Cannot decide what scope for a lightweight Mtn rifle

[Moki]

I'm using three VX3 2.5-8x36mm Boone & Crocket reticle scopes on my lighter weight rifles. On my super lightweights I'm running Leupold Compact 2-7x33mm duplex reticles.

 

[ducky]

To keep it Light could go to the VX3 3.5-10x40 with CDS. Or step up in quality and a little heavier to the VX5 2-10?

You beat me to it!

I think the glass is pretty good on the VX3/3i Leupolds, I do think the 2.5-8X36 while a decent scope for short to mid range does get a little dark due to it's small objective diameter. I still use the 2.5-8X36 on my .30-06, .300 H&H, and .338-06 and the work well. However, I actually went down to the VXII/2 3-9X40 or to the VX3/3i 3.5-10X40 on most of my other rifles I shoot alot. The 40mm objective gives me a better FOV and a little brighter scope which is nice especially when it gets to prime time for hunting. Don't misunderstand, I can see well before and after legal shooting light with the 2.5-8X36 but I think the 40mm are better at those times. Plus you only add about 1.1 ounces of weight (357g ) and it'll probably still work in your low mounts with the 3.5-10x40, the 3-9X40 is actually a little bit lighter at 318g vs. 323g on the 36mm VX3/3i.

I do have a brand new VX5HD 2.5-10X42 but it's heavier at 479g or roughly 17 ounces. Plus it doesn't work with the mounts you have. My scope is still wrapped in the box for a future 6mm Creedmoor project, I'm afraid if I open the box it'll find a home on one of my existing rifles and I'll have to buy another

 

[mdw717]

I use this reticle on a vx3. Used with a ballistic app on my phone, it works for me.

 

[nicholasjohn]

The Leupold and Swarovski mentioned are around 12 oz. , I would like to be in that range. I could live with 18oz. But the size needs to match well with the rifle too, trying to keep it light and handy to carry/balance. Does that make sense? 6oz. May be splitting hairs I know, but those oz do add up.

I have both the Leupold 2.5 - 8 and a Swarovski AV 3-9 X 36, and have used them for well over a decade. The Leupold has evolved through at least one more generation since I bought the one I have, and I think the Swarovski I have is the predecessor to the one you're talking about. Over the years, I have liked the Leupold better, and the picture is somewhat brighter when the light is low. Also, if cosmetics are an issue, the Swarovski is not black in color - it is PURPLE. The adjustments on both scopes are accurate and repeatable, and both are light & compact scopes. I like them both, but if I was going to buy one or the other tomorrow, I would buy the Leupold.

The "light & handy" thing is very important to me, too. I've been using a 30-06 that weights around 8.5 pounds bare, so with a scope & sling and a couple of rounds in the magazine, it's well over nine pounds. As I get older, I'm finding this to be a bit heavy to carry around. I recently got myself a Dakota Model 10 ( in .280 ) that weighs 6.5 pounds, and I put the Leupold scope on it. Weight & balance feels PERFECT, and that's the gun I plan to carry when I go up the mountain. The '06 is probably going to get re-barrelled to 9.3 X 62, for low-elevation hunting for larger animals, and the weight should be about right for that. I'll probably leave the Swarovski on it for now, unless I get the urge to sell that and buy another Leupold. In fact, I could see that happening ……...

 

[ericbc7]

If you dislike cluttered reticles, the huskmaws are hard to beat.

 

[Wedgy]

SWFA 2.5-10x32 comes in at 9.5oz but I went thru this compact lightweight scope thing and won't ever choose a scope that does not have a parallax adjustment.
https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-2-5-10x32-ultralight-rifle-scope.html?___SID=U

 

[nicholasjohn]

SWFA 2.5-10x32 comes in at 9.5oz but I went thru this compact lightweight scope thing and won't ever choose a scope that does not have a parallax adjustment.
https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-2-5-10x32-ultralight-rifle-scope.html?___SID=U

Have you used this particular scope ? If so, how do you like it ?

 

[jd5521]

Trijicon 3-9x40 accupoint comes in at 13 ounces

 

[Wedgy]

Have you used this particular scope ? If so, how do you like it ?

Yes, it has very good glass and tracks perfectly as SWFA scopes are known for. I do not shoot the rifle it is on past ~350 yards so I don't really have to deal with parallax. I gave up on VX-2's & VX-3's a long time ago due to tracking. I would choose the SWFA glass over those two. I've had good luck with the VX-5's & VX-6's but that is higher than your weight limit. The VX-6 2-12x42mm does not have a parallax knob.

 

[ducky]

SWFA 2.5-10x32 comes in at 9.5oz but I went thru this compact lightweight scope thing and won't ever choose a scope that does not have a parallax adjustment.
https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-2-5-10x32-ultralight-rifle-scope.html?___SID=U

I know there was alot of talk about the only 2.5" eye relief at 10X on that scope. I sure wouldn't want it on anything that that kicks.

 

[Wedgy]

I know there was alot of talk about the only 2.5" eye relief at 10X on that scope. I sure wouldn't want it on anything that that kicks.

They have a great return policy if you aren't happy with it. I don't think a 7mm-08 is going to kick like a mule....but in the heat of the moment you could get scoped I guess LOL

 

[Dean2]

My 5 LB NULA is carrying a Swaro Z5 3.5x18x44 and has for the last 10 years. It has great glass, parallax adjustment, lots of magnification and weighs in at 14 ounces with Talley one piece rings. I have some lighter scopes on other rifles but none have the magnification range the Z5 has. Given a guy can have to take some pretty long shots in the mountains I find it a great option.

 

[ducky]

They have a great return policy if you aren't happy with it. I don't think a 7mm-08 is going to kick like a mule....but in the heat of the moment you could get scoped I guess LOL

I don't disagree, but a lightweight 7-08 shooting some heavy bullets might be a little snappy.

 

[laker]

Leupold vx3 3.5-10x40 cds in Talley rings