Gentlemen,

My recent scope disaster has got me thinking and as always I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

I now finally have more than one serious hunting rifle and so I can begin to think about specialising different rifles to better suit different jobs.

I have a varmint weight but quite manageable SS 308 for sitting in highseats with, which is also ideally suited to longer range use and foxing with the right load and moderator.

The 30.06, my beloved trusty rusty, will no longer be coming up the highseats with me as I can't stand dinging her stock on a poxy rail every other time as I get in the seat and then watching her rust in perennial drizzle.

I have decided that she has a higher calling as a large game stalking rifle for trips abroad and traditional stalking over here.

With that in mind her duties will range from longrange culling to bush hunting in Africa, through driven boar in mitteleuropa to big nasty things in the Russian wilderness.

With that in mind, and with half an eye to the future What would you say is the best choice for a rifle such as this in terms of optics a 7x50, a 8x56 or a 1.7-10x42?

Will be buying either Zeiss or Swaro as I hope it to be a long term investment.

With thanks,

Amir

I was looking at a 1.7-10x42 when they first came out and was very suprised to see how much they varied in quality, I was inside a very large sporting goods shop (all right it was Cabela's) and I was looking at the various mounts with different scopes -- poor light conditions but at least the mounts weren't moving. I looked thru at least a dozen of this power with various reticles and there were only 2 or 3 that I would have purchased -- the rest either had focus problems or were slightly off-color.

On the other hand everyone one of the 1-6x24 Swarovski scopes were superb --- even better than the 2 or 3 of the 1.7-10x42 that I thought were good. I purchased a 1-6x24mm with the illuminated Battue reticle and just love it.

Of course I have just looked thru a bunch of scopes that were off-spec as it was a very small sample size.

Amir.
I have the Zeiss Victory, 2,5-10x50 on my 308 Win.

This is a light and exellent combination size, and it will cover the use you mentioned for your beloved trusty.

The 2,5 work ok in thighter spots, the 10 is more than ample for longer shots, and the 50 mm front lense take care of dusk and dawn.
Still it is not as big as become cumbersome on a working rifle.

I only regret that I did not buy it with an illuminated reticle.

I only recommend what I have used myself, and this scope I can stand by!

Amir,

Why not have a look at the new Schmidt & Bender 1-8x24.

Up on 8 power will cover longrange culling and turned down a bit will cover bush hunting in Africa, whilst down at the lowest mag will be great for driven boar in mitteleuropa to big nasty things in the Russian wilderness.

And all in a single scope too.

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
I have the Zeiss Victory, 2,5-10x50 on my 308 Win.

The Zeiss 2.5-10x50 also happens to be a personal favorite of mine. It really covers an awful lot of ground - from driven hunting over long range sniping to low light situations (given the right reticle).

A variable scope will provide a lot more flexibility to meet the requirements of widely different hunts.

If there is any chance that you might want to take your rifle to Central Europe for a bit of low light pig hunting, consider the option of a 50-56 mm objective lens with a reticle like a German #4 (unless you feel rich and want to splash out on an illuminated reticle - an expensive option!).

If there is any chance you might need the scope for driven hunts, a low range magnification of 1.5-2.5 is very useful.

- mike

Amir, fixed power scopes are fine for stalking under predictable conditions, but for a rifle/scope to be as versatile as you state, the scope needs to be a variable. With due respect to the lads above, you also need more than a 24mm objective lens.

The Z6 1.7-10x42 is a really nice scope, but I find the reticules a bit fine for instinctive shooting. If it had the older style 4a ret, it would be perfect. If you go for this scope, you really need the Ill Ret which is fantastic but damn ugly.

The other option is to look out for a PV in 1.5-6x42 or 2.5-10x42, you can buy them for the right price. I have the 2.5-10 on my 30/06, I think it is just about perfect for this rifle. Personally I find the higher mag is more useful than the really low end. 2.5x is good enough for driven Boar.

Hi Amir,

definetly the Z6 1,7-10x42 as You have the the most versatile one...

QAnother option may be the Z4i 3-12x50 as an alternative for a bit more light gathering for the dark side of the night (pig hunting in my case), which is also a bit chaeper then the 1,7-10x42 - but has also a very high quality optic!

Klaus

I just found a Swarovski PF 8x50 with an illumination module which I will put on my new rifle - similar concept to your .308. Out to 250yds or so, I came to the conclusion that I don't need a variable on a deer rifle.

I also have a 2.5-10x50 Z6i which is a beautiful scope, but if I were to buy another variable it will most likely be a March-F for a specific longer range rifle.

What Scubapro said.

I have a couple of Z6's with IR and although there is no faulting their quality I'm finding that the gun mounting has to be just so to get the eye relief right on it on the highest magnifications. Of course this might just be user error.

However the Z4i and the Z3's look like great value scopes by comparison and I'm sure should come in a bit lighter too which is handy when lugging it about all over the place.

I also agree with Brian thatthe 24mm objective lenses are only really worth haveing on a dedicated close range(or purely daylight) rifle for Africa, or driven boar. They really are a specialist tool.

What's the odds on the 30-06 going up a highseat by the end of the year?

K

quote:

Originally posted by DB Bill:
I was looking at a 1.7-10x42 when they first came out and was very suprised to see how much they varied in quality, I was inside a very large sporting goods shop (all right it was Cabela's) and I was looking at the various mounts with different scopes -- poor light conditions but at least the mounts weren't moving. I looked thru at least a dozen of this power with various reticles and there were only 2 or 3 that I would have purchased -- the rest either had focus problems or were slightly off-color.

On the other hand everyone one of the 1-6x24 Swarovski scopes were superb --- even better than the 2 or 3 of the 1.7-10x42 that I thought were good. I purchased a 1-6x24mm with the illuminated Battue reticle and just love it.

Of course I have just looked thru a bunch of scopes that were off-spec as it was a very small sample size.

Thanks Bill, the one i've looked through looked pretty good, comparable to other swaro scope of that objective size I've looked through.

I hear you on the 1-6x24 scope but worry about the low light performance with an objective that small.

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
Amir.
I have the Zeiss Victory, 2,5-10x50 on my 308 Win.

This is a light and exellent combination size, and it will cover the use you mentioned for your beloved trusty.

The 2,5 work ok in thighter spots, the 10 is more than ample for longer shots, and the 50 mm front lense take care of dusk and dawn.
Still it is not as big as become cumbersome on a working rifle.

I only regret that I did not buy it with an illuminated reticle.

I only recommend what I have used myself, and this scope I can stand by!

Much obliged as ever Arlid, thank you for detailed reply.

I was worried that 50mm objective would be toobug/heavy for the purpose I had in mind but if you say it's ok i'll take a serious look at it. This is the model 7 synthetic right?

That magnification range sounds just about spot on too.

Out of interest what do you have on the 35 whelen?

Best,

Amir

quote:

Originally posted by DJM:
Amir,

Why not have a look at the new Schmidt & Bender 1-8x24.

Up on 8 power will cover longrange culling and turned down a bit will cover bush hunting in Africa, whilst down at the lowest mag will be great for driven boar in mitteleuropa to big nasty things in the Russian wilderness.

And all in a single scope too.

Looks good Dave but as in my reply to Bill, what's it like in low light?

I would still be taking it out on those fine autumn and spring days when I'll be walking rather than sitting.

Otherwise I like the idea these small scopes very much.

quote:

Originally posted by mho:

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
I have the Zeiss Victory, 2,5-10x50 on my 308 Win.

The Zeiss 2.5-10x50 also happens to be a personal favorite of mine. It really covers an awful lot of ground - from driven hunting over long range sniping to low light situations (given the right reticle).

A variable scope will provide a lot more flexibility to meet the requirements of widely different hunts.

If there is any chance that you might want to take your rifle to Central Europe for a bit of low light pig hunting, consider the option of a 50-56 mm objective lens with a reticle like a German #4 (unless you feel rich and want to splash out on an illuminated reticle - an expensive option!).

If there is any chance you might need the scope for driven hunts, a low range magnification of 1.5-2.5 is very useful.

- mike

Thanks Mike, I appreciate your advice on the boar hunting.

I think an illuminated reticle is sounding like a good idea, even if only for versatility if I don't use it very often.

I shall have to look into the reticule designs and see what looks like the best compromise between day time longish range shooting and close, fast and dark stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by Claret_Dabbler:
Amir, fixed power scopes are fine for stalking under predictable conditions, but for a rifle/scope to be as versatile as you state, the scope needs to be a variable. With due respect to the lads above, you also need more than a 24mm objective lens.

The Z6 1.7-10x42 is a really nice scope, but I find the reticules a bit fine for instinctive shooting. If it had the older style 4a ret, it would be perfect. If you go for this scope, you really need the Ill Ret which is fantastic but damn ugly.

The other option is to look out for a PV in 1.5-6x42 or 2.5-10x42, you can buy them for the right price. I have the 2.5-10 on my 30/06, I think it is just about perfect for this rifle. Personally I find the higher mag is more useful than the really low end. 2.5x is good enough for driven Boar.

Cheers Bri, your thoughts run comfortingly parallel to mine.

The idea behind your 30.06 was not dissimilar to that above, no?

quote:

Originally posted by scubapro:
Hi Amir,

definetly the Z6 1,7-10x42 as You have the the most versatile one...

QAnother option may be the Z4i 3-12x50 as an alternative for a bit more light gathering for the dark side of the night (pig hunting in my case), which is also a bit chaeper then the 1,7-10x42 - but has also a very high quality optic!

Klaus

Tahnks Klaus, that's a good option and a bit cheaper to boot!

quote:

Originally posted by JabaliHunter:
I just found a Swarovski PF 8x50 with an illumination module which I will put on my new rifle - similar concept to your .308. Out to 250yds or so, I came to the conclusion that I don't need a variable on a deer rifle.

I also have a 2.5-10x50 Z6i which is a beautiful scope, but if I were to buy another variable it will most likely be a March-F for a specific longer range rifle.

Thanks mate, I'm tending towards a variable for this .06 with the input so far.

That 2.5-10mag range is making more sense the more I think about it too.

quote:

Originally posted by Fallow Buck:
What Scubapro said.

I have a couple of Z6's with IR and although there is no faulting their quality I'm finding that the gun mounting has to be just so to get the eye relief right on it on the highest magnifications. Of course this might just be user error.

However the Z4i and the Z3's look like great value scopes by comparison and I'm sure should come in a bit lighter too which is handy when lugging it about all over the place.

I also agree with Brian thatthe 24mm objective lenses are only really worth haveing on a dedicated close range(or purely daylight) rifle for Africa, or driven boar. They really are a specialist tool.

What's the odds on the 30-06 going up a highseat by the end of the year?

K

Cheers bud, i'll give you and trade account of yours a shout when I've gathered the readies. It looks like a toss up between the Zeiss 2.5-10x50 or the Swaro 1.7-10-42 at the moment. I'll have to look through a couple and see.

The chances are good if I can borrow a scope and get it mounted and zeroed tomorrow. 100 yards in the morning and 200 in the afternoon but this is flexible. Usual place, come along if you can make it.

A small request if I may, just not in Luns meadow....

One of the (many) things you can also consider is the size of the scope you intend to mount. Apart from objective bell size, size wise there can be quite a bit of difference between two scopes of different manufacture both with 50mm objective lenses, say.

Case in point, I'm the happy owner of various Zeiss (Victory and Classic series) 2.5-10x50 as well as some Swaro (PV) 3-12x50. The Zeiss "Victory" is slightly shorter than the "Classic", and both are considerably shorter than the Swaro PV. The Zeiss scopes are actually surprisingly compact for scopes with good low light performance.

I have not looked at or handled every scope on the planet, so only you can say what scope will fit your bill.

As Brian pointed out, reticle design is another really important issue. A friend of mine proudly showed up at the range last week with a brand new Leica scope, which he apparently picked up for a song and a dance (relatively speaking) in the UK. It looked like it had superb optics from the brief look I had through it. My friend was intending to use it as a hunting scope, but he had not noticed the scope came with fine cross-hairs, in fact so fine I don't think they would even be ideal on a hunt in full daylight stalking the Scottish heather. Just too easy to loose a reticle like that - not to speak of what happens when the light fades. These days, illuminated reticles can compensate for some of that. I personally like my reticles to work, even in the event that illumination fails (battery dead, technical problem - you name it). A good, simple reticle design is what I personally want: heavy outer and thin inner cross-hairs to allow a reasonable compromise between low light use, fast pick-up and ability to shoot (sight) accurately.

- mike

Amir,

If you used 7x50 before and were happy with the scope go for either Zeiss 7x50 illuminated or if you have sentiment for Meopta go for Meostar 7x56 choice of illuminated or not and better quality than previous Artemis series.

Regards,
Greg

if i understand.i have found in deer hunting that i may be stalking or set up in a hide waiting for them at a distance.i like the 4.5 to 14 50mm obj.if the game is under a 100 yards or less i can zoom back the power for better field of view.if i need to glass around at long range i can zoom up to 14 power.but i set my range card and make my long range shots at 10 power.as for brand of scope.how much you can spend

Hi Ghubert,

I agree on a Zeiss Victory 2,5-10x50 as a prime candidate for a long term investment. Another scope you should consider is the superb Kahles Helia C 2,5-10x50. As good as the Z Victory and less expensive. One of the hidden quality scopes!

Good luck!

PH

Think about how low you want the scope to be mounted on your rifle.

I have both a 1.7-10x42 Z6i and a Kahles 3-12x50 34mm diameter tube 'sniper' scope being mounted and currently installed on rifles. Due to the 50mm objective lens, the scope has to be mounted quite high.

Since it is on a rifle which I hope to use in sniper type shooting competitions at Bisley this is not so great a hindrance.

I looked at a 2.5 - 10?x50 Z6i before choosing the 1.7-10 x42 Z6i. The latter can be mounted significantly lower and, in my opinion is more versatlie - stalking & driven game.

If you are set upon higher magnification, I would suggest the 2.5?-14? x44 Z6i with side turret parallax adjustment. If you want to shot way out there, this last feature will help you.

Also, while a being a fairly long scope, so it will be a bit easier to mount on the rifle, it is still capable of being mounted fairly low due to its' not excessively big objective lens.

Amir.
The 2,5-10x50 sits on a lightweight Kimber Montana and is actually a very handy rig.
Reticle is german #4

On my dedicated red deer rifle, The Ugly Betty in 35 Whelen, I have a Zeiss Victory 3-12x58 with the illuminated # 40 (I think it is).
This rifle see a lot of low light use as well as on moonlit night over frozen or snow covered fields.
loaded with 250 grn Woodleigh RN it usually flatten them with very little loss of meat.

Another scope that I had on my 375 Ruger in Namibia recently, was the Zeiss Duralyt in 2-8x42. It is also a lot of scope for the money, and perfomed very well.

I also recommend the Zeiss victory 2.5-10x42 with a 30mm tube and #8 reticle. It has a number of advantages.

1) It can be mounted low with the 42mm lens and not upset the rifles balance.
2) It has a front focal plane reticle which means no chance of POI change as you vary magnification.
3) You can turn it down to 6x and still have max exit pupil at low light with the 42 objective. With the higher 50mm obj. you will however get to 7x.
4) The #8 reticle allows fine shot placement with the fine inner wires but also allows shooting after dark with the thick wider posts bracketing the target.

My son used this scope on his .243 in Africa and took two bushpig at 40 metres on dusk set on 4x. We could not see the animals with the naked eys but when I looked they were clear and distinct through that scope.

I had to bribe him to get it off him and now it is on my 7x57.

Thanks for the advice guys.

I'm going to borrow a zeiss Diatal 7x50, as an example of a very good 7-50, to get me out of a fix and to see if it's much better than the Meopta.

I'll then take some time and look in to the variables. I like Arlid's suggestion down to the reticle as well but code4 has made me remember why I considered the 42mm objective scope in the first place.

Hmmmm, have to think about this, thank you everyone for your help.

Best,

Amir

Amir, if the 42mm seems more to your taste, have a close look at the Zeiss Duralyt, 2-8x42.

As I said, I have one on my 375 Ruger wich got a rough test in Namibia recently and came out with flying colors.


This is a budget model from Carl Zeiss and come only with the #6 reticle, or #6 illuminated.
Glass quality seems to be very good.
It is a good alternative to the Euro brands old stand by, the 1,5-6x42

quote:

Originally posted by Arild Iversen:
Amir, if the 42mm seems more to your taste, have a close look at the Zeiss Duralyt, 2-8x42.

Arild,

don´t understand me wrong, but I have had a closer look at the Duralyts on the IWA show: they have not a good image: brutal unsharp on the rim! Nothing serious to look at!

Sorry,
Klaus

For me the do it all scope for big game hunting is 1.5-6x42. I have such a scope on my 06 and find it excellent. 1.5 for moving game, 4 for walking and 6 if it's a long way away.

Klaus.
Due to the fact that I have had Cataract operation on both my eyes, I should probably stay away from giving advises regarding optical devices

With this my handicap, I still belive that for the money, the Duralyt is an ok scope in its class.

I agree to a sertain degree that the edges are a bit blurred, but for this old mans eyes, I found it to be more than good enough for day time hunting, which this scope is used for.
Actually, I did not pay any attention to the edges at all, only to the beast in the middle of the crosshairs

As I said, I used it in Namibia taking seven animals, and I found it to be a very usable scope.
The 2 worked all right in dense brush, and the 8 was spot on on my longest shot, the black wildebeest at 170 meters.

For low lite / night use, I have my two Zeiss Victorys, which are in an other division by far.


1894mk2.
I wholehartly agree with you that the 1,5-6x42 in a quality scope is a great configuration.
For general big game stalking, probably the best there is.

Ok so.......

A man made me an offer I couldn't refuse on a Zeiss diatal 7x50 IR and it followed me home.

I look forward to the coming season now!

Thank you for all of your help gentlemen, I think the direction I'm taking is to keep this rifle deliberately as general as possible and investigate other rifles for other specialised uses.

I had an interesting scenario last week that got me thinking about scopes.

On most variable people tend to focus more on the top end magnification than the lower end.

I was stalking with a client last week who had a 3-12 Swaro on the rifle. In the space of 150metres we got into two lots of deer (coming into us from different directions, and the client could not find the deer in the scope. The first pair of bucks were at about five yards and the second deer nearly walked into us as we leant on the tree. Each time no shot was taken as fast target acquisition was needed and it didn't happen. Later in the woods we had a couple more opportunities at bucks and prickets in foliage. Again they were travelling deer and the client couldn't get them in the scope.

At the end of the day I realised that the scope was set on the x12 setting. I'm sure that if they had stalked with the scope on x6-7 we would have had at least one more deer in the chiller.

Variables are great but you either need to have the restraint to not fiddle (with the scope...)or otherwise they can be a pain.

K

Kiri, anyone stalking with the scope set on 12x is going to struggle, they likely have little experience and could not bring the rifle into action quickly and with confidence in any case.

To be honest I have little real use for the very low end, below 4 or 5x, and no use at all for anything over 12x.

I tend to keep my variable on the 260 at about 7x and the 22/250 at 8 or 9x for the vast majority of the time.

We are back to where we started, a good 6, 7 or 8x fixed will do 99% of what we are ever likely to need.

Anyone want to buy a Z6i??

It's at times like this I'm glad I had the good sense to shut up and listen to the fine folk on the forum when looking for my first rifle/scope combo.

I've only really used a variable in anger on a .22 and I must confess it was as you guys say a faff. IMO and contrary to popular belief one doesn't always have the time to wind it up for long range shots and to leave it on high power when walking is folly for the reasons given above.

With a fixed seven power I have shot all manner of things large and small from less than ten yards to over four hundred. I have also shot targets with it fairly successfully out past 600 yards.

The more I play with various scopes the more I am coming to the conclusion that glass quality, mechanical integrity, and reticule design are the most important factors.

The Zeiss has a thicker, illuminated crosshair on the number four principle, how I get on with this compared to the much thinner, non-illuminated ballistic reticule of the Meopta remains to be seen.

A recent load development session seems to indicate that shooting small groups is harder with this scope than with the Meopta, possibly because of the the thickness of the reticule making hard to draw a fine bead on my habitual targets. I seem to be able to hold about a three quarters of an inch at best, the thing is I know the rifle and loads are capable of better.

For hunting however, I imagine it should be more than precise enough and this is the rifle's primary use after all.

Yes Brian,

The stalker was a novice and actually didn't realise it was on that setting. My bad as I didn't notice it before, but it is a lesson learnt.

Personally I am a fan of the variables and I use mine right upto 18 power in the right scenario.

I'm leaving this afternoon on a last minute Kudu hunt/cull. so it will be interesting to see how the scope works in the thick bush we are hunting. Of course the 260 is in the box ready to go!!

K