There are few fixed power standard eye relief telescopic sights between 2.5 and 4X available in USA as current production. . . . Which brings me to several questions about such sights AND immediately previous generations, such as Leupold's M-8 or FX-II fixed power series.

1. While I am nearly certain that Leupold's FX-III 4x33 is superior mechanically and optically to Nikon's 4x40 Buckmaster series made in the Philippines, does superiority translate to a significant improvement in usability, or in trouble-free longevity?

2. Leupold's M-8 series was in production for a generation - I have seen a 3X that was made in 1977. While I anticipate Leupold made qualitative improvement in optical glass, glass coatings, and perhaps seal design or material during M-8's production life, should prospective buyers use date of manufacture as a deal-breaker for the M-8 series?

3. How mechanically and optically significant is the transition from M-8 to FX-II, M-8 to FX-III?

4. Leupold presently offers FX-II and FX-III sights as standard big game, rimfire, and compact versions. Yet all use 25.4 mm (one inch) basis tubes. Can these "versions" be used interchangably - that is, can rimfire designated sights be used blandly and uneventfully on centerfire rifles, such as 30-06, 45-70, etc.?

6x42,forget the rest.

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
6x42,forget the rest.

Excessive magnification and bulk, for my purpose, is worse than useless. Six power is excessive, perhaps bulky as well. Having written that, I am aware that I may be alone in the universe in believing that - for my hunting area.

11 ounces,60MOA internal ele as a minimum,gracious eye-relief,which grants mounting options denied many others and a large ocular which promotes speed of aquisition.

I'd concede your "experience" as being one of many limiting factors in the selection process cited.

quote:

Originally posted by Naphtali:

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
6x42,forget the rest.

Excessive magnification and bulk, for my purpose, is worse than useless. Six power is excessive, perhaps bulky as well. Having written that, I am aware that I may be alone in the universe in believing that - for my hunting area.

Naphtali,

Your right - The manification needs to fit the purpose! I use 2.5 and 4X fixed power scopes on 3 of my BG rifles, Use iron sights on 3 more and 6x24 or 8x32 on beanfield/target rifles.

I've all the glass thus far cited,if only for conversation.

Guess which ocular is the 6x42?

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
I've all the glass thus far cited,if only for conversation.

Guess which is the 6x42

Okay, I'll bite. What is the field of view at 100 meters or yards? Better, please furnish a link to the sight's specifications, description, and price.

I needn't furnish a link,I have said glass at my immediate disposal. FOV isn't commensurate with rapid acquisition on a lineal scale.

The 2.5x's paltry ocular is a heavy concession,much in the way of gawking through the eye of a needle. The breadth of the 2.5x's eye-relief is also far lesser and in conjunction makes it a concession upon movers.

That under the assumption stock fit and mounting are in synch for each/all. It's akin to the fluff associated with EER glass being "faster",which it of course is not.

Now a fullsized 4x is a step very much in the right direction from the 2.5x,but yet secondfiddle.

None can hang with the ubiquitous 6x42's utility/splendor,whether pursuits are at spitting distances or involve erector dumps and windage corrections.

I've shot/got them all and love the 6x42 on everything from rimfire to the 378Wby...with most stops in between.

Do yourself a favor and get an IOR 4X32 and you won't have to put up with Loop-olds inferior glass



I have seen them as low as $265.00 but they sell for $360.00 here.

But I am with busheler about the 6x42's

I've never lost a bet big enough,to force me to field an IOR...and it just takes too long to wash the smell away,even when dabbling with 'em as a lark.

I have identified the solution to my query with one small problem remaining - price!!!!

Kaps Optik http://www.kaps-zielfernrohre.de/en/ (Classic Line 4x36 mm). This sight has a 30 mm basis tube and a field of view that is greater than others I've spec'd except one from EurOpitk. I've queried them about price shipped. No reply yet. With luck, price will be no more severe than, for example, Nikon's 1.1x4 African or one of Leupold's newer generation variables.
***
A related problem has arisen. Griffin & Howe reports that they do not offer their side mount system for actions other than [some] bolt actions. I want a quick detachable mount system that, when scope-rings assembly is removed from the rifle, the top of the receiver is clean.

I'll have to look into the IOR 4x32. Is the reticle in that scope Permacenter?
The very best 4x I have is the Schmidt and Bender 4x36. I compared it to the only other 4x I have, a Leupold, and there was no comparison; the S&B blew the Leupold out of the park.

Don