• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

Scope for lightweight rifle

mcseal2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2009
Messages
312
I am building a lightweight 270 win for mountain muleys. I recently bought a used Kimber 84L Montana in 280 Ackley that I can't get the accuracy I want out of. I really like the weight and feel of the rifle, so I came up with a plan. I have a Winchester M70 I have been using in the mountains with a #3 fluted Pac-Nor barrel in 270 win that shoots very well, but is on the heavy side. I dropped the rifle off at the gunsmith yesterday to get the barrel transplanted over on the Kimber. I know the #3 fluted barrel will add a little weight, but the Kimber stock and action are still much lighter than the M70. The M70 will get a new barrel in 25-06, the stock shortened, and my wife is going to shoot it. She just whitetail and occasionally antelope hunts and doesn't have to pack a rifle far. The combination of light recoil and moderate rifle weight should be just right for her. Easy to justify me getting a new gun when she gets one too!

Anyway, I'm curious what others are running for scopes on lightweight rifles. I'm not planning on this being an extreme range gun, maybe 600yds max. I don't go looking for long shots when hunting but like to be prepared for them if it's the only option. I practice 300 to 600yds regularly but hunting like to keep shots under 500, much under if possible. Currently the barrel likes 140gr accubonds at 2950fps and if that load still works when it's on the Kimber I'll stick with it. I have a Swaro 3.5-18x44 I like with the 4W reticle and I'm leaning that way. I have Leupold 3-18 VX-6's with the TMOA reticle on the others I shoot quite a bit, but that scope is to bulky for a build like this. The VX3 with a wind reticle might be an option in 4.5-14x.

Here is a rundown of the features I want:

For magnification I want at least 12x on the top end and more is better.

A ballistic turret system for elevation adjustment and a covered windage adjustment so my Eberlestock scabbard doesn't dial it for me

A reticle with MOA marks for windage holds

An objective no bigger than 44mm to keep the scope fairly low. I don't want to go under 40mm to bad for low light either.

Very tough and reliable, this gun will likely go on some hunts I will only be able to afford once in my lifetime.

Anyone know the perfect scope for my build? Thanks for any help you can give.
 
I think you've pretty much have the ideal scopes nailed down between the vx3 and the swaro.
 
Thanks for the replies. I didn't know if some other brand had options I should consider now. I guess there is no reason to fix what isn't broke, probably should stick with one of those. I saw an article a while back in Eastmans magazine where Guy was setting up a Savage lightweight hunter for a sheep hunt. I think he had a Zeiss on it, might look at what they have too. I have time before the gun is ready so I can shop around a bit.
 
I think the swaro and leupy both weigh less than zeiss. IMO you're leaving nothing on the table w/ the above mentioned scopes esp at their weight class. That leupy weighs 13oz! Cmon man! :D
 
Check out the new Vortex Razor HD LH. Your style rifle is the exact kind of rifle that Vortex had in mind when they designed this scope.

My "lighweight" 338 RUM is topped with a VX6 3-18x50 TMOA and I am very happy with it.
 
Check out the new Vortex Razor HD LH. Your style rifle is the exact kind of rifle that Vortex had in mind when they designed this scope.

My "lighweight" 338 RUM is topped with a VX6 3-18x50 TMOA and I am very happy with it.

18 oz.... edit: sorry.. 16.5

The Z5 is a good scope but you might want to check out the March 2.5-25x42.

22oz

Both scopes are edged out in weight by the before mentioned, and I believe the op already has a vx6.
 
Incorrect, my VX6 3-18x50 weighs 20.5 ounces.

The new Razor HD LH weighs 16.5 ounces.

Correct, work wouldn't let me access their page so I had to use unconventional means which took too long. Off the top of my head i thought it was 18... either way the reticle choices suck IMO.

I never stated the vx6 weight... the op has one and has already ruled it out. The march weighs 22oz if I remember correctly.

None the less their still edged out in weight by the former 2. Not much to matter concerning the vortex, but he already has the z5 in hand.
 
.. either way the reticle choices suck IMO.

Is it the absence of a top post that you don't like? I have yet to look through the HD LH, but I personally really like the HSR-4 MOA reticle. Overall I really like what Vortex did with this scope. As long as the glass has Razor quality, this scope is going to be a huge win for light weight long range rifles.
 
Is it the absence of a top post that you don't like? I have yet to look through the HD LH, but I personally really like the HSR-4 MOA reticle. Overall I really like what Vortex did with this scope. As long as the glass has Razor quality, this scope is going to be a huge win for light weight long range rifles.

Yes, and I agree, this scope has a ton of potential.

Here is why I don't like the T. Holding on an animal's shoulder/crease you visually draw a line of which you place the vertical of your crosshairs. Animals have feet anchored to the ground, the ground is solid and sometimes darker in comparison to above the back which is where the top of your cross hairs lie. A full X gives you a much quicker to identify (by contrast) vertical line. So in the event of lower light, or other issues, you have a better chance of finding your aiming point.

To put it in the most extreme example of a minimal cross hair vs a good ol'fashioned duplex, think about this... if you had 2 scopes to choose from would you use a duplex on a OIL hunt or a target dot? My opinion may hold some functional value or it may not, but I thought it sounded good.
 
Yes, and I agree, this scope has a ton of potential.

Here is why I don't like the T. Holding on an animal's shoulder/crease you visually draw a line of which you place the vertical of your crosshairs. Animals have feet anchored to the ground, the ground is solid and sometimes darker in comparison to above the back which is where the top of your cross hairs lie. A full X gives you a much quicker to identify (by contrast) vertical line. So in the event of lower light, or other issues, you have a better chance of finding your aiming point.

To put it in the most extreme example of a minimal cross hair vs a good ol'fashioned duplex, think about this... if you had 2 scopes to choose from would you use a duplex on a OIL hunt or a target dot? My opinion may hold some functional value or it may not, but I thought it sounded good.

Me and some buddies have been arguing over this reticle for a while. What you said is basically the main reason why some guys don't like it... just not enough references to draw your eye to the center crosshairs, which I agree is the definitely a negative on this scope. Your point of duplex vs target dot is right on. I really wish they would have done something like their EBR-2C reticle, but I think Vortex is trying to market to the pure lightweight hunter that is not looking to shoot to extreme distances.

Very much like the OP, practice out to longer distances while keeping hunting distances within ~500 yards. I bet Vortex did a bunch of market research and I would guess the average sheep hunter does not like the cluttered tacticle style reticle like the EBR-2C.

I am still looking for the perfect light weight long range scope... there are several good candidates, just nothing perfect yet.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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