I admit it, I am bored...

Here's a quote from Finn Aagaard,

"...I venture to suggest that for big game hunting under reasonably good light conditions, 1x of magnification per 100 yards of range is usually satisfactory. To be on the safe side, 1 1/2x per 100 yards might be preferable, while 2x per 100 yards is plenty and more than most of us can handle to any advantage..."

Discuss.

well I'll throw my 2 cents in for what its worth. I don't think everybody, but a lot people spend time on the bench shooting at little bitty dots at 100/200 yrds and like to use higher magnification cause its easy to see the little dots. And with this they tend to get used to keeping/comfortable with variable scopes on higher power.

For most hunting situations, up to 4 power is all thats needed. Once I get out past 200 yrds, I won't complain about a 6 power, cause thats what I used for yrs, but its not necessary. I have hunted in open country south texas/Mexico and for yrs used a fixed 6 power on my rifles. I've only warmed up to variable scopes in the last 10 yrs.

Now days I seem to like 1.5 x 4 power or there abouts and perfer to practice off hand at 50-100 yrds, much more fun that shooting the little dots, also much more fun to shot irons. I've killed my share of little dots on a bench.

1.5x4 or 2x7 is all thats needed and keep them set were ever your confortable and the situation calls for

I use a little Leupold 2.5 on just about everything, but then I won't shoot at an unwounded game animal over 300 yards away. I often meet up with long shot artistes who think if it isn't 4 X 14 it's useless, but I find those folks usually can't hit anything without a benchrest.

Personally, I can't see any use at all for anything over 6x on a big game rifle, and think 4x and 2.5x are just fine. I will grudgingly admit that a big European style objective is helpful in the gloaming, though. I don't use them anymore because I like light, trim rifles, and mounting some 50mm Hubble Jr. absolutely wrecks such guns. Maybe if one keeps a special rifle just for leopard, or stag and boar at night. I certainly wouldn't want to have to carry the damn thing for any distance, and snap shooting would be just about out of the question, IMO.

As for 1x and "0x", they aren't any smaller or lighter than Leupold's 2.5 compact, and if they are any faster it is something less than 1/10 of a second difference, at least for me. If I can get magnification without getting slower, larger, or heavier, I'll take it. The magic "X" for me is right around 2 or 3.

I have to agree on the hubble scopes, I like smaller scopes too. But I have to admit I have a 56 mil Kahles that I got cheap, but I don't use it. I'll take off and sell someday.

I don't mind a 30 mil tube, but I like a small objective, straight tube is even better.

I've shot the 1x4 for 0-100 yard shooting since October and feel good about it. But, I'm going with a 2x7 or 2.5x8 for longer distance capability. I'll use the irons for real close work and leave the 1x4 for a back up.

Frank, have you tried the 1-4 at longer distances? Most people who do find 4x no handicap out to 300 yards, in my experience.

Also, have you timed youself snapshooting with the irons vs. the 1x? Aagaard ran a series of tests that showed the low power scope was faster in the hands of nearly everbody, which matches my experience.

I generally keep my variables screwed down to 1.5-4x, sometimes 6x, when hunting big game.

But I have cranked it up to as high as 10x for well-rested long shots and when I did I was glad to have the extra magnification and clarity. Maybe I didn't need it, but I think it helped and as I say I was glad to have it.

I love the 1.1-4 and 2-7 scopes. Realistic hunting situations rarely would require more and shooter abilities seldom out pace these scopes capabilities in the hunting field.

I have used my 2-7 Kahles on a 9.3x62 for a oryx at a later lasered 265 yards and my 1.1-4 Kahles at 210 meters on a springbuck on a 30-06 double rifle. That's about as far as I intend to ever shoot in the field.

Some may want more, however there is a distinct difference between wanting and needing. I support what ever is legal, ethical and preferred by any hunter exercising their priviledge to hunt afield.

Good luck.

Mike

In his later writing, FInn said that he changed his mind on the subject of scope size. He admitted that extra magnification and larger objectives did make things easier to see, even in broad day light.

Persoanlly, I use a 6.5-20 on a .22 and shoot running squirrels with it. Have no idea how many offhand rounds I have fired at 25x. I like 3-9 or 3-12 scopes on big game rifles. I used to run deer dogs about 25 dyas a year. I usually kepy my scope on at least 6x, and often 8x if I could see any distance at all. Occasionally I would crank it down, but not that often. WHat is on each side of a running deer is not improtant-it is easier for me to shoot when the deer comes closer to filling the scope.

Everyone is different, this is just what worked for me.

I find that my variables stay somewhere btween 2 and 5X in the field. Often the higher power is used at closer range to thread the needle through the bush.

I have several rifles with veriables on them. Most that are used for hunting big game are in the 1.5-5 range, and usually in a 20mm scope. I have two 375 H&H rifles that sport 3-9 X40mm scopes on them, and both have a 1.5-5x20mm scope as back-up for heavy bush.

I must admit to, most times, carrying all of them set on about 3 power, while hunting. Soooo, I guess I could get along just fine with all 3x scopes on everything. Where I find differences in scopes to be usefull, is with different reticles, and or illumination. I'm thinking, at this time, about obtaining a 1.5-5X20mm Luepold Veri-X III with a German #4 post, with an illuminated apex to install on my 9.3X74R double rifle in QD mounts, and rings. This way I can use the 9.3 for my light rifle, with my 470NE double as my heavy, and both be adiquate for DGR use if the need arrises while one or the other is in hand, and the Ilumination will be usefull for sitting a Leopard blind!

I have never seen the need for anyscope with higher magnification than 9 power, even for P-Dog shooting. With the 3-9 power, I use the high magnification to be able to see the sticks that are invisable between me and the target, so as to tread a bullet through a tight space to the target! Other than that, I simply shoot on about 3 power, no matter the range!

I must be one of those who deslike low power scopes!

Years ago I hunted with 1.5-5 scopes, then after one trip, changed those to the 2.5-8X.

I found it disconcerting looking at the end of the barrel as I looked through a 1.5x scope.

I generally keep my scope at 2.5 as we walk in teh bush, and wind it up to 4-6 for a shot.

For the longer shot, the 8X comes in handy.

I've got a fixed 6 X 42 Leupold on my 300 WinMag and its all the power I need and excellent in low light, as in for Leopard or any other low light conditions. I use Leupold 1.5 X 5 variables on my 375 H&H and 416 Rigby but almost always use them on the 1,5 setting with no problems at any distances I shoot at large game.

quote:

I found it disconcerting looking at the end of the barrel as I looked through a 1.5x scope.

Ah, I remember that! Threw me off for a while too, at first. Now, if I throw a gun to my shoulder and don't see muzzle, it makes me think something is wrong.

Seeing the barrel took a bit of getting used to for me also, but after a day on the range it was fine.

All my scopes are variables, 1x4, 1.5x5, 2x7, 2.5x8, 3x9. Ussually the scope is at the lowest setting when I hunt and the bulk of my shots on game are taken with the scope at the low setting. Every so often I'll crank up the scope a bit on a longer shot, meaning 100yds+, when the deer is feeding and not walking. Also when I'm sitting in a tree stand in a fairly open area with the 1x4 I'll set it on 4x. I also have cranked up the magnification when trying to avoid brush or limbs and twigs at close range.

If all I could get was a fixed 2.5x I wouldn't loose any sleep.

JPK

I bought a 1.5-6 x42S&B for my 9.3x62 last year and one of the reasons I got rid of it was seeing that long barrel in the scope when it was set to X1.5 power. Even worse, the barrel never seemed to run "along" the cross hairs and for some reason that really freaked me out!

I ended up using a 4x32mm and that worked fine..I quite fancy a 2.5-10 x42mm Swarovski, but I'm loath to change something that "works"..

Regards,

Pete

Years ago on a snowy January day, I went out to look for coyotes. I took a .300 Wea. Mag Mk V because I knew it was sighted in. I made a measured 440 yard kill (square 40 acre field)
on a distant coyote. Only later did I realize that the 3x9 Wea. Scope was set on 3 X.
Yes, 4x is plenty and then some!

Rich Elliott

I use 3X Leupolds, 1x4 Leupolds, 1.5x5 Leupolds on all my guns 375 and up....I guess I may as well confess that my .338 and 300 H&H wear a 2x7 Leupold...These guys on this board would sniff me out and find out anyway, they are good!!