The highest quality dot sight I've looked through was a Vortex. The glass was unimpressive. I think they don't care as much because of the market they are catering too.
And you are holding you revolver wrong handed sir.
Low power scope for deer.
- Thread starter Bfh_auto
- Start date
- Status
And you are holding you revolver wrong handed sir.
When I switched from 3-9-40 Nikon Prostaff's to 2-7-33 Leupold VX2 I noticed a difference between 2 and 3x. I not prefer the 2-7-33 as long as its in a higher quality scope like the VX2. My Nikon 2-7 is crap compared to the Leupold.
Now on a woodchuck gun I run 6-18-44 and on the coyote rifle its 4-12-44.
Now on a woodchuck gun I run 6-18-44 and on the coyote rifle its 4-12-44.
FL-NC
Member
This AR has a 4X Trijicon AGOG. I routinely hit 8" plates at 400 yards with this setup, although I wouldn't try it on a deer that far because the 223 will lose so much velocity at that distance.
This Ruger has an old 1.5- 4.5X oakshore scope in a 1" tube. The rifle is 300 BLK shooting subsonics, so it is limited to 100 yards or less. At 100 yards I can easily hit a Copenhagen can with it.
This Ruger has an old 1.5- 4.5X oakshore scope in a 1" tube. The rifle is 300 BLK shooting subsonics, so it is limited to 100 yards or less. At 100 yards I can easily hit a Copenhagen can with it.
hi
That Ruger is nice setup.
Garandimal
member
Well...
Have a:
3-9X40mm on the ole .270 Win. - stays on 3 but, if need be, will go as high as 6.
2-7X33mm on the 77/357 - stays on 2 but have run it up to 4.
2.5-8X36 on the new .270 Win. - and it will stay on 2.5, but go as high as 6.
GR
Have a:
3-9X40mm on the ole .270 Win. - stays on 3 but, if need be, will go as high as 6.
2-7X33mm on the 77/357 - stays on 2 but have run it up to 4.
2.5-8X36 on the new .270 Win. - and it will stay on 2.5, but go as high as 6.
GR
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,211
That depends, did I want the revolver to be steady or the camera...
All of them were weak hand though. You do know, if you use your weak hand enough, it becomes less weak, right?
That is very true.That depends, did I want the revolver to be steady or the camera...
All of them were weak hand though. You do know, if you use your weak hand enough, it becomes less weak, right?
For the record I was joking about the wrong hand comment.
Shot this deer around 40 yards on the trot in thick brush, w a fixed 4x.
Saw the hole and slid it through as he was going away. Old rifle, thought the fixed power was classic.
It didn't have enough mag for me to determine 100% if that was his ear at 75 yards in the blow down across the creek.
And it was almost too much mag when he came running past.
Have taken other movers up close, moving faster..........1 or 2X makes those shots easy.
2-7X for the overall win, if one has the discipline to always have things start at 2X LOL.
Had my other .35 rem w 2-7X and slid one through a 9 pointer's shoulders at 75 yards.........thick.........at 3X. Thought it was at 2X.
Still worked fine.
View attachment 832864
Saw the hole and slid it through as he was going away. Old rifle, thought the fixed power was classic.
It didn't have enough mag for me to determine 100% if that was his ear at 75 yards in the blow down across the creek.
And it was almost too much mag when he came running past.
Have taken other movers up close, moving faster..........1 or 2X makes those shots easy.
2-7X for the overall win, if one has the discipline to always have things start at 2X LOL.
Had my other .35 rem w 2-7X and slid one through a 9 pointer's shoulders at 75 yards.........thick.........at 3X. Thought it was at 2X.
Still worked fine.
View attachment 832864
I'm torn on pulling the 4X compact off the 760 and putting it on my 10/22...........move the 2-7X onto the 760.
I should just get another old Leupold 4x for the .22 and move the 2-7X onto a Ruger #1
C'mon man, the .35 rem is zeroed (and the crosshairs straight) LOL
If one doesn't shoot movers maybe a 4x is good enough.
I should just get another old Leupold 4x for the .22 and move the 2-7X onto a Ruger #1
C'mon man, the .35 rem is zeroed (and the crosshairs straight) LOL
If one doesn't shoot movers maybe a 4x is good enough.
mustanger98
Member
Not for big game, but I've found that a .22 rifle with a compact 2.5x21 (duplux reticle) will reach out 100yds+. Of course, I can hear all the naysayers when they hear that scope cost $50 or less. It got a chuckle from my brother-in-law until I started racking up hits. It'll work on a deer rifle too.
mcb
Member
I have only shot one deer with a scoped rifle (Leopold 3-9x40) all the rest have been shot with iron sights and a few with just a front beads (slugs in a shotgun).
I hunted unsuccessfully the past two years with a Vortex 2.5-10x44 and a Burris MTAC 1-4x24.
I hunted unsuccessfully the past two years with a Vortex 2.5-10x44 and a Burris MTAC 1-4x24.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
IMHO, most hunters over-scope their big game rifles. I've seen folks who've hunted for decades and never taken a shot over 150yds using 4-12's. I also think the ubiquitous 3-9x is the most overrated.
The Leupold 1.5-5x VXIII is my all-time favorite rifle scope. To me, it is about the most flexible big game scope possible. Perfect on a dangerous game rifle like this CZ .416Rigby. The rifle below it is a Ruger .338RCM that I bought as my elk rifle and I have another 1.5-5x to mount on it as well. Perfect for the handy 20" carbine. If I can't make a 300yd shot with a 5x, I don't need to be in the field. Only if I were hunting mule deer/antelope out west where 400yd shots were the norm, would I want more glass.
Also perfect for this little .250Savage International. I have a Leupold MK-AR 1-4x on my .450BM Ruger. I also like 2-7's and the 2.5-8x on the .270 at top is the most scope I'll ever put on a big game rifle.
#2 would be the VXII 1-4x, shown here on m CZ452FS.
The Leupold 1.5-5x VXIII is my all-time favorite rifle scope. To me, it is about the most flexible big game scope possible. Perfect on a dangerous game rifle like this CZ .416Rigby. The rifle below it is a Ruger .338RCM that I bought as my elk rifle and I have another 1.5-5x to mount on it as well. Perfect for the handy 20" carbine. If I can't make a 300yd shot with a 5x, I don't need to be in the field. Only if I were hunting mule deer/antelope out west where 400yd shots were the norm, would I want more glass.
Also perfect for this little .250Savage International. I have a Leupold MK-AR 1-4x on my .450BM Ruger. I also like 2-7's and the 2.5-8x on the .270 at top is the most scope I'll ever put on a big game rifle.
#2 would be the VXII 1-4x, shown here on m CZ452FS.
Those are some beautiful rifles.
Legionnaire
Contributing Member
I hunted with a 2-7x on my Model 7 in .308 for years. Sold that rifle and (stupidly) the scope. Current Model 7 is a 7mm-08; it wears a 2.5-8x.
Also have 2-7x scopes on my Ruger No.1 RSIs.
Also have 2-7x scopes on my Ruger No.1 RSIs.
MCgunner
Member
The brightest scope I have is a Weatherby Supreme 3x9x44. Generally, though, my 40mm objectives work fine.
I have a Leupold VX6 2-12 on my .300wm and have been happy with it. I start with it on 2x or 3x depending on how dense the surroundings. Been very happy with it.
I’d give up high magnification if I had to. I find using 10x or higher difficult in the field.
I’d give up high magnification if I had to. I find using 10x or higher difficult in the field.
mustanger98
Member
Some get it while some don't... the hunter needs to see the deer; not hair somewhere on the deer's side.
Being a woods hunter I always wanted a 4x40 scope for my Marlin 30-30. Only 4 power scopes I could find were 4x32 and seemed to be cheap quality. I finally found a Weaver Classic scope that is 4x38, good quality and glass. wider field of view than the 32 mm scopes. Bright and clear edge to edge. Payed around 150.00 a few years ago. Google Weaver and ck them out !!! hdbiker
I have a few.
Have a Weaver 2-7 on my Ruger No. 1 in .270 Win.
I have a Springfield 1903 with some old 2.5x scope with a post reticle.
Looks like this one.
I have a 3x ACOG (TA33 G) on one of my AR's (I mostly use that on hogs, but I did take a doe with it).
I also used to have an SWFA 1-4 on my PTR-91 using ARMS rings. A buddy wanted it more than I did though. That's a pretty good buy.
The ACOG is my favorite.
They provide good target identification while extending my range a bit while still being fast closer up.
The ACOG is almost red dot fast.
Chuck R.
Member
My "all around" deer rifle is an older Steer MOD M "Professional" in .270 that wears a Swarovski 2.2-9x.
I've killed a lot of deer with it and 5 Chamois, in both wooded (not the Chamois!!!) and open terrain.
I'm replacing it this year (barrel is about gone) and I bought a VX6 2.2-12 Leupold. While I've developed a liking for higher magnification, the longest shot I've ever made on a game animal was with a 6X on a Chamois in Austria at about 500 meters. I have 2 almost identical Swarovskis' in QD mounts; 2.2-9X on my .270 and a 1.5-6X on a 8x68S. I'd packed the wrong scope for the trip and ended up with the 1.5-6X. Luckily (not really, you do get what you pay for sometimes) the 1.5-6X rings fit on the 2.2-9X scopes bases. So a quick re-zeroing at my gunsmith's place and up the mountain we went.
I've killed a lot of deer with it and 5 Chamois, in both wooded (not the Chamois!!!) and open terrain.
I'm replacing it this year (barrel is about gone) and I bought a VX6 2.2-12 Leupold. While I've developed a liking for higher magnification, the longest shot I've ever made on a game animal was with a 6X on a Chamois in Austria at about 500 meters. I have 2 almost identical Swarovskis' in QD mounts; 2.2-9X on my .270 and a 1.5-6X on a 8x68S. I'd packed the wrong scope for the trip and ended up with the 1.5-6X. Luckily (not really, you do get what you pay for sometimes) the 1.5-6X rings fit on the 2.2-9X scopes bases. So a quick re-zeroing at my gunsmith's place and up the mountain we went.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The scary thing is that many use their rifle scope for glassing. So they mount a larger than necessary scope when they should be buying binoculars instead.
MCgunner
Member
If 7.62x39 is "weak", then so is the most prolific deer hunting round of the 20th century....the .30-30 Winchester. The old thuddy thuddy has killed many a deer. I even saw a guy the the New Mexico mountains, bolt gun country, toting a 94 Winchester. I'd bet that ol' boy had been successful more'n once with it.
The 7.62x39 is not "weak". It's range limited for sure, but not "weak". I can attest that a 154 grain cheap Wolf load will lay the smack down on a good sized pig.
The 7.62x39 is not "weak". It's range limited for sure, but not "weak". I can attest that a 154 grain cheap Wolf load will lay the smack down on a good sized pig.
- Status
