Hi all, after reading all the posts on 22 Hornets I had to add my 2 cents worth. I too like the little hornet, I have a Ruger 77/22, and a matching 77/22H. Still playing with loads, looks like 13 grs Lil Gun, Hornady 40 gr Vmax is hard to beat.
I would like to hear what scopes you hornet guys like, I have a 3-9 Tasco on mine- but feel I need more top end to see small stuff with. however I hate to screw up the overall size ( small and neat) of the Ruger. BTW I'm 69 and can't seem to see as well as I use to in shooting,
Richard TX

Forgot to add, my Ruger 77/22H magazine will accept 1.800 length cartridges ! I don't follow magazine alteration in othr posts ??
Richard TX

I have read that some mount their scopes backwards on .22 Hornet rifles. This is so one will think they are hunting at long range.

Both the wife and I have Bushnell Sportsview
4x12-OA scopes on our 223's and I have the same on my Ruger 77/22-Hornet. They tell me it has either been discontinued or they chaanged the name. I am far sighted. It focuses to 15 feet and cost about $90.00.
My load is 9.7 grains of 2400.

My 22 Hornet is a Kimber, and I have an older Redfield 2-7 mounted on it. My eyes don't work so well either, but so far, that's lots of scope for the calibers. When my eyes get worse, I plan a Leoupold or Burris compact in a higher magnification range. You're right, a big scope on a little rifle just looks out of place. - Dan

I have a 6X18 Bushnell on both of my .22 Hornets. They did appear to be overkill, until I discovered that with a larger scope you can observe the bullet's impact on crows and groundhogs out to about 150 yards.

Kind of sweet to watch a 40 grain Hornaday V-Max smack a crow center mass from 100 yards out.

Unfortunately the heavy recoil produced by the typical Hornet limits scope choices....

I have a Leupold 3.5x10-40mm on my Model 70. It looks good on it 'cause there isn't anything dainty about the old 70.

I think 10x is all I need at typical Hornet ranges.

Long live Lil' Gun!

Tim

Brighten the corner where you are

Barberx: I don't think you really need anything more than 9x to see anything within the Hornet's range. That said, you could probably see a lot better with a Leupold or other quality scope make set at 4x than with your Tasco at 9x. My suggestion would be to look at the Leupold Compact line and try either the 2-7x or 3-9X. They make a nice match for the trim little 77/22 and will be somewhat smaller and lighter than your current Tasco.

P. S. There are probably some other good compact scopes available besides the Leupold, but I'm just not familiar with them. I think the Burris line has fairly clear optics, but friends who have had the Burris Compacts complain of extra-critical eye relief and eye placement, making them slow to acquire the sight picture and a bit frustrating to use.

My Hornets in the Ruger 77/22H and No. 1B both carry Leupold Vari-X II 4-12 AO scopes. It is the perfect scope for both rifles, but physical size is a tad too big for the 77/22H, but not too much by my likes. The AO really isn't necessary, but I like it too...I'm kinda wacky that way.

Stonecreek's observation is excellent for the Leupold 3-9 compact. That would work very well on the little Ruger.

I like the higher magnification of the 4-12 because I shoot a lot of chizzlers. They are about 1/3 the size of a prairie dog, and at 200 yards, they are hard to see...even at 12X.

I shoot targets, a CZ Hornet, a Ruger77/22VHZ (on its way to becoming a .19 Calhoon), and a .17 Remington (Remington 700 classic). I don't mind screwing up the size of the rifle for being able to see real well.
I have 2 Weaver V-24's, and a Nikon Monarch 6.5 X 20.
The Nikon's OK, but not quite enough magnification for the little .17 bullets. It's just fine for the .22 calibers, though.
The Weaver's are just GREAT, and I sort of regret spending the extra money to "try out" the Nikon. The Nikon cost about $100 more than the Weavers did.
I like lots of magnification, as you can tell.
I have a Tasco WC+ on my .243, a 10 X 40. It's OK, but every time a shot impacts a little off, I wonder if it isn't the 'scope going to hell! I'll probably replace it with another V-24.
I'd really like to be able to afford Leupold Vari-X III's, but that's another story...
Regards, George.

Seeing that I have 4-16X scopes on my air rifles(my Rapid 12/250 wears a 6-24X) I figured "why not my Hornets". Exactly what I got on both of my Rugers and don't feel over powered at all. Nice to be able to see the whites of their eyes before firing. Lawdog

Lawdog--- seeing how you are using a air rifle with scope your probably one to answer my next question!!!! I know air rifle scopes are advertised to be made to with stand reverse recoil, since the hornet has no ( almost ) recoil how do you think air rifle scopes would work on 22 hornets ??
barberx TX

barberx,

If a scope is air rifle rated, by that I mean will stand up to the double recoil the today’s modern magnum springer rifle create then they will stand up to any centerfire cartridge. That includes the big bores. Scopes that will hold up to the pounding of cartridges like the .375 H&H and larger will not hold up to a magnum springer. Been there and done that. Air rifle scopes normally will focus down to 7 to 10 yards out to infinity. I have an air rifle rated Burris 6-24x on my Ruger No.1B in .22 Hornet and it works just fine. Lawdog

I have a Redfield 6x fixed power widefield scope on my 22 Hornet and find that a quality lower power scope is often much easier to see with a higher power cheaper scope. You might want to get a better scope instead of higher power. I can see and hit anything within the 200 yard or so range of the hornet.

regards,
Graycg

I never felt like the Hornets trajectory deserved anything over 6X max and 4X was plenty. besides I always consider the beauty of the Hornet was that it made a splinded walk around compact varminter at about 5 lbs. with scope..I always had them chambered out to 22 Hornet Imp.

I have found a Leupold Vari X 3 in 2.5x8 to be entirely adequate for my hornet due to range limitations.