I would be happy with a fixed power scope from 1.5x to 6x. I am currently using a Zeiss Duralyt 2-8 which is a lot of scope for a crossbow, but it's done everything I want on a dozen or so now.

Whatever scope, the low light conditions dictate a heavy reticle with a thin cross wire in the center and first focal plane. Not compromising on the low light capability obviously means accepting the additional weight of the front end metal and glass.

As noted elsewhere on this forum, I ran a quick box test on a 3-12 Tekoa yesterday. I had suspected that the adjustments were jumping around, but it was a new rifle shooting factory stuff, and the barrel channel was very tight at the tip, not touching, but close enough that it might have been making contact when the rifle was fired. I sanded out the tip and resealed, then torqued the action to spec. I also cleaned all the copper out.

Surprisingly, the poi hadn't changed. I fired three, ran it over 16 clicks (4 inches), fired two, then finished the box with two at each corner, ending up back in the original group. Then I fired three shots at another target at 3x, then two back at 12. No poi shift at all.

It appears my rifle, a CZ 6.5 Grendel, doesn't care much for the Hornady 123gr SST ammo, and also that it likes to be "dirty", as the last shots grouped tighter than the earlier ones. Even so, at a previous range session, I was able to put 3 shots in about a 4" group on my plastic "gong" at 300 yards using the tip of the lower post as my aiming point as per the online Tract ballistic program, so it's okay for deer, if I make it that far in the rotation. I definitely need to get some dies.

Anyway, the scope is solid thus far, and I'd likely buy another one, especially if they have another 30% off sale! I hope at some point they make a fixed 6x that could be a bit more compact, but I understand that would be kind of a niche product for a new company to take a chance on.

I would like a scope of about 6x with an objective of 30 to 36mm. A one inch tube would be fine since there is no need for a huge amount of adjustment range. The tube should be strong enough to make a good carrying handle and should be long enough to mount on any rifle. I would like a dot of 4 or 5 moa ; etched on. I'm not trying to shoot groups with this outfit. robust adjustment screws. As some else said, just a good, solid, rifle sight.
I can shoot in a full moon using an old Weaver J-4 so I don't believe a huge objective is necessary for me. a 5 to 6mm exit pupil and good coatings will produce all the brightness I require. By the way, there is no reason for the scope to be ugly. No brightly colored graphics, no big, knurled occular bell. GD

If I had to choose among existing scopes, then I agree with the above. This is the closest we can get to an ideal all-around scope for big-game hunting. I have a 1.5-6X42 Swarovski PH on Heym SR30 rifle and that's what I use for most hunting. The only minor fault for this scope is that its eye relief is a bit short (80mm) but it's OK on my rifle.

Here are some other fine choice in my opinion:

• Schmidt and Bender 4X36 (made of steel, 1 inch tube, nice, light and compact)
• Zeiss Diavari 1.5-6X42 or 2.5-10X50, Plex FFP Reticle (Excellent edge-less view through the eyepiece)
• Schmidt and Bender 1.5-6X42 Zenith or 1.5-8X42 Stratos with FD7 reticle (Excellent scope, nice and compact, just a bit heavy, 600 grams)
• Schmidt and Bender 3-12X42 Classic with A7 reticle (Hmm.. I can't think of any faults for this scope, simply perfect)

If I had to build a new scope, then it's a completely different story. Give me two or three years (and help me please if you may) and I will give you the best hunting scopes in the world: No critical eye relief, no moving parts, no electronics, no batteries, absolutely perfect zero retention, no turrets, unlimited windage and elevation adjustment, and more...

-Omid

Some nice scopes of today and yesterday:





The best scopes of the future (still on paper ):

Something like a Nightforce NXS 1-12x42 FFP with a useable illuminated hunting reticle coming in under 18oz loaded with Swaro glass or similar.

I would love an SWFA 6x42 with the 1-4's low turrets and maybe an illuminated reticle.

This but it'd be a MOAR reticle and I'd bump the top power to 12X, then I'd make it weigh 14 ozs.

Yeah, I know, but one can dream

FXR3 6x42 Firedot 4, 1" tube

I want a duplex type reticle with an elevation turret. I don't want 759 has marks, dots and I don't need a windage turret.

The perfect hunting scope already exists -- the Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-12.5x42. Anything that lacks the Accupoint's fiber-optic dot is going to be in second place, at best, IMO.

The problem with your perfect scope is it lacks magnification range. A couple years ago I found a couple deer with my binoculars in a three point or better area. A fork with eye guard qualified. I was using a Swarovski z5 5-25X52 and had to turn it clear up to 25X to verify one was legal. I don't see any value in limiting one's self.

The perfect scope should be good in every hunting situation. Light, good in low light and dependable.

Leupold 6x42 M1 elevation with SWFA/Nightforce tracking and reliability for me.

I'd bring back the Weaver Classic V9, build it in the USA and use the same glass as the Super Slam binoculars.

That's only for you though Rich. 99% of people don't want or need more than 12.5 in a hunting scope. Commenting without knowing if that particular Accupoint is the perfect hunting scope. I do like it's features,and have been interested in seeing one but the weight does turn me off a bit.Otherwise it has what I'm looking for in a hunting scope.

[quote=R_H_ClarkThat's only for you though Rich. 99% of people don't want or need more than 12.5 in a hunting scope. Commenting without knowing if that particular Accupoint is the perfect hunting scope. I do like it's features,and have been interested in seeing one but the weight does turn me off a bit.Otherwise it has what I'm looking for in a hunting scope.[/quote]

Are you ready, R_H_Clark, for a smart alec this morning? I really like to say 92%, or any number that comes to mind at the time , of statistics are made up at the time of use. There is another sight I frequent: https://www.longrangehunting.com. 99% of the guys there prefer the higher magnification scopes.

Perfect scope would be as follows:

Z8 Swaro Glass

2x16 power

44 or 50mm objective max

x5 turret less sub zero function and tool to set or Khales turret

30 mm tube

sub 24 oz weight

I've concluded you aren't going to get great glass in a durable construction without it being weighty. The 2.5 Accupoint weighs a little more than many scopes with comparable mag. ranges and side-focus, but its great reticles and the fiber-optic dot make the extra weight worth packing. Once you use one you will not want to shoot anything else.

I might also point out that my observations indicate that exactly 92.9% of the people taking long-range shots at big game animals have absolutely no business doing that, and they routinely wound and lose many animals.

The reticle on that Swarovski, like nearly all others, disappears when looking into dark areas. Mine never does.

Everything in shooting is a trade-off, or compromise. For me the Accupoints compromise the least # of important aspects. Nothing else is even close except the Leupold Firedot.

Are you ready, R_H_Clark, for a smart alec this morning? I really like to say 92%, or any number that comes to mind at the time , of statistics are made up at the time of use. There is another sight I frequent: https://www.longrangehunting.com. 99% of the guys there prefer the higher magnification scopes.
[/quote]

I got a big laugh out of that Rich. You know I enjoy pulling your chain. If you enjoy them them more power to you.

I would love to see someone produce a 2-10X44 with great glass and durable internals, made out of titanium if that's what it takes to make it light, with a mill dot reticle ,lit by tritium in the center. It needs 4" of eye relief and a tube long enough to easily mount on the longest action and have room for ER adjustment.

I don't care if it has capped turrets or locking turrets but they need to be low profile. A side focus all the way to 10 yards would be great as well,just in case I ever want to put one on my best 22 rf.


Now I think I pretty much described that Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-12.5X42 except for the weight,and the fact that I don't really know what the internals are made of except that they should be brass at 22.4 ounces.

I always wanted a Zeiss Conquest 4x32 that was 1 inch shorter and 4 oz lighter.
That would be the perfect scope for 99% of my hunting needs.

you should look for the old 2.5-10x32..

great little compact scope!

Where I'm at vegetation/ range wise, 5x on the low end might be too much =] also when it's in the 90's opening weekend of deer season, anything over 12x gets a little wavy.

I see the need for both high and low to cover all hunting situations across the country, so for the perfect 1 scope to kill all things... I think you would have to go with a wiiiiiide variable, factor of 8 or 10. I only have messed with Leupold VX-6 but In know there are other options out there with 8 and 10x zoom.

The problem with that wide of a zoom is reticles, if you go FFP the markings will damn near disappear on the low end, and cover up half your target at the high end. if you go SFP, you might as well keep it a duplex because you might not be able to use the 20x for ranging/ accurate subtension if you are shooting at 200 yards from against a tree at 6x.

I think sometimes solutions create more problems. Give me a scope with a range that falls somewhere around 2x on the low end, and 8-12x on the high end, with at least a 4mm exit pupil on the high end and a good heavy post, thin crosshair German #4 reticle

Kentucky windage works... or use your rangefinder and dial if you like to do that kind of thing...

I’ve given up on trying to stay within certain weight limits within reason. I don’t particularly use flyweight rifles either but as long as I can stay under the 9lb range and better yet the 8-8.5lb range I’ll take the wicked reliability of a 6X or 3x9 SS. I’ve been eyeballing the Bushnell LRHS scope a bunch as well. I’m just about done making excuses for crap that doesn’t track. Drives me nuts and I’m not a real LR shooter. 600 is my practiced limit so I’m not stressing out turrets or anything.

For a hunting scope....

SFP

An exact dupe of Conquest 3-9x40 optical and eye relief properties.

Nightforce SHV internals in a 1" tube. Don't care about less erector travel- it'll be way more than sufficient anyway. Capped turret. Side parallax.

MOA adjustments

3-9 or 3-10 x42

Reticle to be just like the 3-9 Conquests duplex, except with windage dots at 2 and 4 MOA.

My favorite scope is my Kakles KX 3.5 x 10 x 50mm. If I could dream up the ultimate I would stretch the KX to be 1.5x or 2x power on the low end and bump the top end to 12x. Hold the 50mm, but the hard part would be hold the same size and weight overall. Don't want it any heavier.

If Bushnell could get the weight of the LRHS 3-12 down to 18 ounces they’d have a winner.

Yup. That's all I'd own.

I'm thinking if anyone COULD make a lightweight scope with the dead nuts tracking, zero retention and return to zero that the LRHS has, they'd have already done it. They could loose marginal amounts of weight by going down to a 1 inch tube and maybe shorten it up a little but in doing so they'd loose adjustment range. Once you start going lighter weight components in the erector and adjustment mechanisms reliability is going to be compromised. I'm just not sure how much lighter you could get and maintain reliability. The SWFA 3-9 and fixed powers are lightest I'm aware of that you can count on when dialing and they're about 20 oz.

John

Give the swfa 3-9x42, a 1 inch tube (for weight reduction) 4 inch eye relief, make it a 4-12 power and upgrade glass. Keep the mil/mil reticle/turrets. Make the turrets lower profile and add a side parallax adjustment. To me glass has gotten worse in recent years. I looked through an older Nikon Ucc scope the other day from the mid 90s. It sat next to a current Zeiss and a swarovski. The old Nikon was much clearer and brighter to my eyes. Maybe I'm going blind but the old Nikon glass would be in my hunting scope.

John,
Agree...
I still wonder how the prototype scopes that Pat and George had built were 20 ounces and then when Bushnell got them into production they ended up at 25 ounces. Was disappointing at the time.
I reckon I’ll just keep on with the PMII 10x42 for my western rifle and call it good...

I grab every Monarch UCC I see at a reasonable price. They are some of my favorite scopes. I just traded off my last newer model Monarch. They have good glass, but not as good as the older UCCs IMO.

As far as a hunting scope goes, I'd be happy if SWFA would just offer a decent duplex reticle. That fine target reticle disappears into the background at dusk when I tend to see deer.

So to be clear... you think this reticle-



Is less visible than what reticle?

That one is less visible than one with an inner duplex subtension greater than .07 (?)....

You understand that it is .07 of a mil, correct?

The Leupold VX6 1-6 is just that.

And to just be doubly clear, you're saying that this reticle-





Is less visible than this one-

The one in the bottom pic sucks less........! At least for my 56 yr old eyeballs.

To be fair though, I haven't had any problems blasting pigs at last light with the 3-9x SWFA.

I actually prefer the MQ in low light.

During the last 5-10 minutes of shooting light in the evenings, yes, the second one is easier for me to use. Even better in that lighting situation is a good #4 German reticle like the ones that come in Meopta Meostar scopes. I've yet to see any non-illuminated BDC type reticle that was any use to me during the last 10 minutes of shooting light.