Just got back from a one-day prairie dog hunt where we had good luck. Ample population and shots not outrageously long. We had a few shots at naive dogs as close as 100 yards, but most shots were between 200 and 250 with a few stretching to 300 or a little over.

One friend started out using a Sako .222 Magnum with a Leupold VX-II 4-12X. His percentage of hits was good, but after a while he wanted to switch and shoot his Ruger No. 1 .220 Swift equipped with a Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10X just to give it a try. He was knocking them dead with the Swift, running a percentage of hits at least as good as with his .222 Magnum. But he kept commenting that he was surprised at how much apparent difference there was in magnification between the 12X and the 10X.

Well, when we went to put the equipment away he discovered that his 3.5-10X was inadvertently turned down to just 4X. No wonder it seemed so much less than the 4-12X on his other rifle!

Now, the moral to this story is that if you can see prairie dogs at 250 yards well enough to hit them regularly when magnified only 4 times, why do you need a 14X to shoot at an elk at the same distance?

I'm not saying that I recommend 4 power scopes for prairie dog hunting, but I am saying that using too much magnification in a game hunting scope not only increases undesirable things like mirage and shaky sight picture as well as reducing field of view and speed of use, but the extra magnification also doesn't really help you put the bullet significantly closer to where you aim.

My hunting scopes will always max out at 9 or 10X on the high end and have 4x (or preferably lower) available to me when called for.

You make a lot of sense.

How many decades was 4X the standard in USA scopes? How many years was the 2.5X Lyman Alaskan scope considered THE big game scope?

Stone,

Sounds like you had a nice PD trip.

Your situational scope power settings remind me of how, when calling coyotes, I ALWAYS had my variable Leupold scope turned to a minimum power of 3X or 4.5X. I could always turn the power up, if needed, should the yote hang up "out there". BUT.........a close-in "surprise"???.........ya better be very ready.

My favorite calling scope?....the Leupold Compact 3-9X.

Kevin

First of all, you don't need 14X to shoot an elk at 250 but it sure helps if the yardage is "long".

Prairie dog shooting at LONG range dictates the use of higher magnification scopes just to see the darn things. I doubt your friend could have made long shots with his scope set on 4X simply because the crosshairs would covered the critter.

It you're satisfied with a 4X scope for varmint hunting, so be it, but for me I like something more like his 14X or at least 10X.

Zeke

quote:

Originally posted by ZekeShikar:
It you're satisfied with a 4X scope for varmint hunting, so be it, but for me I like something more like his 14X or at least 10X.
Zeke

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
I'm not saying that I recommend 4 power scopes for prairie dog hunting, but I am saying that using too much magnification in a game hunting scope not only increases undesirable things like mirage and shaky sight picture as well as reducing field of view and speed of use

Perhaps Zeke would like to reread the post in order to absorb the point of it.

I shoot quite a few PDs. My experience is that 12-16X is the max that is useful in most cases. More magnification than that leads to a lot of mirage.
Though I have shot some with a 4X scope, I really think 12-16X is far more effective.
Too each his own, I guess.

quote:

I shoot quite a few PDs. My experience is that 12-16X is the max that is useful in most cases. More magnification than that leads to a lot of mirage.

I once tried prairie dogs with a fixed 24X Leupold and found that, once spotted with binoculars, it was very slow and difficult to find the dog in the scope's very narrow field. I have a couple of 6-18X scopes that are usable on 18X, but I've found a 14X to be more practical. A 12X gives up very little to the higher powers and is usually sufficient under 400 yards (not that hitting them is easy at that range, but seeing them is still easier than hitting them!)

However, the point of my post was that when targets are larger, like deer and elk, it makes no sense to burden yourself with too much magnification. An elk at 300 yards magnified four times is still much larger than a prairie dog at the same distance magnified 20 times.

On the other hand........PD's are a whole nuther "game" for me, that started in about 1994. Doesn't seem that long ago......

Like Stone, I once tried a fixed Leuy 24X....and very quickly discovered that it relegated the rifle, a 22-250AI, to early morning use only. NO mirage!!

Having said that, I do like having the ability to SEE the PD as closely as possible.....DEPENDING on prevailing conditions. Thus, the Leupold 6.5-20 and 8.5-25 are my favorites. I do admit that I'm a "table" PD shooter......with shade, Dr. Pepper, snacks........you get the idea.

BTW....Stone, I fixed the binoc spotting problem looooong ago. See pic. (Note: I've since upgraded the rangefinder)

Kevin

Well as long as some hijacking is going on, I might as well help hijack my own thread.

Kevin mentions using a .22-250 AI. I used to shoot a .22-250 quite a bit when prairie dog hunting. But after a while I found that nearly any of the centerfire .22's have surprisingly similar effective ranges. I've gone to a .221 Fireball almost exclusively, and can't see that the .22-250 I used to shoot gave me more than perhaps another 50 yards of range.

There are several factors which probably contribute to the similarity in effective range. *The smaller .22's are usually a bit more accurate than the larger ones -- a half-MOA Fireball probably beats a 3/4-MOA Swift in most instances. *You can also shoot longer strings with the smaller cartridges before you suffer from excessive barrel heat. *Recoil is a factor -- in part because of the toll constant shooting takes on your shoulder, and in part because you can shoot better when the lower recoil of the smaller cartridge allows you to call your own shots (also another good reason to keep your magnification on the more modest side since with high magnification/narrow FOV scopes it is harder to see your shot impact.

In my experience, if you want to really reach out there you need to jump up to the 6mm category. A 70 grain .243 Ballistic Tip doesn't get blown around by the wind nearly as badly as a 40 to 55 grain .22 bullet. (Yes, I know there are extra heavy specialty .22 bullets for 1-7 twist barrels, but those defeat the purpose of having a light gun to begin with.)

What about it, Kevin? I know that you specialize in the more diminutive cartridges. How do you think they compare in practical range to the .22-250 or the Swift category of .22's?

quote:

I'm a "table" PD shooter......with shade, Dr. Pepper, snacks........you get the idea.

My kind of shootin' - Can I go next time?

As for bigger game hunting, I require a higher magnification - just in case - to count points for legality.... and no, I don't have 30-06 binos.

You know, of course, Stonecreek, that I agree with your contention.

With the advent of bi-pods, rangefinders and all the mod cons, ranges are being stretched to distances where maybe high magnifications do make some sense - but as sportsmen and sportswomen I think we should accept some limitations to ranges when hunting game and not merely destroying pests. A good rule of thumb for this might be to not shoot beyond distances where we are sure a body hold will connect. For these shots 4x should be plenty.

Stone.....

....now don't go gettin' me to lyin'.

I'll admit that I'm no fan of recoil when shooting PD's....."self-spotting", and an all day pounding come to mind. That's why I put Vais muzzle brakes on my 22-250AI and 20BR rifles....even though my popularity suffers on the firing line, and too many shots may induce a dull headache(WITH double hearing protection). But, I only pull them out when shooting beyond about 400 yards.

Inside 4-500 yards I do enjoy the "sub-caliber" 17's and 20's.....no recoil...easy spotting, even with a high magnification scope.....no headaches. Many of the 17's and the 20VT come to mind.

Below is my rebuilt 40XBR 17 Javelina.....only the action was reused. It weighs a bit over 15 pounds. In it's original form, I made my longest 17 caliber shot on a PD at 631 yards.....it took 11 shots(a BAD quartering wind....needed over a full turn of both windage and elevation on the Leo 6.5-20XAO scope, over a 100 yard zero).

Kevin

quote:

Inside 4-500 yards I do enjoy the "sub-caliber" 17's and 20's.....no recoil...easy spotting

I've never used a .17 in the field, but I can verify what you say about the .20's. I've hit them as far away with my .20 Vartarg as with any of my .224" calibers. Also, I've been surprised at what gratifying "aerials" the Vartarg will sometimes give you. (Being able to see all of a spectacular aerial is one more reason to use a slightly more modest magnification with its wider field of view )

Stone,

What???.....surely you jest!!!.....you've no .17 for PD's??? Such a deficiency MUST be corrected!!

Here ya go.....how about a 20Vmax at about 3800fps in the 17AH, or about 4000fps in a 17HeBee? Any shot inside of 300 yards is almost a "gimee", not to mention the acrobatics......PLUS no cleaning for a few hundred shots.

At least that's my story, for two of my Coopers(with Leo 6-18XAO), and I'm stickin' to it.

BTW....my Cooper 20VT works ok also.

Kevin

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

Originally posted by ZekeShikar:
It you're satisfied with a 4X scope for varmint hunting, so be it, but for me I like something more like his 14X or at least 10X.
Zeke

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
I'm not saying that I recommend 4 power scopes for prairie dog hunting, but I am saying that using too much magnification in a game hunting scope not only increases undesirable things like mirage and shaky sight picture as well as reducing field of view and speed of use

Perhaps Zeke would like to reread the post in order to absorb the point of it.

Well Mr Stonecreek,
Perhaps the title of your thread might have confuse folks who are a bit slower than yourself.
Pretty tricky when you lead with how magnification is unimportant and then follow with a story of an inept yet accurate shooter killing prairie dogs at close range.

So, what exactly was your point again (other than to pontificate with your vast knowledge and wisdom)?

Zeke

Make that "vast knowledge and great wisdom", please. Like our president, I so dislike being under-praised.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Make that "vast knowledge and great wisdom", please. Like our president, I so dislike being under-praised.

and it happens so often......

Today's optics give you both low magnification and high magnification in the same scope; you get the best of both worlds, get to have your cake and eat it too.

I always stalk with my scope on the lowest setting, both for field of view and for use on quick snap shots if an opportunity suddenly appears.

But, being able to crank that scope up to 16x for a really long shot, a shot through holes in brush, or for load development on the range makes the rifle way more versatile IMO. Nobody walks around hunting with their scope set at 16 or 18x, but its really nice to have it when you want it.

I love the newer Leupold VX6 3-18x44. Probably the most versatile scope I have ever used.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Make that "vast knowledge and great wisdom", please. Like our president, I so dislike being under-praised.

Fair enough. Vast knowledge and great wisdom, which I'm sure you possess.

Zeke

Great story and sounds like a great PD safari.
I agree about magnification. Every chance I get I go to northern Utah to shoot long range. The light conditions are perfect and wind is seldom a factor.
We shoot from 350 yards out to 900 and use a Leica 1200 Rangefinder. With a 3-9x40, shooting rocks (@18" to 30" wide) at half a mile is not difficult. With my old 1908 Brazilian Mauser and 40 year old mil surp ammo, the military iron sights are dead on and we score a high percentage of hits @half a mile.
This year, my friend, shooting the old Mauser offhand, missed the 850 yard target by @6".
IMHO, light conditions can make up for a lot of lack of magnification.
Also, good scope resolution is often a fair trade-off for magnification.

I love big scopes on little targets. I have shot most of my praire dogs with a Leupold on my Remington R 15. It goes to 14x and I crank it up to see the "whites of their eyes".

I am of the opinion that you should shoot whatever your eye likes! Mine like 8x or better most of the time.

If you're shooting to 300 yards a 4X scope works fine. On prairie dogs I usually go with friends and family and let them shoot all the close ones.

Usually I'll shoot the 22.250AI from 400 to 600 yards with the 69 grain SMKs but my favorite is the 6.5x284 with the 142 grain SMK's. Then I'll crank the Nightforce up to 22X and start the real long distance shooting.

quote:

if you can see prairie dogs at 250 yards well enough to hit them regularly when magnified only 4 times, why do you need a 14X

guess I've gotten used to seeing which hair to split.

Grizz

MANIFICATION OFFSETS AGING, NOT THAT I WOULD KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.....

My 6 PD dog rifles have on the low end 4x12 to 6x24

My favorite is 4x16

We have found out that most dogs are shot around 8x to 12x.

I have occasionally use the higher powers but as the guns and temps heat up the lower powers come in very handy.

The most magnification on a big game rifle is 4x12 most 3x9s and smaller.

The newer wide range magnification scope are intriguing I just have not pop for one yet.

I have a Leupold 2.5-8 X scope on my 375/404 rifle.

Most of our hunting is the bush, where one does not see the whole animal.

We are talking about large animals, at sometimes close range.

Where magnification comes in handy is when one has to take a shot through a small gap in the bush between branches.

The magnification certainly helps one to see where to place the bullet in those small gaps.

After using lower power scopes on big bores, and higher power scopes as well, I have found that for my big game hunting needs, there is nothing better than a 3-9.

With 3 exceptions, since 1969 I have only used fixed 6 power Weaver scopes.

I like fixed power 3X and 4X for big game hunting, and they suit me fine for varmint hunting..They look nicer on my guns, they slim down the gun..A scope is just a cross hair to me, if I can put the X on the target Im good to go.How big they make the target is of no consequence to me..I do have one 3x9 and two 2x7x28s, the rest are fixed powers..My favorite scope on my favorite rifle. a 7x57, is a Leupold 2.5X, 7/8" tube, Leupold Alaskan..

Im surprised so many here agree with me on scopes, Ive been trashed to death for my approach to scopes but Ive never felt the need for more scope, but have for less powerful scopes while hunting in my early years..

But such is a personal choice for all of us, and no one is wrong to choose what they prefer. They all work as a matter of fact.