The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Medium Bore Rifles Re: Deer hunting, 270's, and low powered scopesGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Re: Deer hunting, 270's, and low powered scopes | Login/Join |
| one of us |
This right my alley, I love 270s and hate large scopes. You might look at the burris full field II in 1.5X5. Many manufactures also make a 2X7s. Almost all of my rifles wear scopes under 40mm and most of those scopes are compact. At 300-350 you can still do good work with a fix 4 or 6. If you choose a variable, keep it at a specific magnification and lock it there if it has a locking ring. | ||
|
| one of us |
I must once again call out to all you fine people for your wisdom. I have finally exited the long procese of deciding on a rifle. I have come to the remingotn LSS mt gun in 270. Now, in order to keep this gun's out of this world balance and to save wieght, i want to get a fairly small scope. But I need to be able to shoot 300 yards also. I know leupold makes a compact line but those dont really float my boat so I am looking at there 2x7 because the have a larger obj. lense. Is 7x good enough for 300 to 350 yards? Thanks again gents, Matt | |||
|
| one of us |
Burris compact! | |||
|
| one of us |
300yds is not a long shot! Deer at that range with open sights are easy! Maybe you should shoot some NRA Highpower matchs, you could learn a few things. | |||
|
| one of us |
I have some 1x4 1x5 ect on a few rifles of lower vel. On a 270 and above rifles I prefer a little more power I put on 3x9s. Unless they are a big bore like my 416 that wears a 1.75x6leupold As for 300 yards being a long shot you need to shoot at longer ranges. After you have shot out past 600 for a while 300 is a chip shot. | |||
|
| one of us |
While the 2x7 Leupold you are looking at is an excellant scope, I would have to suggest you consider the 2.5 X 8 of the same make. The 2.5 X 8 will give you a little more magnification for those long shots and is still a very small scope. I believe that the 2.5 X 8 is actually shorter than the standard Leupold straight 4X scope. The other thing is that the 2.5 X 8 is in the VX-III line and will have better coatings and such than the 2 X 7. Not much difference to be sure, and I hunted with a 2X7 for a number of years. Still, I have the 2.5 X 8 on my 300 Wby Mag and my 338 Win Mag and they have served me well. On the other hand, I have five friends with 2X7 Leupolds sitting on their 270 Winchesters and they are all happy with them. R F | |||
|
| one of us |
Look at the 1.75-6X VX III | |||
|
| one of us |
I also really like the 1.75-6X VariXIII. That or the 2-8X VariXIII will certainly fit the bill for any big game hunting application you will ever come across. Jeff | |||
|
one of us |
You're on the right track with the 2-7x/2-8x scopes. Just remember, for decades fixed 4x's were the standard and many "300-yard" shots were, indeed, successfully made. 6x was considered a high-power varmint scope, for Pete's sake! Another option I'd investigate, were I you, is a fixed 6x like the Burris Fullfield II. You can successfully hunt with a lot less glass than today's average hunter or the magazines he reads would have you believe. RSY | |||
|
| one of us |
I have2 Vx2 2X7s and 2 Vx3 2.5X8s. I am sure you would be happy with either. if you don't mind the Extra money, take a look at the VX3 2.5X8 with the boone and crocket reticle. I have one in my safe waiting for my .270 to come back from pac-nor barreling. It has cross hairs set up for 200 300 400 450 and 500 yards, if you shoot a 270 130 grain bullet at 3050 fps and at another power setting it does the same thing with 150s. It is n Expensive scope 460.00 I paid for mine and the VX2 2X7 is plenty good enough, and I paid 280.00. ...tj3006 | |||
|
| one of us |
I, for one, appreciate the fact that you practice and have set your maximum range at 300yds. I am under the same personal range restrictions. I don't criticize those that practice and can make much longer shots sucessfully. I do wonder where hunting ends and long range shooting begins. In my experence many hunters, in South Texas, buy 7&30 mags, no range finders, and shoot less than a box of shells a year. They then shoot at a deer a God knows how far, it runs off, and they spend 5 min looking for blood. Again I respect your self imposed max range. Back to your original question. Scopes in the same price range are competitive, it's a Chevy-Ford thing. I prefer the lower power, to 7x, for hunting because at 7x a deer is pretty small at 300yds. This will not encourage too long shots. One last thhig; on another board, they have almost sold me on a fiked 6x. just my $.02 capt david  | |||
|
| one of us |
Best bang for buck 04 VX11 2-7. | |||
|
| one of us |
for years in sdouth Dakota I hunted mule der with a .270 and a weaver K3 scope(Jack O'connor said that was all you needed for big game) well, all I can say is I never hsad a deer toofar away to shoot at. On the trask ranch I still hold the record for the longest shot on a mulie, I won't mention the range but it was a far piece. I think the guys are right, get a variable or a 6x it's all you need for the .270 but, I still use my old K3 and a good pair of binoculars. | |||
|
| one of us |
It will be very hard to beat the 2.5 to 8 Leupold or the standard 4X. Both mount low to center of bore and get the job done. | |||
|
| <eldeguello> |
I used a Leupold 3X on my .270 for three years in Alaska. The longest shot I ever took with this rig was across a glacier chasm to a Sitka Blacktail buck at about 350 yards. I fired twice, and only hit him once due to faulty range estimation. 1 shot killed him, however. I put a Leupold 2X-7X on my 7mm Rem. Mag. Ruger No 1B, and this combination has proven superior as a mountain rifle! The 1B is a little on the heavy side, but the 2X-7X scope will allow good hits at ANY range at which you can see the animal at all..... The 2.5X-8X Leupold is also light and compact enough for a mountain rifle. I have one on my Ruger No. 1H .375 H&H. It works great for Colorado elk hunting! | ||
|
| <9.3x62> |
Quote: Let me be more clear. 300 yds, again, is the farthest I can practice. I can hold MOA at that range with a 2-7x scope and hunting rifle/bullets without too much trouble, at the range at least - who knows about field conditions. Anyway, I am probably more than capable of taking deer a bit farther, but I choose not to because I can't practice those shots. Besides, I take a lot more pride in stalking to within 300 yds than making a shot at 500 yds. Connecting at 500 yds in field conditions (wind, grade, inexact distance, imperfect rest, adrenaline, different cheek weld, etc.) for someone who can never practice at that range, especially with a hunting power scope, and a standard sporter rifle, is just dumb luck, not skill. | ||
|
| one of us |
Quote:Quote: Like I said: where does hunting become shooting? capt david | |||
|
| <allen day> |
I've used fixed 4X Leupold and Redfield scopes on various .270s for many years. Shooting past 300 yds. is not at all out of the question with fixed or variable scopes under 7X, contrary to contemporary opinion. I have a custom .270 Win. under construction right now that will carry a fixed 6X Leupold, and it'll be fine for any sort of long-range shooting I'll carry out with that rifle, even out past 400 yds., if need be. AD | ||
|
| one of us |
1.5x6 or 2x7 are ideal scopes for deer rifles. Elk rifles too for that matter. My go to elk rifle is a .300WM with a 1.5x5 Burris. 1st antelope I ever shot was with a .270 wearing a 2x7 Leuy compact. @300yards. I didn't feel at all handicapped.  | |||
|
| one of us |
Thank you all for replying. I am sold on a 2x7 or 2x8 if i can get that much money. I regulary ring out the 500 yard gong at my hunting club but in the respect of the game i chase would never take a shot out that far with anything. My max with it is 300 and so shall it be with my new rifle, Which is nolonger a 270. Thanks to my buddy i baught i 3006 today but i will still try follow my icon Jack O'Conner and go with a small scope. | |||
|
one of us |
WEll I hope I'm not too late to put in my 2 cents worth. I sold optics for years in Tucson. Your initial question is a very valid, yet extemely subjective querry. Define "small" scope. How good is your vision? Do you wear corrective lenses to see? Near sighted, far sighted? Any Astigmatism? What works well for someone else may not work for you. A Leupold scope may transmit light just fine for you but not someone else. The true test is to go shopping during low light conditions, have someone select a few scopes for you without you knowing which is which, observe a target some distance away and see what YOUR eye likes the best. This is the MOST objective way to buy optics. Scopes are a major purchase and you should take enough time to make a definitive choice. Ex. I like a lot of magnification myself because I have an Astigmatism in my shooting eye in addition to near sightedness. A 2.5x8 is so close to the 3x9, I prefer the increase in magnification. Why? Because your stated limit maybe 300 yards but you may see the trophy of a lifetime at 335 or 350 while you have a steady rest and he isn't going anywhere, so you have time to shoot. It's admirable that you have your limitations but they may always be challenged in the field. The size and weight difference to me is minimal for a bit larger scope, but that is my opinion and also very subjective. I have Leupold 4.5x14 on ALL of my rifles. doc | |||
|
One of Us |
Ive got an old Weaver steel tube that is the bees knees as far as size, power and weight go. Its an old V-8 (2.5-8X) with a small eyepiece and a 40mm objective, and inspite of being decades older than my newest scope it still weighs less. Unfortunatley the fine people in El Paso who fix up these little honeys cant do this particular model anymore.  They do sell refurbished ones like the K-6 though, better than original condition and garanteed as long as theyre in business. Still a great scope. | |||
|
one of us |
I've currently got a 1.5-4.5 on my 308 Ruger RSI and a fixed 6X Seeadler on my 275. I have never shot anything over about 240 yd's but a good shot could certainly shoot 300 with either one of these. I also have a Leupold 2-7 on my 458 and it's a fine liitle scope. | |||
|
| one of us |
Quote: Matt: You are on the right track to avoid the compact models on a full-size hunting rifle. Don't get me wrong -- I love the little Leupold 2-7 Compact and have three of them. But the larger OCCULAR lens of the full-size 2-7 model is important in creating a broader field of EYE PLACEMENT and will give you a longer window of acceptable eye relief. This more forgiving range of eye placement makes the scope quicker and sight picture acquisition faster. The actual magnification of the 2-7 Leupold tops out at about 6.6X, which is plenty of magnification for shooting deer-sized game at 300 yards. I'm not knocking any of the other brands, but the Leupold will be smaller and lighter weight than anything else in it's magnification, and its serviceability and resale are unquestioned. By the by, I think it is a waste of money to buy the VX-II over the VX-I unless you just HAVE TO HAVE "click" adjustments. The Vari-X III's and new VX-III's are certainly fine scopes, but the basic Leupold is a helluva buy for the money. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Shiloh - You didn't say WHERE you will be hunting? That has usually been the determining factor for me in what sort of sight or scope I put on a rifle. I've hunted in places where you may spot your deer a half mile away. (Not that I'm about to shoot at him this far out there) And then again I've hunted in country where 50 yds is a long shot. Bottom line is you need to think about this WHERE. The 2 X 7 might be a big overkill in scope power. As a rule, however, that or something similar, would make a pretty good all-around scope. Good luck with whatever you choose. | |||
|
| one of us |
I would agree with a good 4 power Weaver or Leupold or a 2 x 7 Leupold and call it a day! More people use the full range of their scope in 2 x 7 than anyone ever does in larger powers like 4 x 12 or higher. Just my experience. Cheers and good shooting seafire | |||
|
| one of us |
I like the Simmons Whitetail Expedition in 1.5x6x32 | |||
|
one of us |
All of my rifles wear Leup. scopes & most of those are the VXIII 2.5x8. I've never felt & really needed more glass for hunting, nice for the bench but I can't see having a nice 6 1/2# rifle mounted w/ a 2# scope & mounts for the occasional 400yd shot most guys shouldn't take anyway.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
I just got the latest issue of Field and stream and there were four gunwriters who took part in something of a competition, actually more of a self test for different hunting shots at deer. Anyway, apparently Wayne Van Zwoll is a stud, as he either bested the three other guys or matched them in the long range excercises and was only using a 2.5 power scope on a 270. It appears from the article that Layne Simpson didnt much care for getting showed up by old outdated equipment, he had all kinds of excuses. Case in point, you can only buy so much performance. The rest is up to you. And low powered scopes are up to the task @ 300-400 yds, if you are! | |||
|
| one of us |
Quote: ========================================================== The above post is in agreement with my conclusion of why there are so many heated arguments over optics. The post says that the optics should match each persons eyesight. I agree with that. To each his own. | |||
|
| one of us |
You also get Multicoat 4 on all lense surfaces on the 04 VX11's. Thats why I think they are the "best bang for the buck". The clicks aren't worth the extra cash. | |||
|
| one of us |
So Ya switched to an 06, Not a bad choice at all ! I love the 30,06 and the .270 As far a I am concerned, the only real advantage to th .270 is the Recoil. A 150 grain 30,06 is almost as flat as 130 grain .270, and the 180 grain 06, Is a better round for Elk...tj3006 | |||
|
| one of us |
Quote: For deer I prefer the .270 over the 30-06, all my .270's shoot best with the 130's going over 3100fps, while my 30-06's shoot best with 150's at 2800fps. Big advantage to the .270! | |||
|
| one of us |
Ray, If you don't mind me asking what does your eyesight test to on the chart. 20/20, 20/10, 20/40 ? | |||
|
one of us |
I started with a 1.5-6 on my M.70 with a BOSS but it just shot so well I put a 3.5-10X50 Leupold on it. It was already heavy, but I always use it from a tree stand so who cares. Now I've got an excuse to buy a very light carry rifle for closer shooting. Don't you just love guns. | |||
|
| one of us |
Americans have a passion for bigger is better, we are the pawns of high vel advertisement and paid off scribes..... For all practical big game hunting, its like O'Connor said 40 years ago a 4X scope is all thats needed..and a fixed 3X suits me fine on a 270 or any other caliber.... The 2x7x37 or 40 is a fine scope and you cannot go wrong with it. I still think varibles are more prone to breakage and I have been told they are somewhat more prone to breakage, due to more working and fragile parts..I was told this by some high ranking production managers, but only if used very hard was their qualifier.. My personal choice today is the 1x4 adn 1.5x5 Leupold on all my guns, with a few fixed 4Xs and a couple of 3Xs, and one 2.5x Leupold Alaskan, they are all Leupolds....Never have felt the need to change brands in 50 years of hunting.. The first 10 years prior to that were with Weavers 2.5X as thats about all we could get or afford back then..they were fine in that hot dry dessert Big Bend country of Texas, but not so good in the cold wet high country of colorado where we hunted elk every year..They fogged up all the time. | |||
|
| one of us |
Shiloh, I don't have a 270, nor a big variable. I shoot a 7x57 Ackley improved with a 19.5 inch barrel, and a scout mount with a 2.5 Leupold Intermediate on it that weighs 8 ounces or so. The whole gun weighs a tad under 6 pounds, and rattles your teeth each time you pull the trigger. But what I have is a gun that I can carry all day, that has superb balance and therefore quick response, and will kill caribou or moose at 350 yards if I forget myself. A real buddy. My other gun is a 416 Remington on a long Mauser action, again with a short barrel, and a 1.5 x 5 Bushnell Scopechief that is 30 years old. I use this scope and rifle because I often have to go into the Alder after some poor wounded 1000 pound brown that is really pissed off because some dumb sob with a 4X12 on a 300 Winmag took a potshot at him at 250 yards despite my admonitions. And I keep it set at the 1.5 power. I need balance and handling, I need light transmission, I need field of vision...if I am to make it back home to my sweetie after all is said and done. A big high-powered scope just won't do it. If your eyes are OK, go with a small light scope and take it to the range to learn it's quirks. A small scope is not a target scope and will not cure your shooting shortcomings. Practice quick target acquisition at low-light dusk to simulate woods or overcast or rain. Carry the gun at sling and practice getting it off your shoulder and shooting. Practice throwing the gun to your shoulder and taking it off safety and finding your target by instinct. Practice the second shot. You will do just fine. The 270 is a truly great caliber and will do everything that you ask of it. Read the reviews to pick a scope. Leupolds will take the recoil. Tasco's and Bushnells are reliable and lightweight and will give you crosshairs and a target even at darkest dusk. Expensive Nikons give you a really clear picture. If you have lots of cash, the 30mm European tubes are V E R Y excellent (drool). Variables are acceptable at the ranges you suggest... as are fixed power scopes up to 4 power (anything bigger closes your field of vision and limits light). Check it out. Take your pick. Most namebrand scopes now are acceptable. See which one YOU like best and lay down the bucks, then ..... practice.  and enjoy. | |||
|
| one of us |
FWIW, I have a 270, that wears a Leupold VariX-II 3-9x40. Rationale - I hunt on properties that range from dead flat, open ground, where you can almost see the curvature of the Earth at the horizon (Outback Oz) to bush/rainforest where seeing 20 feet is rare. My personal favourite property ranges from 20 foot distance in the trees and mountains, to open shooting across gullies and grazing zones on the flats. The scope/rifle combo covers them all, and balances well. | |||
|
| one of us |
A fixed 6x42 is hard to beat. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Medium Bore Rifles Re: Deer hunting, 270's, and low powered scopes
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |