What is this crazy obsession with modern hunters buying a nice lightweight sporter rifle, then mounting a great big, 3" diameter, target turreted, 24X super scope atop them ?

To me, it's pretty ridiculous:
1. It ruins the look, feel, and balance of an
otherwise nice rifle.
2. The average guy's sporter rifle is a 300
yard gun at best and you sure don't need
extreme magnification for that range.
3. The average guy can't shoot good enough to
utilize the capabilities of the big scope.

Just kind of a pet peeve of mine that I've noticed quite a bit lately. IMO a good old 3x9 or 4x12 is about all a guy ever needs for hunting, and frankly a fixed 4x or 6x will do the job nicely.

well how the hell else am I supposed to make my 1 mile shots with 180 grn match kings on deer?? you tell me that! sure I could get closer but that ruins the effect and then I might actualy be obligated to track that thing.

We like them because we can see much better with them... Evaluate racks etc. We also hunt several different terrains/situations in a day... As an example I frequently hunt a clear cut in the early morning and stalk midday and then back to the clear cut in the afternoon without going to my truck... My little Model 7 in .308 can do it all... <g>

Besides.... We aren't "average" hunters mate.. ;-)

But I'll grant you this.... It sure does take away from the compact lines and looks of my rifle...

$bob$

I agree 100% with ya Steiny.

I agree that a good 3 to 9 will do anything you need a hunting rifle to do. Fixed fours are fine as well, though my rifles do double duty as varminters (groundhogs) in the summer and early fall, so the 3 to 9 works best for me.

The big scope thing is a craze of the times, sort of like the 15 round capacity 9mm handguns of the last few years. Overkill, pure and simple.

Dan

Steiny,
That is also my pet peeve, I believe any scope with larger than a 20 MM obj. lens for big game hunting is a penis envey syndromada. I made that last word up but it sounds good to me if one pronounces it correctly...

I might add that the longer a scope is and the larger the objective lens is the more apt it is to get knocked out of zero...I see that every single year in Africa..

I don't like big objectives because I can't use low rings. If I have to use high rings, then my head is too high and I shoot lousy.

I also do not like it if a big scope throws a gun out of balance.

I have thought about this one often. Buy a nice Rem. M7 in .330 RSAUM & then put a 4-12 somethingoranother scope on it? The largest scope I have on any of my rifles is a Leupold 3x-9x compact. I have only felt I needed more when trying to get a 300 yard shot @ a nice Springbok, they are awfull small! For elk & most deer hunting I think most are served well by any of the trim 3x-9x scoped, but that's why we have so many choices here in the US.

The scope is a sighting device and not for "glassing" and more power does not equate to a better shot,only more tremor and mirage,but then I have seen guys in a whitetail jungle with a moonscope,bipod and 24" barrel-go figure -between madison avenue and "Guns and Baloney" magazines they can sell anything.- Rawhider

Give me a 2-7x tops.

Wait a minute. If I want it in a Leupold compact, I'll have to settle for a gloss finish, because the lowest power compact variable in matte is 3-9x.

(Why can't they make an 8 oz. matte scope in 1.5-6?)

Oh well, I guess there's spray paint....

I would agree wholeheartedly with Steiny apart from the 3-9 bit

Ray kills me with his insistance on 20mm scopes - Ray that's fine but if 42mm is marginal for seeing deer in woodland an hour after darkness then 20mm is not going to cut it.

42mm scopes do not lose zero if mounted well at least not now. They may have done so once but no longer.

I would agree that once a scope gets wider than the rifle it is mounted on then it is out of proportion. A 6x42 is 1.9" at the objective and as such is near identical to the fore end of most sporters beneath it at that point.

It is possible to mount a 6x42 low enought that the limiting factor is the bolt handle on the occular and that my friends is the same size on a 20mm scope as a 42mm one.

I have just never understood why more people don't go for the stronger scopes. I Just bought a new swarovski 4+12+50 and I am already missing the big 20 power that was on my gun.I'll have to say...I like the power!!!

What 500 grains said ditto.
I had a zeiss 3 - 12 X 56 VM a beautiful scope.
Could see deer with it way past legal shooting
time.But could not get it mounted low enough for
me to shoot well.3.5 - 10 VarX3 does it for me,or
straight 4X on my 270 works well too.
Jeff

The 20mm objective is more than adequate if you keep the magnification down to 3X or so. That would still provide a near 7mm exit pupil (20 divided by 3). A 7mm exit pupil is about all the human eye can do anything with, more would not make for a brighter image.

A variable with a 6X top end and 20 mm objective might start darkening up on you, though--at least when compared to a 6 x 42.

Dan

Actually, I'm waiting to see one of those 5lb. 58MM objective 20x Euros mounted in a see through mount. Its bound to work for somebody.

Green 788's right. At 3 power, the 20mm gives just as bright an image as a 42mm, or 50, or even 56mm objective. The extra glass is weight, and dollars (or Euros) wasted, nothing more.

Now, if you actually use the higher magnifications in extremely low-light conditions, then the extra glass might be helpful. But generally, it's a waste.

(I'm assuming of course, that the optics are of equal quality otherwise-- same coatings, etc.)

Pertinax

I think this line of thinking brings up a few errors no one should be making. First, did not everybody learn in hunter safety that a scope is not to be used as binoculars(violates rule #1)
Second the fallacy of power equals accuracy(could be applied to cartridges too) If magnification equals accuracy, how can I hold the 12 inch 10 ring and 6 inch x ring at 600 yards with a post front sight?(Highpower competition) I hear people talk of their long range gun but they have never fired on a 300 yard target,guess what fellas thats what target shooters call short range! And as for light gathering ability, in most places legal shooting hours end at sunset and guys like them make me nervous which is why I carry a flashlight when leaving the woods late. A 4x scope makes a 300 yard target look to be 75 yards away and in the same focus as the crooshairs if you think you need more I got news for you, its your hold not the magnification.

While I admit that super high powered scopes (above say, 12-14 power)sound like a bit much for big game, the other part of the gripe for the poster is a large objective. Stand hunting, where you may have about two or three seconds to make the decision whether this is the animal that you are looking for, or whether this animal is even legal to take in your neck of the woods requires brightness AND magnification. A large objective helps when you are faced with a low light situation as long as you have the power set above about 3X. As others point out, there doesn't seem to be as much difference in the lower powers from a smaller obj. If some say this is using the scope for a spotting scope or binoculars so be it. I would never consider scoping anything but game animals.

Ray you hit the nail on the head!

I think it is related to folks who have bench experience, but not field experience.

It also relates to folks that have no sense of style, I suppose the dress funny as well?

[ 09-27-2002, 01:37: Message edited by: Paul H ]

Well, I have went back and forth on this one. I am in this 30mm kick these days. But still have the 50mm objective scopes from when I was big into them. Basically, its a waste of my time to worry or have a pet peave with what another man does with his weapon. Just too busy to really care what new things are out there. So I usually don't give it a second thought. But I do worry about it on my guns. Right now, I like 3.5X10's and 2X7's. But have to have a 40mm objective on a long range rifle. 20mm on the slugguns and muzzleloaders.

What if your deer are this big?

Depends on your "Legal Shooting Hours" and the way you hunt.

If you ride around in a truck until someone spots the Game for you and it is the middle of the day, no doubt a small Power - small Objective scope might do fine for you.

On the other hand, if your Legal Shooting Hours are from 1 hour prior to Sunrise until 1 hour past Sunset as they are in the SC Lowcountry, then you get the real benefit of the large power, large Objectives with HEAVY Duplex reticles.

So, you can choose the smaller (shall we call them "vagina envey syndromada" to compliment Mr.Rays wording) scopes and come out of the woods before the HUGE WHOPPER TROPHY Bucks begin moving. Or, you can choose a scope that allows you to be able to place clean 1-shot kills under low-light Legal conditions.

Must admit if you have a "poorly designed stock" then the High Mounts needed for the larger Objective scopes can be a problem. However, unless your head is the same size as a 5 year old, High Mounts are not a problem on bolt action Remington and Weatherby synthetic stocks.

If any of you come to the Carolinas to hunt that like the "vagina envey syndromada" style scopes, don't change a thing. Come right on as you are equipped.

Pete, you have to come over here and hunt deer. That thing is the size of my dog. We have some big whitetails north of Wainwright that would make half a dozen of that little fellow. - Dan

I own, and use, several Leupold scopes. Including the 3X20 and the 6X42. The 6X42 has a much brighter twilight image, thanks to it's magnification.
In fact, John Barsness reported that the old Balfor 4X33, a fully multicoated 4X, did not have quite as bright a twilight image, 1/2 hour after sunset, than did the Leupold single coated 2-7X28. E

For big open fields these scopes may be a good idea, but for hunting in bear country they could be a problem.

Just imagine a grizzly bear charging within 30 yards and having a big and powerful scope on the rifle!

I guess this all seems pretty darn easy to me. If you don't like em don't use em.

Now how's about we hear about some stories from the hill instead of all this b.s.

As a friend of mine would say it just doesn't matter, use what you want.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

i have to agree with bigcountry and Mark R Dobrenski, i'm not interested in keeping up with the joneses or criticizing them.

Dan,

Thats a picture I lifted off the Deer-UK site as it gives a good idea of size. Its actually a muntjac, an introduced deer species that are spreading like wildfire over here. Because of their nature, they are very challenging to stalk both most being taken from highseats. The other good thing is that there is no close season on them as the does are permanently pregnent from the age of six months. They are ugly critirs as deer go, but sure do taste good!





If you are trying to take these regularly, stalking in dense woodland right at first and last light, good light gathering performance in a scope is a must. I would say the "average" scope over here for stalking is a 6x42mm 3-9x42mm with a high number being one of the better Euro scopes.

We also have deer sized deer too!







Regards

Pete

[ 09-27-2002, 12:01: Message edited by: Pete E ]

Yeah Pete, those ones in the lower picture look like real deer. After some thought, though, I think a little deer that's always in season would be great stalking practice, and as you say, good eating. I've never heard of a muntjac before, where do they come from originally? Take care and good luck with the little ones. - Dan

last august I went to the museum of natural history in nyc, they had munjac on display with animals from the far east (india, pakistan, etc.)

anyone want to varify if that's correct?

[ 09-28-2002, 03:09: Message edited by: Curtis_Lemay ]

Dan,

Curtis is right......they come from the India and surrounding regions. Also know as Ka-ka or barking deer as they sound just like a terrier barking.....

Pete

Here is a good link: Muntjac

Well, I don't know about easy, 1894. I've helped pack a thousand pound moose out of a swamp that made me (almost) swear off ever hunting them again. But you're right, the little ones are probably harder to get close to, kind of like antelope I guess. I think I'd like to try it though. Where do you guys hunt these muntjacs over there? Private property, crown land, reserves, what? Somehow I've never pictured many hunting opportunities in England, as it's so crowded by Canadian standards. Is it an expensive undertaking? I'm quite curious. Thanks - Dan

Dan,

This is not to the letter of the law, but the general drift is right. There is no free hunting on Crown/State land. We either pay by the day renting from someone who owns the shooting rights or lease the shooting rights for a period. As a visitor you would probably be in contact with a sporting agent/outfitter who would sort you out.

Prices start at say $160Cdn for cull stalking ie Does and none trophey bucks and go up to say $650 per day for red stags on a top Scottish Estate. Trophey fees are be negociation but figure another $1500Cdn for a really good stag. There are no tags or draws to worry about. You could either borrow an Estate rifle or if the agent does a bit of paperwork, yuou can bring your own over.

There are muntjac all over southern England and they are spreading north at a rapid rate.

Where ever you are in the UK, I bet you can find excellent stalking within a 2 hr drive
I can't imagine a Canadian flying over to hunt the UK with all that excellant hunting at home, but if your planning a holiday here anyway or just staging through, our stalking is well worth a look.

I think the prices I quote are in the ball park for commercial stalking, if you can get a contact over here, they should be able to sort you out for considerably less although they may not be able to guarrentee a record book trophey...

regards,

Pete

[ 10-02-2002, 18:19: Message edited by: Pete E ]

I get a touch sensitive about this as muntjac form about 70% of my stalking. They are tremendous fun to stalk and at the end are so easy to deal with provided you can find them. IMHO a dog is essential as they run just the same distance as other deer regardless of calibre and are often shot closer to cover and nearer darkness to boot.

A steady hand, anticipation and controlled speed are the essential ingredients of muntjac stalking. If you get to stalk the bark on foot successfuly you will remember it for the rest of your life!

1894,
Try this take a 3X fixed and a 6-14X of the same brand or any brand however you want to do it, sight them in dead zero at 100...then hit each a good hard wack on the objective lens, then shoot them both again for zero...Sight them both in and drive them around in your truck for a few months and see which one holds its zero best with all things equal...Safari and horse back hunts are telling on a rifle and scope and I see these problems every year in all my hunting camps...

I am not trying to make an arguement, rather offering a warning to those who spend big bucks on a hunt and have it go sour over a change in zero..That is what this forum is about, differences in opinnion, the reader can take his pick of advise. I contend that large scope of today are as guilty of changing zero as they were 50 years ago.....the more scope that protrudes from the front ring, the more likly to go bad.

Pete E,

Speaking of deer in the U.K., these are the ones that I would really like to hunt:

Chinese Water Deer






(see: http://www.deer-uk.com/Deer.htm This is an excellent web site with lots of good information.)

I think it would be a very nice trip to go hunt Muntjac and Chinese Water Deer in the U.K. Even with the firearms hassles I think it would be a very enjoyable and interesting hunt. The Chinese Water Deer would sure make an interesting and unusual trophy to have on the wall! Maybe some day I'll get to do it. Just my two cents....

-Bob F.

[ 10-07-2002, 22:16: Message edited by: BFaucett ]

I'm probably a little different them most of the rest of you. I don't make any effort to "blend in",and look like the rest of the crowd. I don't care to have a rifle and scope that is most popular.
For the same reason,I don't care what you are using to hunt with. Very often I see shooters with expensive gun/scope combinations that just turned me off. I would'nt hunt with a rig like that,even if it were given to me. I still would not make any critical remark,because the owner MAY have a good reason for using it.
I personally do not like Big scopes.The first thing that I did to my new Winchester "94 Carbine,was to replace the Bushnell 2x-7x big bell with a Loophole 1x-4x vagina envy syndromeda.
This is America;we can do whatever we want to,even if it appears a mite silly to some others.
Just Opinion,
Frank