Ideal scope for 300 wsm

jimsbriar

Active Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
30
I would like your opinion on what scope to put on my sako finnlight 300 wsm. Currently have a Zeiss 2.5x10x44 conquest.

I don't shoot beyond 500 yards, but want a scope with excellent light transmission and clarity, coating. The Zeiss is pretty good, but it has its limits in low light, rainy conditions

I am also realizing that at 47 my eyes are not as crisp as they once were.

Money really is not consideration.

Thanks everyone!
 
I've looked at teh night force, but concerned that the cross hairs are too fine. Ill take another look though. Thanks
 
Not shooting past 500 yards, I would go with a scope that enables you to hold over instead of dial if need be. Lots of options out there.

Leupold V6 series with boone and crocket reticle
Leica Magnus series
Swaro z6


All the above make scopes in the 3-15 powerish range that you can also get larger objectives for a little more light gathering. I think they have the option to dial for yardage as well if need be. I would call the above more "hunting" oriented scopes.

You could just go full blown tactical and look at the top level "Alpha" scopes like
the Schmidt and Bender, Tangent Theta, Minox, Hensoldt, Nightforce, etc. Those are all renowned for world class optical clarity. Definitely heavier scopes however, and some if not all traditionally have a 34mm tubes.
 
Zeiss HD 3-15
Leupold VX 6 3-18

Leupold vx6 was gonna be my other suggestion. Leupold and trijicon seem to "look" very bright to my eyes. Leupolds twilight coating, or whatever they call it, seems to really agree with the same tints my eyes see well. Trijicon really has amazing clarity but i have zero experience with their scopes other than looking through them.
 
I have a variety of Night Force scopes and my favorite for hunting in the 500 yard range is the NXS 3.5-15x50.
What ever you go with, I would seriously think about a second focal plane scope so when you dial the power down for a up close shot, you can still see the reticle.
 
I have a VX6 3-18 x 50mm on my 300WSM model 700. It seems to be a perfect blend of magnification and clarity for the weight, especially on a hunting rifle.
 
Thanks everyone for the response to date. This has been really helpful.

I should have mentioned that this would be a purely hunting scope.

Is it really worth the extra weight and cost to go to a 30 mm tube vs. 1 inch?
 
Yes, the 30 is a good option.

The VX6 3-18x44 would be an excellent option for your purposes.

I'm running a couple of them on hunting rigs. Though, I have taken these rigs to some long range training and wrung them out to over 1000 yards. Worked VERY well.

I'm a true NF and S&B lover and use many of them, but at 19.5 ounces on top of a hunting rifle I'm carrying around the mountains (After doing my part getting in shape after losing 50 pounds) I'll have to take off packing weight in other ways, the VX-6 line offers what I want - a reticle (Holland ART) I can use for running my dope without dialing, locking turrets with MOA markings (for when I want to dial) and even illumination all at a pretty decent price.
 
The 30 MM tube is not necessary if this is a hunting rifle and not shooting way out there. I have a Zeiss HD Conquest on a savage 6.5 Creedmoor that I shoot out to 600 yards with no issues. If I wanted to go out further, I would just use an elevated rail.
 
Have you considered the NF compact 2.5-10x42? It is comparable in weight to the VX6 2-12. My next purchase will be a sako finnlight in 270wsm, the above scopes are what I have narrowed my search down to to top it with. My plan is to be able backpack heavy timber for sambar in Australia and also be able to stretch its legs for Tahr and Chamois in NZ.
 
Start with March and work towards a S&B.
The March 2.5-25x42 will allow you to have the low light performance and any distance you choose to shoot. From brush busting to as far as your cartridge can stay supersonic.
S&B glass is something you need to experience if money is really no object.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top