What's your variable scope power range?

[Greyfox]

For my Western hunting where the bulk of my shots have ranged from 200-1000 yards, I like scopes in the
5x20 magnification range, weight, 25-35oz. I generally carry at 5-10x depending on the degree of cover. 10-20x for the longer shots.

 

[xsn10s]

I've stuck with lower magnification scopes. My 30-06 has had it's 2.5-8X Leupold for 2 decades. My PSS has had the 4.5-14X50mm LR Tactical on it for 31-32 years, but now wears a SWFA 6X MQ. The 260 AI wears a SWFA 10X. I was glassing crows just past a mile with the 6X which surprised the heck out of me. But honestly I'd like to have a NF 5-20. That could go on the new 7mm RM or on the 260 AI.

 

[300grains]

3-12, 4-12 and 2,5-15

 

[Teri Anne]

Having lived in the western US many years and having spent time in family hunting camps as early as the late 1960's, I am always interested when I'm at a gun store/shop listening to people discuss scopes. Most of my family members used either fixed 4 power scopes or 3-9 variables. I naturally went with 3-9 when I bought my first scope because that's what my dad had on his rifle.
Over the past several years, and zoom ranges have increased, I have purchased a variety of different variables. One such was a Zeiss 6-24. I mounted it, hunted with it, but found myself in a situation where I was trying to get a follow-up shot (didn't need it) and couldn't because of the field of view at 6 power. I sold the scope not long after that and now most of my scopes are either 3x or 4x at the low end (I don't shoot competitions, only shoot targets for load development and dial up work).
When I was in Germany, I found most of my scopes bottom end was 1-3 power with one rifle wearing an aimpoint for driven hunts: most of the shots we had were less than 100yards.
So, the question is, what is your scope zoom range and why do you like that range?
I'm curious as to what the community thinks and what your experiences are.

Over the years I have done a lot of hunting with rifles with iron sights as well as scoped. My first scope was a Redfield 4X on top of a Marlin 336C in 35 Remington. (Wish I still had that rifle) Anyway over the years I have owned a lot of different rifles and a lot of different scopes, different manufacturers as well as different calibers and/or scope manufacturers. Since we are talking about scopes here the worse I have ever had, and it was inherited on a used rifle I bought many years ago was a Tasco 3 x 9 x 40. The glass was terrible, the reticle left a lot to be desired and there was absolutely no repeatability on the adjustments. It went into the local landfill, which is where it really belonged, not sitting on the top of any rifle. I have had Leopold's, Nikons, Cabelas,, Bushnell's and of course Vortex.

It has been my experience that you ultimately get what you pay for and purchasing a rifle scope is no different. I do not subscribe to any dollar limit as long as I can afford it and have found over the years that the scopes that fit me best are always affordable, at least for me. Over the years I have found, that for me, that Bushnell's and Vortex work the best. The optic clarity, magnification, and reticles are fantastic, (of course depending on the model) My current go to scopes are Vortex for many reasons.

When choosing which scope to buy you should already have in mind what you are looking for in a scope, tube size, optical clarity, reticle type, parallax adjustment, reticle adjustment (conventional capped or tactical) and what kind of shooting that you are going to be doing with the rifle. Once you have narrowed down the type of scope it's time to start comparing. My first consideration is optical quality. I try out every one of the selection to see which scope, in my opinion has the clearest optics. Keep in mind that when checking this you need to adjust the eyepiece to your vision, This is done by sighting the scope on something preferable white or otherwise light blue. This can be a wall at as far a distance as you have or the sky against a white cloud or blue sky. Adjust the eyepiece until the reticle is as dark black as it can be. At that point the eyepiece is adjusted to your vision. From there you need to pick out an object at a distance, the farther the better, then adjust the parallax to that distance, look through the scope and note how clear the object appears using the ambient light available. This is a judgement call based on your vision and what you see. Check all of the different scopes in the group that has otherwise met your expectations and take the one's that you perceived as having the best clarity and move them off to the side.

At this point don't make the mistake than many believe that the more expensive the scope is, the better it is. Optical quality is important but how your vision perceives that quality is more important. Start out looking through a lower priced (not el- cheapo which seldom are ever good) but a good mid-priced scope. Note the clarity, then move up to the next level of scope and compare it to the mid priced scope. If it looks better to you place it off to the side and check the next level and check it, and so on. Somewhere along the line you will not see any improvement in the view looking through the scope. Once you have determined there is no difference go to the previous scope and compare the two. If there is no difference then the optical quality of the lower priced scope is as good as your eyes and differentiate. Buying anything more expensive is a waste of money that will not do you any good, unless it has features that you want that are not available on the less expensive scope. In my case, my preferred scope lineup at this time is Vortex. My level of optical quality begins at the Diamondback level, good optics and most of the features that I like, which currently is tactical turrets, parallax adjustment and a 30MM tube. I also like the Viper HSLR. Both scopes are available in the 6 x 24 x 50 and in the first focal plane with MOA adjustments. Both of the scopes, the Diamondback and Viper are so similar that there is no real advantage for me, to buy the Viper at twice the price of the Dimondback. All of my rifles are equipped with Vortex Diamondback scopes, the .270, 308 and 30-06 all have the Diamondback Tactical 6 x 24 x 50 in the first focal plane FFP. The Tikka T1x .22 has a Diamondback 4 x 16 x 44 Tactical. All of the rifles are used for both hunting and target shooting out to 600 yards. Having all of the scopes being the same helps in that I don't have to worry about which scope I have since they all work exactly the same.

There was a comment about using a 6 x magnification and missing a follow up shot because the person could not find the target in the scope using 6 x magnification. The difference between 4x and 6x as far as field of view is almost negligible. The Vortex Diamondback 6 x 24 x 50 has a field of view of 18 feet at 100 yards. the Diamondback 4 x 16 x 44 has a field of view at 100 yards of 26 feet. To my way of thinking the only reason that the individual could not find the target (deer?) for a second shot was that they had not practiced enough with the scope to know how to follow it. My second comment, which may or may not be liked here is, Why was a second shot needed?

 

[Brad Quarnberg]

Over the years I have done a lot of hunting with rifles with iron sights as well as scoped. My first scope was a Redfield 4X on top of a Marlin 336C in 35 Remington. (Wish I still had that rifle) Anyway over the years I have owned a lot of different rifles and a lot of different scopes, different manufacturers as well as different calibers and/or scope manufacturers. Since we are talking about scopes here the worse I have ever had, and it was inherited on a used rifle I bought many years ago was a Tasco 3 x 9 x 40. The glass was terrible, the reticle left a lot to be desired and there was absolutely no repeatability on the adjustments. It went into the local landfill, which is where it really belonged, not sitting on the top of any rifle. I have had Leopold's, Nikons, Cabelas,, Bushnell's and of course Vortex.

It has been my experience that you ultimately get what you pay for and purchasing a rifle scope is no different. I do not subscribe to any dollar limit as long as I can afford it and have found over the years that the scopes that fit me best are always affordable, at least for me. Over the years I have found, that for me, that Bushnell's and Vortex work the best. The optic clarity, magnification, and reticles are fantastic, (of course depending on the model) My current go to scopes are Vortex for many reasons.

When choosing which scope to buy you should already have in mind what you are looking for in a scope, tube size, optical clarity, reticle type, parallax adjustment, reticle adjustment (conventional capped or tactical) and what kind of shooting that you are going to be doing with the rifle. Once you have narrowed down the type of scope it's time to start comparing. My first consideration is optical quality. I try out every one of the selection to see which scope, in my opinion has the clearest optics. Keep in mind that when checking this you need to adjust the eyepiece to your vision, This is done by sighting the scope on something preferable white or otherwise light blue. This can be a wall at as far a distance as you have or the sky against a white cloud or blue sky. Adjust the eyepiece until the reticle is as dark black as it can be. At that point the eyepiece is adjusted to your vision. From there you need to pick out an object at a distance, the farther the better, then adjust the parallax to that distance, look through the scope and note how clear the object appears using the ambient light available. This is a judgement call based on your vision and what you see. Check all of the different scopes in the group that has otherwise met your expectations and take the one's that you perceived as having the best clarity and move them off to the side.

At this point don't make the mistake than many believe that the more expensive the scope is, the better it is. Optical quality is important but how your vision perceives that quality is more important. Start out looking through a lower priced (not el- cheapo which seldom are ever good) but a good mid-priced scope. Note the clarity, then move up to the next level of scope and compare it to the mid priced scope. If it looks better to you place it off to the side and check the next level and check it, and so on. Somewhere along the line you will not see any improvement in the view looking through the scope. Once you have determined there is no difference go to the previous scope and compare the two. If there is no difference then the optical quality of the lower priced scope is as good as your eyes and differentiate. Buying anything more expensive is a waste of money that will not do you any good, unless it has features that you want that are not available on the less expensive scope. In my case, my preferred scope lineup at this time is Vortex. My level of optical quality begins at the Diamondback level, good optics and most of the features that I like, which currently is tactical turrets, parallax adjustment and a 30MM tube. I also like the Viper HSLR. Both scopes are available in the 6 x 24 x 50 and in the first focal plane with MOA adjustments. Both of the scopes, the Diamondback and Viper are so similar that there is no real advantage for me, to buy the Viper at twice the price of the Dimondback. All of my rifles are equipped with Vortex Diamondback scopes, the .270, 308 and 30-06 all have the Diamondback Tactical 6 x 24 x 50 in the first focal plane FFP. The Tikka T1x .22 has a Diamondback 4 x 16 x 44 Tactical. All of the rifles are used for both hunting and target shooting out to 600 yards. Having all of the scopes being the same helps in that I don't have to worry about which scope I have since they all work exactly the same.

There was a comment about using a 6 x magnification and missing a follow up shot because the person could not find the target in the scope using 6 x magnification. The difference between 4x and 6x as far as field of view is almost negligible. The Vortex Diamondback 6 x 24 x 50 has a field of view of 18 feet at 100 yards. the Diamondback 4 x 16 x 44 has a field of view at 100 yards of 26 feet. To my way of thinking the only reason that the individual could not find the target (deer?) for a second shot was that they had not practiced enough with the scope to know how to follow it. My second comment, which may or may not be liked here is, Why was a second shot needed?

Well, since you quoted my post, I can only assume your last paragraph was in reference to my post so here's the answer.

First, no follow up shot was needed, but I certainly was not going to Not take a second shot if I could.
Because of the terrain and trees, I had the scope on 8 power to get ensure there wasn't something obscuring the vitals.
The Moufflon Ram was on the edge of a small clearing at 325yards. At the shot it jumped and headed down hill at a run, tumbling the last few feet before disappearing into a group of trees about 10 yards below where he'd been feeding.
I was laying on a small knob with steep drop offs on three sides and had to crawl to get into a position I could clearly see the ram. The knob was so small, my friend and professional hunter couldn't fit on it, and one of my legs was supported by my toes that had a tenuous purchase on a small rock below me.

There might be minor differences in FOV between 4 and 6 power scopes, but all scopes are not created equal, and the FOV can and is very different depending on manufacturer. You can make a general statement about FOV between the 2 being "almost negligible" but I would throw in the conversation that it depends on what your definition of "negligible" is, and what the shooting circumstances are.

A Vortex Crossfire 2 FOV@100yrds is listed at 25.7". A Leupold, Freedom 4-12x50 FOV is 22"@100yrds.
A Vortex Viper 6-24x50 FOV is 17.8"@100yrds, and a Kahles 6-14x50 FOB is 20.4"@100yrds.
A Burris Fullfield 4, 4x vs 6x is 26" vs 20"@100yrds.
On a running target even 4x is a challenge in any type of terrain. Easier in the open from a standing or sitting position, but infinitely harder when you're prone with a small window and no ability to shift positions.

Back to the Ram. After about 10 minutes of no movement from the trees he disappeared into, I went to the spot he'd been hit and found a massive blood trail. The Ram just inside the trees and the shot was a perfect heart shot.

I've hunted and killed many moose and elk. I've helped recover moose and elk that hunters failed to take or connect with a follow up shot and the animals headed into steep canyons that required long hikes with heavy packs, and a bunch of manpower to get them out.
In almost all of the cases, the initial shot was lethal. But those animals are strong and sometimes they go for many yards before they realize they're dead. In several cases I was witness to, the animals ran after being shot and ended up over the lip of a ravine, tumbling sometimes a hundred or more feet into the bottom. I always, especially on large animals, or animals I'm hunting in steep terrain, try to take a follow-up shot if they don't drop immediately.

Experiences between hunters can and does vary just like their equipment.
I am always learning, always trying to improve my knowledge and I always try to see things from a different perspective, even if I don't always agree. Sometimes I gain a better appreciation of things by doing so.

My experience is that 6x at the bottom end of a scope is too high for me personally. I've met and hunted with others that it works fine for them. That's the beauty of having the ability to choose what works for you.

I remember when I was a kid and first started hunting. My belief was that everyone should shoot a 270 win. One of my buddies had a 308 and another a 243. Neither was enough gun for western mule deer. Now that I'm older and more experienced, I realize my view was very narrow and that one size doesn't fit all.

Happy Hunting/Shooting to all!

 

[xsn10s]

Over the past several years, and zoom ranges have increased, I have purchased a variety of different variables. One such was a Zeiss 6-24. I mounted it, hunted with it, but found myself in a situation where I was trying to get a follow-up shot (didn't need it) and couldn't because of the field of view at 6 power.

When I was in Germany, I found most of my scopes bottom end was 1-3 power with one rifle wearing an aimpoint for driven hunts: most of the shots we had were less than 100yards.
So, the question is, what is your scope zoom range and why do you like that range?
I'm curious as to what the community thinks and what your experiences are.

I'm sorry I missed the main point of your post. IME what you might try is training yourself using the Bindon Aiming Concept. While primarily used for red dots I found I made it work with magnified scopes also. I "think" it's one of those learned concepts by doing it. It might have worked for me because I did a lot of training with red dots back in the late 80/ early 90's. And after awhile I tried it with my regular magnified 3-9 scopes. One time while I was on 9X a jack rabbit took of running about 40 yards from me. It was hard but I forced my mind to allow the reticle in my right eye float on the rabbit's head in my left eye. It was weird at first because of the great size difference but I hit the rabbit in the head first shot. It doesn't work for everyone and admittedly the last time I tried it was three or four years ago while shooting sagerats on the run. My old eyes might not be able to do it anymore. Or more like my lack of practice now lol.

 

[Gary in MD]

A few that I like that I have now on hunting rifles.
(3) - 3-15x50 Tract Torics
(1) - 4-14x56 SHV
(1) - 3-10X42 SHV
(2) - 6-24X50 Arken EPL4 (varmint & target rifles)

 

[xsn10s]

A few that I like that I have now on hunting rifles.
(3) - 3-15x50 Tract Torics
(1) - 4-14x56 SHV
(1) - 3-10X42 SHV
(2) - 6-24X50 Arken EPL4 (varmint & target rifles)

Hey Gary out of the first three which scope is the easiest to get behind? Or has the most forgiving eyebox?

 

[Gary in MD]

Hey Gary out of the first three which scope is the easiest to get behind? Or has the most forgiving eyebox?

I've got to be honest…. Those Tracts have a forgiving eye box, clear and bright. So far for me, the adjustments are positive and repeatable. I'm getting another soon.
I will say that the SHV has a slightly finer reticle and are solid, absolutely no problems with mine.
Gary

 

[sp6x6]

I grew up mountain hunting with 3-9, then shot a lot of game with 4-14. Last 14 been 6-20 4 years and 3-24x52 march and a 2 -20 x50nx8 all later ffp.

 

[lancetkenyon]

According to the spec sheet an Athlon Cronus weighs 34.8oz. Call it 35oz if you wish but that's a bit shy of 48 ozs. Just saying.

Did you read this from the person I quoted?
"I run vortex gen 2 razor 4.5-27x56 on all my rifles except one of them"

The Vortex Razor Gen 2 4.5-27×56 is 48.5oz. 48(oz) ÷ 16(oz in 1 lb) = 3lbs.
I gave him the benefit of rounding down...

 

[MostlyUselessLurker]

3 pound scope is hefty

 

[memtb]

3 pound scope is hefty

VERY!!! 1/3 the weight of my rifle dressed and ready to hunt! memtb

 

[Teri Anne]

Well, since you quoted my post, I can only assume your last paragraph was in reference to my post so here's the answer.

First, no follow up shot was needed, but I certainly was not going to Not take a second shot if I could.
Because of the terrain and trees, I had the scope on 8 power to get ensure there wasn't something obscuring the vitals.
The Moufflon Ram was on the edge of a small clearing at 325yards. At the shot it jumped and headed down hill at a run, tumbling the last few feet before disappearing into a group of trees about 10 yards below where he'd been feeding.
I was laying on a small knob with steep drop offs on three sides and had to crawl to get into a position I could clearly see the ram. The knob was so small, my friend and professional hunter couldn't fit on it, and one of my legs was supported by my toes that had a tenuous purchase on a small rock below me.

There might be minor differences in FOV between 4 and 6 power scopes, but all scopes are not created equal, and the FOV can and is very different depending on manufacturer. You can make a general statement about FOV between the 2 being "almost negligible" but I would throw in the conversation that it depends on what your definition of "negligible" is, and what the shooting circumstances are.

A Vortex Crossfire 2 FOV@100yrds is listed at 25.7". A Leupold, Freedom 4-12x50 FOV is 22"@100yrds.
A Vortex Viper 6-24x50 FOV is 17.8"@100yrds, and a Kahles 6-14x50 FOB is 20.4"@100yrds.
A Burris Fullfield 4, 4x vs 6x is 26" vs 20"@100yrds.
On a running target even 4x is a challenge in any type of terrain. Easier in the open from a standing or sitting position, but infinitely harder when you're prone with a small window and no ability to shift positions.

Back to the Ram. After about 10 minutes of no movement from the trees he disappeared into, I went to the spot he'd been hit and found a massive blood trail. The Ram just inside the trees and the shot was a perfect heart shot.

I've hunted and killed many moose and elk. I've helped recover moose and elk that hunters failed to take or connect with a follow up shot and the animals headed into steep canyons that required long hikes with heavy packs, and a bunch of manpower to get them out.
In almost all of the cases, the initial shot was lethal. But those animals are strong and sometimes they go for many yards before they realize they're dead. In several cases I was witness to, the animals ran after being shot and ended up over the lip of a ravine, tumbling sometimes a hundred or more feet into the bottom. I always, especially on large animals, or animals I'm hunting in steep terrain, try to take a follow-up shot if they don't drop immediately.

Experiences between hunters can and does vary just like their equipment.
I am always learning, always trying to improve my knowledge and I always try to see things from a different perspective, even if I don't always agree. Sometimes I gain a better appreciation of things by doing so.

My experience is that 6x at the bottom end of a scope is too high for me personally. I've met and hunted with others that it works fine for them. That's the beauty of having the ability to choose what works for you.

I remember when I was a kid and first started hunting. My belief was that everyone should shoot a 270 win. One of my buddies had a 308 and another a 243. Neither was enough gun for western mule deer. Now that I'm older and more experienced, I realize my view was very narrow and that one size doesn't fit all.

Happy Hunting/Shooting to all!

Good Morning,
This message clarifies your previous comment where you said, "One such was a Zeiss 6-24. I mounted it, hunted with it, but found myself in a situation where I was trying to get a follow-up shot (didn't need it) and couldn't because of the field of view at 6 power." Everybody has a different view on what they like and dislike. I hunted with a 3 x 9 for a lot of years but when iron sights did not work for me during competition I switched over to scopes and it was then that I found that the 3 x 9 no longer worked for me. I no longer have any 3 x 9 scopes but do have a 4 x 12 on my Tikka T1x. I for one, and I am sure there are many others than cannot differentiate the difference between 4x and 6x unless comparing the FOV side by side. One of the issues that I have come across as both a military and NRA certified instructor is that many people cannot pick up their rifle and find the deer in a field 100 yards away even with a 3x magnification. Obviously the higher the magnification the narrower the FOV is. The issue is not really the magnification it has to do with the hunter not knowing where to point the rifle to bring the target into the FOV at the range they are shooting. One way around this is to go out in the woods looking for squirrels scampering around the ground. (You don't need to hunt the squirrels just use them to find, focus and follow) The first thing is to find the squirrel. You should be able to do this by simply mounting the rifle to your shoulder, pointing it towards the squirrel and finding it in the FOV the first time, every time. The next challenge is to try to keep the squirrel in the cross-hairs as it scampers around. Once you can do this, then you are familiar with how to find your target then track it at whatever power you have the scope set to.

I have come across some Game Wardens who took a dim view of doing this with an active firearm. The solution to this is to find an old beater that has seen better days. mount a old 3 x 9 on it, remove the bolt and magazine (if practical) and use it for these exercises. The rifle is a training aid, cannot be fired and thus not an issue with your local sheriff or game warden. You may also want to paint the last couple of inches of the barrel and part of the stock with orange paint to indicate it is not a shoot-able firearm. You will be surprised at how fast you can acquire, aim and track your target at pretty much at any magnification or range you care to shoot. It works, give it a try.