I'm going to buy a good scope for long range hunting with my 6,5x55. I would like a magnification of no less than 12 on the upper end, preferably more (16?). Also a fairly large objective, ~50-56 mm since I will use it on early morning/late evening hunts. I don't think I will need target style adjustment. I'm willing to spend some serious money for a good scope but only if the money is worth the increase in performance. Weight is not a major issue.

Any ideas? Very interested in actual experience of different scopes by sheep-hunters, bean-field rifle users etc.

I have a Nikon 5.5 to 16.5 on my STW and just love it.It was less than $400.00.

------------------
I HUNT LONG RANGE.AND YES I USE MATCHKING'S.

NXS 5.5x22, simple.

------------------
Brent

I like the burris black diamond series with mil dots and 110 in of elevation.

I use a burris full field 2 in 4.5-14 x 42.

it works good for me, it is 315 bucks at midway.

get a burris full field or a leupold vx-1 or vx-2. they will both hold zero and are durable and have a great warranty. and they are clear enough to hunt with. I don't understand these guys that brag about how clear their swarovski is and how much light it gathers. first of all you don't need to count the hairs on a deers head before you shoot. and my full field 2 is plent bright enough for legal shooting hours, now if you want to poach by moonlight then maybe the swarovski is the way to go.

First,what is your idea,of "long range"?

Second,what size of target do you wish to hit,at that distance?

From there,I can toss an opinion or two..........

I use swarovski 3x10x42 scopes and find that 10 power is adequate for 500 yard shots on big game in open fields or in the mountains.Our legal hunting times are from 1/2 hour before sunrise to 1/2 hour after sunset so the extra light gathering ability of these scopes is an advantage especially on cloudy days.I will not use 50 mm or larger objectives as they have to be mounted too high and are too bulky to fit properly in a saddle scabbard.

Sorry, should have been more specific. My "long range" is very modest for some of the members on this forum. I would say up to 300-350 yards.

Our legal hunting time for roe-deer starts 1 hour before sun-rise and ends one hour after sun-set so good light-gathering ability is a must.

Object is black grouse/capercaillie with a target area 3-4 inches high and roe-deer with a target area 4-5 inches high. A few foxes and badgers will probably be accounted for as well. My current rifle has good precision, I can place 3 shots in a 1/2 inch at 100 meters from a firm position.

[This message has been edited by Wachtel (edited 02-16-2002).]

Wachtel you should probably get a 50mm scope then, and the best you can afford. In Europe that would probably be a Zeiss. 1 Hour before and after sunrise is a long , long window.

We normaly go 1/2 hour before and after here in the States. You can always buy a cheek pad to put on your rifle butt to get your eyes up to the level of the 50mm. A 9x or 10x variable is plenty for 350 yrds...............10

Wachtel,

My Leupold 24X40, for instance.
Ideal for hunting or traget shooting at long distance.

------------------
BER007
Keep the faith in any circumstances
------------------------
BBER007@HOTMAIL.COM

Looping trajectory of the Swede(not criticism,just fact),coupled with smallish targets,would seem to make very good use of a scope that wears turrets. Rather than guess,or use reticle subtention(though I very much like the mil-dot reticle),you can paste crosshairs where you wish the bullet to strike. No other method,is as precise.

I think the Leupold 3.5-10X or 4.5-14X LR's,are about the cream of the crop,in utility. 30mm main tubes and enough objective diameter to gather light,without getting plumb ridiculous and having to restock your rifle,to use some of the scopes now available(which require ultra high rings,to clear the objective,which will cause your existing cheek weld to disappear).

The 4.5-14xLR is a pretty snazzy scope,in my estimation.

Once you taste target turrets,that repeat,you'll not consider any other way of doing business with a rifle(my opinion)...............

Big Stick,

I'm switching to GS HV:s 110 gr for the Swede and the trajectory will hopefully improve a lot over the 156 gr. At least the ballistic program I put together indicates this: A little less than 2 inches high at 140 yards gives me -2 at 270 yards and -8 at 350. Since I like the rifle a lot I don't wan't to change it without trying a new recipe first

But I couldn't figure out which model of Leupold you meant, the Long Range models (LR's?) all had higher magnifications? In your opinion; is there a substantial difference between the optics of a Vari X II (VX II) and a Vari X III?

One more thing, I built a new stock for this rifle with a *very* high straight stock, The bolt just clears the stock, 1/8 inch clearance! So large objectives won't be a problem.

I�m one of those guys who brags about his Swarovski.
I have a 3-12x50 mounted on a Heym in 243 Win, for the moment, and this combination is great. I love this scope. If you have the money buy one, you can�t go wrong. It�s with the german reticle (nr 1) not the best for shooting on the range but great for hunting.

Regards/Rolf

------------------

I am a big fan of the Leupold LR scopes. I have a 3.5-10x40 LR M3 on a tactical 30-06.

The M3 features 1 moa elevation adjustments and 1/2 moa windage adjustments. This arrangement is obviously not as precise as the standard 1/4 moa adjustments, but it lets me adjust out to 1300 yards in one revolution of the elevation turret. For my purposes I prefer that.

The 40mm objective gathers ample light to see very well during early morning and late evening twilight. With moonlight or snow cover you can see well at night. I prefer the 40 mm objective because it gathers plenty of light for me and is mounted relatively low on the rifle.

The 10x magnification lets me easily hold on a 1 inch target at 200 yards. But since you want more I would recommend consideration of the 4.5-14x50 or the 6.5-20x50. I believe they are some of the very best available for the price in the U.S.

The Nightforce scopes are certainly a quality piece of gear. But too heavy, large, and expensive for my purposes.

I would repeat Big Sticks recommendation to avoid huge objective lenses. Anything over 50mm is just too big to be practical in the field, in my opinion.

Good Shooting MM

[This message has been edited by MontanaMarine (edited 02-17-2002).]

Here is a link with a good review of the Leupold 3.5-10x40 LR M3. It will give you a good idea of what to expect from the Leupold LR scopes in general. MM

http://www.snipercountry.com/LeupoldLRM3.htm

Starting to lean towards the Leuopolds but ...

Got a tip to buy a Sightron SII 4,5-14x42. Any one know something (experiences?) about the quality of these scopes?

Wachtel, I think that Schmidt&Bender has a high magnification varmint scope. Check that out because it will surely be better than any Leupold or scopes like them.

Sightron is junk.

The Leupold LR's are the scopes I'm talking about. They offer a pretty nice and tidy package,replete with many good features.

The objective diameter and 30mm tube,combine to allow them to be pretty bright and have much internal adjustment. Without mounting a truly gigantic device atop your rifle.

I've never failed a Leupold scope and have had most of them. I have a target elevation turret installed on all of them and all track as required and repeatedly.

The side focus,brightness and internal adjustment are the strengths of the LR's. None of those things will hurt performance.

I think you will have a hell of a good time with your Swede,once you start playing with the elevation turret. With it,the impossible,becomes mundane.................

Maybe a leupold 6.5-20 x 50 would suit you I have a 6.5-20x40 on my 22/250 and I like it very much.

Regards PC

------------------

I have a 4.5-14x40 mm Leupold VXIII on my 308PSS, it is very impressive in light gathering capability. I also have a 3.5-10x50 VXIII that I use for whitetail deer at dawn and dusk. It is great, but after using both I will probably never buy another 50mm scope, and I take most of my shots in the last moments of legal shooting (1/2 before and 1/2 after.

For best vision you want to keep the objective/power ratio to about 5 and the ten power 50 mm gives you that. I find that I see just as well after sunset with the 4.5-14x40 set to 8 power - and it still has the magnification for those tiny critters at longer range in good light.

There may be a slight advantage for the 50mm objective when sniping, but it is a pain when stalking compared to the 40mm.

Don

For all hunting of big game I see no use at all for a scope over 4X....I can get a good picture of a deer in a scope at 1000 yards with a 4x scope, so why do I need all the exrta weight and bulk on my rifle, especially considering the 6.5x55 is a 300 yard gun at best....

I do have a 2x7X on my 300 H&H...I had a 4x12 on it for a couple of years and took it off as I had no need for 12X on a big game rifle...I have never moved the setting off 4X on the 300 H&H..

I truly believe Americans have been duked and lead down the yellow brick road to fairy tale land on scopes....it's all hype and bluster, a sales program to take your money...

Big scopes can't take a lot of thumps in the field as they will go off zero..just wack the Ocular lens on your big boy and check the zero, then do the same on a fixed power 3X leupold...try it!!

Big scopes don't fair well on horseback and about the only needed use for them is varmint shooting small animals and long range targets...

I suspect I have inflicted a damaging blow to the egos of thoes who have been inducted into the hall of XXXX power, so fire away at me lads, but be forewarned that such flames will land on deaf ears... My mind is made up and based on my experience not some million dollar ad campaign..

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Ray,

I do not disagree with your assesment of 4X being all that is necessary for a big game rifle.

I like to shoot big game, varmints, and targets, and long range plinking out to beyong 1000 yards with my heavy(15 Lb) tactical style 30-06. The 3.5-10 power atop it serves very well in those areas. It is a multi-mission scope on a multi mission rifle. It makes sense.

My 7.5 lb .338 has a 3-9X but lately I have been considering a fixed low power for the reasons you stated. I never take it off 3X. The .338 is a meat gun, period.

MM

Ray,

I agree with you concerning scopes for the *really* big game. On my 375 H&H I have a Leupold 1-4x20 for the same reasons that you have stated. But for the smaller game a larger magnification really come into it's own. (The cross-hairs on the Leupold with heavy German #4 reticle would obscure a smaller animal on long distances).

Just now it's down to either a Leupold 3,5-10x50 or a Swarovski 3-12x50. Thanks for all the in-put, everybody.

I'd get a euro scope for roedeer. If there is any hunting where the higher optical quality would make a difference so is it certainly roe stalking.

For Capercaillie I think a Leupold is just fine since bad light is no big problem. I think weight is an issue for this kind of hunting since it's 99,5% skiing thru deep snow. High power is not necessary in my opinion either. 6-9X is just fine. Just think about it, a capercaillie is about 70 cm from head to tail, black and sits in a snow covered pine. You can see him for miles!

I'd consider one of the Swarovski AV scopes. Same weight and dimension as Leupold, but with better optics. With the #4 reticle is range estimating roe deer quite easy.

On my Swede ( Styer SBS ) I have a Leupold 6,5-20 x 40 mounted . Propably over-powerful but now I can partake in our club's " Sporting Bench Competition " .
When hunting I use 6x to 9x max on the dial so the 4,5-14 will propably be adequate for hunting.
With my handloads the Swede performs very good out to 300 m . Sighted to Two inches high at 200m it drops 4 inches at 300 meters .

On my Swede I have a 6,5-20x40 mounted .

I keep it down to 6,5 - 9x when hunting so the 4,5-14 may be a better choice if you want to buy Leupold .

The greater magnification is great when taking part in local club "sporting gun benchrest shooting" or when comparing new loads for accuracy .
My swede ( Styer SBS )performs very well out to 300m (handloads ) - if sighted 2" high at 200m it will drop 4" at 300m .

Ben

I agree the 9x+ are overkill for the actual shot on big game here in the Southeast. Not that long shots aren't available, it's just that treestands don't offer a good platform except in an absolute dead calm, which is rare. On the ground, any shot will be "field position" with perhaps a tree to brace against.

(I have had one out-of-season doe walk right behind a 100 yd target frame as I was about to squeeze off one from the bench. Unfortunately, I seldom have my sandbags with me while hunting so I don't foresee much 500 yd shooting from field positions or even from treestands.)

But I will explain why I like variable scopes. Especially in thick cover with its shadows and tiny holes in the cover to see through they allow gender identification, and even more importantly allow me to see those pencil-sized limbs out there at 75 yds I need to avoid hitting when the game is at 125 yds.

That's why I have a 2-7x on nearly every big game rifle I have, even on a Ruger .44 mag carbine.

I think the twilight issue is overplayed, though. If it's that dark already I want to avoid the possibility of a nighttime trailing job and seldom shoot. And I don't care who you are or what your "record" is, if you shoot at enough game animals you will occasionally have to trail them. Even with the magical Ballistic Tips so many swear by. It is especially aggravating in the dark.

The extra brightness in the dawn hours might be of some advantage but if you can see well enough to even locate the animal with your naked eye your average 28-40mm scope will allow you to make the shot, assuming it's legal.

[This message has been edited by steve y (edited 02-19-2002).]

Wachtel

When comparing my Zeiss 3-12x56 VM/V with my friends Swarowski 4-12x50 (1� ) we both agreed that the Zeiss was better by a slight margin (We did this a couple of times out hunting together looking at live roe deer and moose). With the difference in diameter and the reticle to the Zeiss advantage it wasn�t surprising�. But I do think that the 4-12x50 covers most situations (except for hunting when it is really dark)! The Swarowski 3-12x50 is also a great scope but somewhat heavier for about the same performance (the reticle system � medf�rstorande eller ej � is about the only important?? difference).
For myself (as I�m not put off by the Big, Heavy European optics) I�m considering buying a 4-16x50 Swarowski to put on my recently accuired 6,5-06 (made by Sundberg) when the money comes around. For the moment it will wear an old Pecar 4-10x52.

BTW, I would be very interested in hearing about your results with the GS 110 gr bullet in your 6,5x55!! I�ve been thinking along those lines, but as the wild boars are on the increase down here it doesn�t make much sense to go under 140 grains of bullet weight.

Cheers

K9

K9,

which reticle do you have on your Zeiss? I've got a good price on a 2,5-10x50.

Waiting for more HVs:, will post results later.

Wachtel
I use a #4 reticle (s� g�r �ven min tidigare n�mnda kompis � skillnaden �r att hans inte �r medf�rstorande). I think it is a good compromise between visibility and precision sighting.
If you�ve got a good price on that Zeiss and think that 2,5-10 is enough for YOUR purposes � go for it!! The V/VM series are light and bright!!! I actually like them better than Swarowski as I find them easier to look through for ME. If Zeiss would have had something like a 4-16x50 or so I would buy it instead of thinking of buying a Swarowski.
Good luck with your choice!

K9

Thanks for all the comments!

I'll take the offered deal on the Zeiss. Swarovski 3-12x50 was 10% higher and much bigger. Leupold LR was hard to get and not much lower in price.

There are a lot of scopes out there but I don't want to buy one without having looked through it first.

I'll mount the Zeiss with EAW mounts (but no rail!) so I can switch between my current scope (Swarovski 4x32) and the new one easily. I'll use the 4x32 for practice shooting on the "running moose".

Where are we on night vision scopes? The military has them and if it's legal in Europe to shoot one hour before or after sunset when it's dark then that would be a advantage.

In most of the Northeast the big game hunting starts 1/2 hour before and ends 1/2 hr. after and that's perfect for seeing stuff.

I am with Atkinson on the 4X and I am disapointed in the lack of choice now. The Leupold 4X is not too hot a scope in my opinion. But I think higher power does better in dim light.

Back when the first good variable (B&L 2.5X8) came out a friend had one on his .243 M-70 Fwt. He spotted a deer and could not decide if one of the antlers was at least the 3" minimum. So he turned it up to 8X. I asked what happened? He said "oh the deer went over the hill"!

I was told by my father that in scopes years ago most hunters that use them would put 2.5 powers on rifles for the woods. The straight 4x power was used in general, but hunting out in western states required a straight 6 power. I sometimes wonder if technology has a grip on our wallets with one hand and a bag over our heads with the other.