The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Leupold vs Minox for 375 H&HGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| one of us |
Karoo, Elmer Fudd here. I did notice that Mark H. Young did at least mention a "1.75-6X" as a minimum for our friend Mr. Magoo. I own one old Leupold Vari-X III "1.75-6X36mm ER," as mine was designated. "ER" for "Extended Reach?" I guess they added this "Extended Tube" version after their initial 1.75-6x36mm was too short to work on long-action rifles. The ER version is indeed long enough to fit a CZ 550 Magnum without requiring extension rings. So is the standard Leupold Var-X III 2.5-8X36mm, just barely. I have collected 7 of those. I prefer the 2.5-8X over the 1.75-6X. Maybe I was further enamored of them by seeing Saeed's success with that scope. I use the 1.75-6x as a backup to the 2.5-8X. My 1.75-6X has a Heavy Duplex reticle, so I have to zero it to hit at the right upper corner of where the heavy crosshairs cross, so I can still see the target. The Heavy Duplex covers up a lot of target. A German 4 or a Standard Duplex is more to my liking. They don't hide the target so much. Neither does a Nikon BDC reticle, another favorite. Since 416Tanzan introduced me to the Nikon 3-9x40mm SlugHunter (75-yard Parallax) and InLine (same scope but 100-yard parallax), both with BDC reticles, I have bought nothing but Nikons. Those are very affordable and tough scopes with adequate optics, even Mr. Magoo gets by with them. Amazing value. My first SlugHunter has over 400 rounds of .458 Win. Mag. on it, no problems ... except it is short and requires extension rings/bases on a long action. At least it is lighter for being shorter. Not too bad a strain on the mounts with a .458 Win. Mag. We need an "ER" version of the Nikon SlugHunter and InLine, like Leupold did with the 1.75-6X.  Rip ... | |||
|
One of Us |
Thanks for the explanation, RIP. My 1.75-6 has been on my 270 for almost twenty years and I am considering putting it onto my 375. I also have a 2.5-8 on a 338 Win but no experience with Nikons. | |||
|
| one of us |
I shot my biggest leopard in the very last bit of light using the 1.75x6 Leupold on a 375. Worked perfect. I also had a Kahles 1.5x6x42 if I remember correctly and it was really great in low light. I just think the 1" straight tube is not the way to go on the versatile 375. Mark MARK H. YOUNG MARK'S EXCLUSIVE ADVENTURES 7094 Oakleigh Dr. Las Vegas, NV 89110 Office 702-848-1693 Cell, Whats App, Signal 307-250-1156 PREFERRED E-mail markttc@msn.com Website: myexclusiveadventures.com Skype: markhyhunter Check us out on https://www.facebook.com/pages...ures/627027353990716 | |||
|
| One of Us |
That scope is just about perfect for low-light hunting. Congrats! All The Best ... | |||
|
One of Us |
So, you wear brown jackets and use 12x binos when hunting sambar? I'll try to watch out for you! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Just as demonstrated in the Australian gun laws thread, reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it? Formerly Gun Barrel Ecologist | |||
|
| One of Us |
Not sure about that, GBE, but I suspect civility is not yours. I was making a little joke. Your countenancing 12x binos and brown coats in sambar hunting suggested you don't see such things as completely ridiculous - hence that you might use them yourself. | |||
|
One of Us |
Swarovski make a 1” tubed 1,7-10x42 scope with a variety of reticles. That to my mind is a near perfect allrounder. Doug at Cameralandnyc.com has these for sale. Having said that my 375 wears a Zeiss Diavari 3-9x36,the old one. | |||
|
| One of Us |
While my 375's top out with 30mm tubed, 1.5-6x42mm's, I would have no issue with larger magnification coupled with substantial field of view. All depends on purpose. I am a fan of straight tubed 30mm scopes in the 1-4, 1-6 type power range and have several. But to my eyes, the 42mm objectives have a noticeable advantage in lower light. The Leupold 1.5-5x20mm is often touted as the ideal. Interestingly, there are several 42mm objective scopes with the 1.5 to 2x low end and 6-10x on the high end, that have as much or more field of view than that particular Leupold. And most offer considerably more light transmission when in the low light.
| |||
|
| One of Us |
Amendment on my last post: After much deliberation, I just replaced a 1.5-6x42 with a 1.5-8x42 on a 375 Ruger. I think that I am going to like this combination. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hopefully your 1.5-8x will have the guts to get you through, Idmay. My resolve about high-multiple variables is that I suspect they might be more vulnerable to recoil than conventional ranges. Why? Because that powering up to higher multiples probably requires lenses to extend farther forward, cf camera zooms. This, it seems, means the erector tube has to be longer, with many now extending well beyond the turrets. This longer tube suggests greater mass to be thrown around under recoil inertia, leveraged against the spring, scraped and banged against the turret screws and pulled at the gimbal. The 375 magnum may not kick like a 458 Lott but, over time, it may have enough to give trouble. | |||
|
One of Us |
Nikon seems to have solved the heavy recoil problem. And they offer 5" eye-relief in the Inline muzzleloader model and the Slughunter model. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I took a custom made 416 Rem to Africa about 5 years ago.Not a 375 but I loaded it with 370 gr bullets to similar in trajectory. I took two scopes for the rifle. A VX3 !.5 X 5 and a VX 6 2X12X42. Both were sighted in on the rifle in Talley detachable mounts. I never took the VX 6 off the rifle. Shot Zebra, bush pig, Kudu and waterbuck with the 416. It was also a backup for my double rifle I used for buffalo. I took a running away shot on a kudu through the mopane at close to 250 yds that would have been very difficult with the 1.5 x 5. Flattened the kudu and shot clean through him hip to brisket, What ever choice you make it will be a good one. There are a lot of good scopes out there these days. The 2.5 X 8 is an excellent choice. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I hope so also. I definitely like the field of view this scope has, and the power range. I agree the 375 Ruger is definitely not a 458 Lott in the recoil department. I suspect that it will do fine. But time will tell.
| |||
|
| Administrator |
Leupold 2.5-8 is perfect for ac375. That is what I have been using for donkey’s years. We tried this against a Nightforce scope after sun down, if anything, several of us thought we could see better with the Leupold. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I "normally" like straight 30mm tubed 1.1-4's on my 416's. The areas I hunt moose in, a 200 yd shoot opportunity would be extremely rare. A 25 to about 100 yds the norm. I did use a 1.5-6x42 one year on a 416 Ruger. It definitely refreshed my memory on the better light transmission of 42's over 24's and the advantage of a bit more power when it is getting dark in the timber. The larger objective and a couple of more X's definitely provides more detail. With that said, I put a 1.1-4x24mm back on this particular rifle for my intended purposes. But, have no issue putting a larger scope on it to fit the circumstances.
| |||
|
| One of Us |
| |||
|
| one of us |
Only problem is Leupold no longer have them for sale ! As they do with many others in their line up ! just looked it up on their website ! Life was simple and perfect when Leupold's top offering was the VX III and everything ended in 1.5 to 5 ! At this time personally I stand confused when it comes to scope choices. There are a huge number of brands and apparent levels of quality of scopes out there today ! Even within old name brands ranges so that one does not know what and what not will work. The "top line" offerings in each brand more than often end up costing 2 or even 3 times what the rifle costs that you want to mount it on ! To pay $3000 for a scope to mount on a $1000 gun seems excessive. One of the importers just listed their available S&B range in a local gun rag and the top line "sniper" scopes sell for can $ 6000 and cents  | |||
|
| Administrator |
I am glad I have a few of these 2.5-8 Leupold in my stock!  | |||
|
One of Us |
Great to see everyone's choices and opinions. I have a couple .375's and they have Leupold 2.5-8 scopes on them, a 9.3x62 with a 2.5-8 and a 400 Whelen with a 2-7 VXII. For me these are about perfect for all useful distances for these rifles, light gathering and low power close range target acquisition. Very happy with these choices. People seem to forget or not be aware that a .375 H&H has a similar trajectory to a 30/06 or .280 or .338 Win Mag and I find it curious that some would use a larger power scope on those rifles and a very limiting low power scope on a .375 | |||
|
| one of us |
Higher power does not make a hunting rifle better, a scope in itself is a magnifier of sorts makes a target bigger, but what good is that unless your counting ticks...You can easily put a cross hair on any animal with low or high power scopes and make a kill, you have about 12 inches of target and lots of body mass, it just makes no since to have a big ugly high powder scope that bounces all over hell from your heart beat..You can't see that in a 4X fixed..Lots of salesmanship has produced a generation of suckers!  Want your shooting to improve use a 3 or 4X so you don't have to grab at the target when your heart runs the x across the target into Lubbuck Tex.Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| one of us |
Twice hit intervening brush situated close to a whitetail. Both times was using low-magnification scopes. Find the higher power end of variables better enables me to to detect obstructions, so to adjust hold. I can think of a couple solid indications for low fixed or variable magnifications - dangerous or running game. But neither are on my menu. Some lack confidence pointing/locating animals at higher magnification settings. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, maintaining binocular vision mitigates against that objection. And those who wing/clays shoot are more likely to use binocular vision as a matter of habit and, I suspect, are more likely able to accurately point a stationary animal at higher magnifications. There is no right or wrong to this; we do what our confidence allows, and we do what we feel most ethical given the conditions in which we hunt. Deer get into some pretty thick cover here in Maine, but higher magnification is more friend than foe for reasons already mentioned. Have a couple VX3 2.5-8s. A VX3 3.5-10 x 50 sits on my .375 Ruger. Like it just fine. A fixed 6x would work as well, though. I say that because my variables are usually set right at, not below, 6x - here and on the occasions I've traveled west. | |||
|
| One of Us |
That matter of seeing intervening twigs can work both ways. If the the twig is closer to the rifle, a low-power scope is more likely to see it than the big one, which will possibly not show it except maybe as a blur - and the closer one is more likely to throw your bullet seriously off line. Another advantage of low power is, if you miss, the wider field of view is more likely to show any rising dust from the recoiled position. | |||
|
| one of us |
You're right on both counts. In fact, missed a deer 3 shots due to a branch right under my nose. Finally figured it out and connected. Did I feel silly. Not as silly as an old friend who twice (yup) shot the roof of his Blazer with .22 CFs. Something to be said for taller bipod legs. That was before I made it a habit to keep both eyes open. Using magnification, both eyes open, no need to compromise. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, SH, keeping eyes open is important. This is why I think our first concern should be good natural or corrected vision. Relying on the scope to make up for dodgy eyesight is a recipe for disaster. | |||
|
| Administrator |
We get to see scopes from every conceivable manufacturer here. Some of the better German made ones are great, but way over complicated. Still, my personal favorite is still Leupold! | |||
|
| One of Us |
The 30mm tube offers no advantage for your purposes. My reticle preference would be strongly for the German 3P #4. Good hunting! | |||
|
One of Us |
Not on a .375 but I have a Leupold VXR 1x4 on my 9.3x62 I bought last year. A few weeks back I did a baited black bear hunt in Alberta. I was after a very smart bear that so far as eluded hunters for the last six years. So we moved the stand from 30 yards (Bowhunting range) to 90 yards in an attempt to fool him. A couple bears came in, neither being the one I wanted. Looking through my scope down the narrow shooting lane and the slightly darker forest I had a little trouble seeing as clearly as I would like to make a shot if I had to. After that I'm now thinking about putting a 2.5x8 Leupold which I have on other rifles on this gun to make similar shots a bit easier. I was a little surprised at how uneasy I felt looking through the 1x4 scope. It should have been a pretty easy shot at 90 yards but looking down the narrow shooting lane and the light difference between where I sat and the darker forest made me think a little more magnification at times isn't a bad thing. Maybe I'm a sucker according to Ray but there's more scope choice when the light and terrain varies between the shooter and the target in the real world. Roger ___________________________ I'm a trophy hunter - until something better comes along. *we band of 45-70ers* | |||
|
| One of Us |
Wary as I am of big powers and objectives, Cougarz, you are right in thinking they help in poor light. This assumes the concept of twilight values - the square root of (objective lens diameter in mm X magnification) - has value. At best such formulas, which suggest we have square eyes and lenses, are rules of thumb. It is interesting, though, that this formula assigns magnification unexpected utility in poor light, even when the exit pupil has shrunk below optimal size for extreme conditions. For instance, compare a classic European 4x36 with a modern 1-6x24 variable. The first scope has an exit pupil of 9mm (more than most people can use) and a relative luminosity of 81; the small-objective variable, wound up to 6x, has an exit pupil of only 4mm and a puny luminosity of 16. Their twilight values, however, are the same: 12. So, if you want a small scope, less prone to damage, but with marginal utility in poor light, a variable like that may be the answer. (I'll reserve my dislike of high multiples for another day  ) | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Leupold vs Minox for 375 H&H
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
