fixed 4x or fixed 6x?

[357smallbore]

Which would you choose for a fixed power out of these two scopes? Hunting application will be shooting no further than 350 yards. Hunting KS prairie land and out west in AZ. From varmint to Elk.
I like the older Weaver and Redfield 6x scopes. The steel tube models.

 

[ridgerunner1965]

since your not going to be hunting close in, my choice would be a 6x for sure. even close in I would choose the 6x,i don't shoot at running game or make quik snap shots.

 

[troy fairweather]

i have hunted some real heavy brush with 6x weavers

 

[mustanger98]

I'd say 4X. If I'm using a variable power, I usually set it on 2x-3X depending on the minimum. 4X isn't too much more. However, I also see the OP already expressed a preference for 6X and I'd say he answered his own question. Mileage varies and so do sight pictures.

 

[LoonWulf]

6x is extremely comfortable for me and generally if I'm going to a fixed scope I'll get a Weaver k6, the new ones. The glass and coatings are much improved over the older ones.
I rarely turn my variables lower than 4-5 unless I'm expecting shots at near point blank.
Still tho, making hits out to 3-350yds with a 4x isn't that hard either, but I'd still prefer to have some extra power.

 

[stillquietvoice]

Hunted for years with a straight 4x never tried a 6x. Now alley optics are variable that start at 4x.

 

[Armored farmer]

This Rem 700 .243 has worn a Weaver 6x since the early 70s. That's my vote.
I have a 3x on my .223 that is none too much scope.

 

[cdb1]

The steel Weavers are cool looking but I’d want better glass that’s available today.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

I've got a bunch of rifles for hunting out West wearing 3 by 9s, and the power on them rarely gets changed off 6x.

 

[Hookeye]

Last yr or so, read a few articles about fixed 6X being the "all arounder".
Buddy put one on his BLR for yotes.
Liked it a lot, til things got fast in the sticks.
Said he's ready to go to 4X.

He's hung up on fixed power.
I'd think a 2-7X would solve his problem.

 

[Walkalong]

4x.

6x is too much for an all around power where shots may be close.

 

[Jim Watson]

In olden times, it was 2.5x for woods, 4x for general purpose, 6x for the Plains.

 

[Skylerbone]

1-8x would be my answer, but 2-7x or fixed 4x are most plentiful on my rifles, right behind 3-9x. More important to me is good glass and a reasonable physical size that does not obscure too much peripheral vision.

 

[Walkalong]

Yep, no reason to handicap yourself with a fixed power scope these days.

The answer to the dilemma.

Vortex Razor 1.5-8x32 on sale.

https://www.eurooptic.com/RZR-6638-Razor-HD-LH-15-8x32-Riflescope-with-G4-BDC-RZR-6638.aspx

https://www.amazon.com/Vortex-Optics-Razor-Second-Riflescopes/dp/B07GNWR8G3

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

If I picked between the two I'd wish I had chosen the other at least half the time. I'll stick with variable power scopes.

 

[ridgerunner1965]

ive always run variable power 3x9 scopes. but some of the longest shots ive pulled off have been on 3x.

the resaon being, once it gets daylight I forget to turn my scope up.ive had a few fixed power 4x and 6x scopes and never really felt handicapped by them.

I was agin scopes for a long time cuz my dad said they were junk. turns out he was using old junk 7/8" scopes from the 50's.. the first scope I ever got I put on a model 7 rem in 243. I nailed a woodchuck at 200 yrds I had just missed the week before with iron sights.

 

[Hookeye]

I took a mover last yr, and was in a stand. So the tree blocked the deer's movement for a bit.
When he popped out, was on diff line than anticipated............and I had a 4X.
Brushy too. But my gun fit well, was a decent scope (old 4X Leupold compact) and I just brought it up and was on him.
Saw the slot to sneak a bullet through and as he hit it, popped him.

It wasn't a tough shot.
But it wasn't exactly easy either.

The 4X added a bit of anxiety. Used to shoot same type of scope on a slug gun way back, and always follow the deer w my eyes, bring the gun up to my line of sight.

Had a 2-7X on a .35 rem Contender Carbine and shot deer at 2 and 3X IIRC. Out to 75 yards. Just seemed to offer a more relaxed shot, even when things happened quick.

Don't see the 4X as ideal, but also don't see it as a handicap.
Worst case you're at 4X................can't accidentally have it at 7X

 

[jmr40]

I use either 1-4X, 1-6X or 3-9X scopes now. I used to use 2-7X quite a bit but much prefer something with 1X on the low end. I have no fixed power scopes. But that is primarily because I find 4X TOO MUCH for most of my hunting. I honestly can't remember shooting at game with any of those scopes on anything but the lowest power setting. I use more magnification to get it zeroed and for longer range paper punching. Twice in my hunting career I saw deer at longish range and moved the scopes up to max magnification in order to be able to identify antlers. Both times a legal buck jumped up at less than 20 yards and I was unable to find them with the magnification on either 7X or 9X.

But I may be willing to change my mind. My brother has a 6X42 fixed power target scope with a 30mm tube on one of his rifles that I shot recently. Even at 6X this particular scope has a pretty generous field of view.

 

[George P]

My old eyes go for a 6X over a 4X every time

 

[mustanger98]

In olden times, it was 2.5x for woods, 4x for general purpose, 6x for the Plains.

And during WW2, American snipers with '03A4's were using 2X or 2.5X. It's been a while since reading "One Shot, One Kill", but I recall it said in training they'd hit a 55gallon drum at 800yds.

 

[Varminterror]

Variable scope is my first answer.

If you hold some odd motivation which precludes a variable optic, then 6x is better than 4x for varmints to elk at 0-350yrds. I shot my buck last season at 18x at 32 yards on the run, and shot my buck through a window in thick timber this season at 120yrds with my optic at 15x. So maybe I’m biased. I shoot with both eyes open.

 

[Elkins45]

Those old steel tube scopes had mediocre optics at best compared to today's scopes. I would rather have good glass in an aluminum tube than poor glass in a steel one.

4X is easier to find and the difference between 4x and 6x isn't really all that great.

 

[Lafitte]

I say that if you really must go with a fixed power scope I recommend a 6X. My scoped rifles are equipped with variable scopes, when hunting they are set on 6X most of the time, will sometimes go higher or lower when "glassing" with the scope.
Lafitte

 

[mustanger98]

According to the game wardens and plenty of hunters, using your sight system for glassing is a big mistake. Ever been watched through a scope? Creepy feeling. Glassing's what they make binoculars and spotting scopes for.

I've heard a lot of guys throw off on "budget" scopes, but I've never had a problem with sub-$70 glass. Some guys don't like Simmons, but I got ahold of a couple of there fixed 4x32's and the look pretty good at MidwayUSA's price point ($32.99, IIRC). Considering that, I don't know why a Barska 2.5X compact, which I also know works, usually gets marked up closer to $50.

 

[Skylerbone]

Some guys don't like Simmons, but I got ahold of a couple of there fixed 4x32's and the look pretty good at MidwayUSA's price point ($32.99, IIRC).

While the glass is useable, there plenty of distortion away from the center and tracking is near non-existent. I bought 3 for kids’ rifles and have already retired 2 for better scopes.