Is there such a thing as, "too much scope"?

[C-130 Dude]

The only time it ever bothered me was when I lived in SC and I took my target .223 to a 400 yard homemade range. My target .223 has a NF 12-42x56. I was shooting over a soybean field when I noticed hogs walking through the beans about 75 yards in front of me. Even on the lowest magnification, it took me a few minutes to find the hogs. By the time I found them, they were almost out of the field. I got one of them, but could have got off a few more shots if I didn't have so much trouble locating them.

That's what we call a "target of opportunity ".

 

[C-130 Dude]

Yes you can have too much of a good thing IMHO. Putting a 32oz scope on a 6lb rifle sounds silly to me but to each his own. Also the type of shots that you anticipate may mean that you have too much magnification as scrmblr said above. For some of the hunting situations 4x is too much BTDT.

You know the old saying, ounces is pounds and pounds is tons or pain or something like like that.....

 

[C-130 Dude]

Yes.
Magnificationn needs can be subjective but, IMO, if your max magnification exceeds your rifles effective range / terminal velocity then you have "too much scope".

Likewise if your MIN magnification impares your FOV for close range work you have "too much scope".

Well stated.

 

[6.5x300 WBY]

No...
I have a NF ATACR 7x35 on a Muzzleloader so

 

[C-130 Dude]

Lol, I don't think so, I'm close, but not quite there yet.
I know March makes a 10-60x56, so not quite there yet unless there are others who offer more. IMO, 10-60 limits its usage.

Holy moly!

 

[C-130 Dude]

I ran a 5-25 ATACR in NRL22 matches. When run at lower magnifications the subtensions were very hard to see due to FFP reticle. I changed to 4-16 and I can more easily see subtensions at lower mags. Other than weight, being able to see subtensions at lower mags about the only reason to use a lower mag scope.

And cost.

 

[frostop]

Well if your one that likes to play with rifle's than I think alot of them "Cost" "To Much"
But if your one that only has one rifle, say a 300 win mag that you use for everything, than by all means buy the best scope you can afford.
Personally magnification more than 16 isn't useful but than I don't plan on shooting at animals beyond 600yds, that being said i have taken practice shots at 1600 with 16x.

I'm 58 and need glasses to see the television but I adjust my scopes for that

 

[QuietTexan]

I have the opposite problem in general - anything advertised as "true" 1x is BS, there will be a large window of negative magnification. I might have to cough up for an ATACR or a Razor because nothing short of costing $2k has really been functional below 2x.

Most all 15-60 were spotting scopes. Have you seen one on a rifle?

Lol, I don't think so, I'm close, but not quite there yet.
I know March makes a 10-60x56, so not quite there yet unless there are others who offer more. IMO, 10-60 limits its usage.

They also make an 8-80x, but if you look through the reticles they're competition focused and come with 1/8MOA and 0.05mil clicks. There is a practical cap in the 40-50x range depending on sunlight because mirage gets so bad.

My March Genesis is 6x-60, has ~120 mil of elevation travel, and is purpose-designed for ELR. It's beautiful to look through, the only close comparison is Tangent Theta. The colors put my ATACRs to shame.

 

[C-130 Dude]

The formula of balancing cost vs options wanted/needed is a delicate one indeed. And confusing at times.

I need glasses too. My 67 year old eyes were never what I would have liked to be. Even with my cataract surgery last year! HA!

 

[C-130 Dude]

They also make an 8-80x, but if you look through the reticles they're competition focused and come with 1/8MOA and 0.05mil clicks. There is a practical cap in the 40-50x range depending on sunlight because mirage gets so bad.

My March Genesis is 6x-60, has ~120 mil of elevation travel, and is purpose-designed for ELR. It's beautiful to look through, the only close comparison is Tangent Theta. The colors put my ATACRs to shame.

I've never seen one much less used one. Wow.

 

[parshal]

I'm 58 and need glasses to see the television but I adjust my scopes for that

My eyes are changing by the week at 53. So much so that I actually wear a 1.75 contact in my left eye so I can see the turret markings. I'm now to the point that I need to change the focus on all my scopes.

 

[hesse]

That's kind of funny I'm 48 and I like a lot of magnification my dad's 73 and he doesn't use a lot of magnification the only time he turns that scope up if you try to determine if it's illegal animal or not he usually shoots out to 400 yards and never turns it up over four

 

[memtb]

Hhhmmm......

What's a muzzle brake? memtb

 

[memtb]

Quote from Quiet Texan: Ihave the opposite problem in general - anything advertised as "true" 1x is BS, there will be a large window of negative magnification


I've hunted places that "negative magnification" would be considered desirable ! memtb