Which VXIII 4.5-14?

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by tjbill, Feb 24, 2007.

  1. tjbill

    tjbill Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    My brother and I just bought Kimber Montanas in 300WSM. We hunt deer, antelope, black bear, and elk everywhere from the black timber of Washington to the desert of Nevada. We are stepping up from our usual 3.5-10's to the VariXIII 4.5-14. My question is 40mm or 50mm and which reticle - Duplex, Heavy Duplex, or Boone and Crockett? Any advice on elevation turrets for these scopes? Thanks in advance for the help! I have learned a great deal from the people on this site.
     
  2. wildcat

    wildcat Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,651
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Go-with-Leupold-MK4-M1-4.5x14x50mm-LRT-with-TMR-reticle.-They-cost-around-$800-to-$900.00.-I-had-one-on-my-223-and-loved-it.-It-has-the-Military-type-Target-knobs-aswell-as-a-side-focus-knob.-Spend-the-extra-$$$$-and-get-the-above-mentioned-scope.-I-think-the-regular-Leupold-VX-III-4.5x14x50mm-cost-around-$600;-I-think.-Good-luck
     

  3. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Is your spacebar broken again?
     
  4. .25AOD

    .25AOD Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    142
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    I think a 30mm tube with a 50mm objective on that rifle would look like a sombrero on a senorita. The 4.5-14 is a great idea for that rifle... I'd just stay with the 1" tube and 40mm objective.
     
  5. tjbill

    tjbill Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    What is she wearing besides the sombrero....that might work for me! Seriously though, the thing I like about the Kimber is it's mostly a standard sized gun. I looked through both scopes yesterday at BassPro and the 50 was a lot clearer and a little brighter. I don't think the 40 was focused though. Does anyone else have similar experience in this comparison? Thanks for the replies.
     
  6. AJ Peacock

    AJ Peacock Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,229
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    I've used the 40mm for the last 7-8 years on my 7mm. I personally like a scope as close to the line of the bore as possible
    for use on a rifle with a standard hunting stock.
    I find I get a more consistent cheek weld and more consistency on target. From an optical perspective, more (bigger) is better.
    But functionally I personally like the 40mm on a packing rifle.

    Don
     
  7. D.P.

    D.P. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    225
    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    I'm with AJ I like to keep the scope low. I shot several VX-III 4.5-14 x40 for many years. All had target turrets installed. I never felt as though the scope let me down. The only thing that drove me nuts is the turret covers, I lost too many to count. Since I have switched to M-4's and to tell you the truth I sont see much difference in the glass. I don't loose caps any more /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
     
  8. yellowdog

    yellowdog Member

    Messages:
    6
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Just got the VX-III 4.5 X 14 X 40 with varmint rectile wich works the same as Boone&C. If you go with that rectile, you really won't need BDC or target turrets. You'll love that rectile, trust me. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
     
  9. zingdingo

    zingdingo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    241
    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    +1

    Couldn't justify putting a portly scope on that fine and svelte a hunting rifle. 1" tube and 40mm objective for me.

    Could go with a B&C (or varmint hunters) reticle, or turrets, whichever I was more comfortable with. If I were having 1 or 2 turrets installed, I would definately go with M1's.
     
  10. POP

    POP Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,478
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2001
    40mm all the way. 50mm is too big and would look terrible on a light looking rifle like this.
     
  11. Bigcat_hunter

    Bigcat_hunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    426
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Iv'e got one of those VX-L's on my hunting rifle. Its a 50mm objective with a half moon notched out of the bottom so you can mount it as low as a 36mm scope. I love it. There kind of ugly but I really dont care how pretty my gun is.
     
  12. arthurj

    arthurj Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    460
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    The 50mm may look big, but who cares, you will gather much more light. I would never sacrifice performance for looks. I could barely even hunt the last 15 minutes of legal hours with my 40 mm. When I stepped up to the 50 it was a world of difference.
     
  13. slymule

    slymule Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    216
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Ditto the 40mm scope - less weight, less bulk, sits lower thus makes for a better cheek weld. Something else to consider - when it comes to gathering a few more minutes of shooting light with the 50mm. Do you really want to take that shot if by the time you make it to where the deer/elk was, its going to be dark anyway. Personally I don't like trying to track in the dark, or as far as that goes, start gutting and quartering an elk in the dark. Just don't think it makes good sense to shoot at a game animal with just a few minutes left of shooting light. If its right before shooting light in the morning, more than likely that elk or deer will still be there unless you spook it. I've had both, sold my 50mm and bought another 40mm scope. Just my opinion....I could be wrong...NAH.
     
  14. tjbill

    tjbill Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    Thanks for all the input!! Just ordered the 40mm with the Boone and Crocket aiming system.