Is it bigger the better?

WizardM · #1 09-22-2008, 12:34 AM

Is it bigger the better? I mean the objective diameter of a rifle scope. ;)

I really enjoy hunting and shooting a lot. I just bought a new Remington M700 laminated thumbhole SS .300 WSM with 26" barrel recently. I have been using Barska 10-40x50 IR SWAT Tactical scope for my Remington .308, and now on my .300 WSM. I want to upgrade my scope for a better one so I could start hunting/shooting up to 1000 yards.

There are tons of different rifle scopes with different size of objective diameters on the market. There are some extreme ones like the ATN day time scope that even come with whopping 8-24x75 configuration. For all the long distance shooters, what do you say is more important, is it really bigger the better? I'm pondering about the ATN 8-24x75 scope but should I go with a better known brand that has smaller tubes? i.e. Bushnell 6500 4.5-30x50

I would love to hear about all your opinions.

WizardM

Bravo 4 · #2 09-22-2008, 09:57 AM

Everybody will tell you that good glass means more.
The consensus says to stay away from the ATN rifle scopes. Ask one of their salesman or techs why they don't have a parallax adjustment.
Sounds like you need to spend your money on a VX-III or such.

royinidaho · #3 09-22-2008, 11:52 AM

Check with the optics sponsors here.

They have some really great deals on really great scopes.

Anything larger than 50 mm gets to be a bit inconvenient. Bulky, size, etc...

Anything smaller than 50 mm gets less than optimum results at either end of the day at power.

First choice would be Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50 w/target turrets.
Second choise would be Leupold VX-111 6.5-20x50 LRT.
Choices are based on you thoughts towards a Bushnell.

Do a side by side test. Don't let a few dollars adversely affect the decision. When its time to make the shot not spending those few $ may well ruin your hunt.

WizardM · #4 09-22-2008, 12:39 PM

Thanks for all the input. This is a great site, I'm learning lots of new things here. I won't go for an ATN scope now, but probably will go for either VXIII or SIII. I'm still thinking bigger tube will give more lights. That's why I want to go for th 56mm instead of 50mm. A bit bulkier won't be a problem for me. I just want to be able to see clearly and be able to hunt up to 1000 yards.

Michael Eichele · #5 09-22-2008, 12:58 PM

I agree with Roy that bigger than 50mm gets cumbersome. I also believe that smaller than 50 is OK IF other features of the scope lend itself to good light such as the Lupy mark 4. These scopes have good glass, a 30mm tube and NO power adjustments. These features lend themselves to better light gathering properties. Having no power adjustment allows for less lenses which increase optical clarity, sharpness and light. I use a 10x mark 4 and a NXS 3.5-15x50 and I can see just as good through either one late or early. I have owned several 56mm scopes and several sub 56mm scopes. I wouldnt go back to the 56's for anything and yes I have shot critters at dark with 40mm scopes (after 10PM in September), thank God we DONT have sunrise/sunset rules up here!

ol mike · #6 09-22-2008, 07:07 PM

A 56mm in a so-so scope will have less light gathering ability than a 44mm scope from a quality manufacturer -i.e. zeiss -swarovski -nightforce -leupold -ior..

I've read that the really big 56mm and up are hard on the scope mounting system b/c of all the bulk/mass trying to move during recoil.

Forget about atn's and the like -get a quality proven brand ..

WizardM · #7 09-23-2008, 12:52 PM

After read everyone's comment, I was going to buy a Nighforce NXS, but found it out there's no Canadian dealers at all, and they don't ship to Canada from US, otherwise, it's going to be confiscated at the border. It really blows my mind. I can't believe this. Oh well, I guess I have to try some other companies that are willing to ship to Canada. :mad: