Recommended scope power for 200 - 300 yards hunting?

[gunsrfun1]

I've researched this on the web and found varying opinions, so I thought I would get some input from THR, which I usually find the most reliable source.
I recently bought a used Remington 78 Sportsman (basically a Rem 700) in .30-06, and took it to the range yesterday to sight in. I mounted a Bushnell Banner 4-12x40mm scope that I had lying around. I plan to use this as a hunting rifle for deer, etc. (should the opportunity arise).
What I found was that at 200 yards (the max. distance of our range), 12x seems a bit underpowered for my eyes. Granted, the Banner is not a top-of-the-line scope. And I realize that I was shooting at a target with a smaller "x" zone than an animal. But I still think I need some additional magnification.
So I'm curious what those of you with experience hunting (for deer, moose, etc.) at the 200 - 300 yard distance think I should step up to, in terms of power. It's a given that I would get a higher-end scope than a Banner.
I am thinking that somewhere from 14x to 18x on the top side would be good. For example, the Weaver Classic 4-16x42.
Two considerations for me are: a) price (I'd like to keep it under $350 or so), and weight (would like to keep it at no more than 16 oz. or so.)
Open to your opinions based on your experience.
Thanks

 

[Art Eatman]

I have a couple of old Leupolds on my two pet rifles. A 2-7 on my .243, which is plenty good for prairie dogs to 300 yards. A 3-9 on my '06, good to 350 on 3X.

Walking hunting, I always use the lower magnification for better field of view. Sitting, I might go up to 4X or 5X.

7X/9X is limited pretty much to the benchrest, testing loads or checking sight-in.

 

[SVTOhio]

Have you tried shooting at deer size targets yet or just small paper targets? It will make a huge difference and you'll see that you actually want less magnification for hunting. My varmint rifle (savage 25-06) wears a 4-16x and I would say that is way to much for the deer woods. I think a good 3-9x would be perfect for you. I have a nikon prostaff 3-9x40 on my ar and I have no problem knocking down steel targets out to 500 yards with it. Awesome scope for the money in my opinion.

 

[PowerG]

+1.

I have taken many deer in the ranges you're talking about with a 3x9, at even 300 it's plenty of magnification. Let's face it, with good bullets if your shot hits within 2" of a good aiming point you will have the deer DRT or nearly so. The problem comes at the other end, where the higher low magnification setting will limit field of view, and there is a strong probability that some of your shots will be much closer. More important, to me, is the scope's ability to be able to give a bright enough sight picture to be able to make a shot very early or very late. You not only must be able to see the deer, but see the reticle also, and a good portion of game taken is in the first or last few minutes of legal shooting light; the scope's low light performance will be best at the lowest magnification setting. If your vision does require more magnification keep that in mind, you're trading performance at one end of the range for loss at the other.

 

[MistWolf]

The 2-7 Leupold Art suggested is a good one and the only way to improve on it for your intended use would be to go to an even lower magnification. If 12 power at 200 yards isn't enough, either the scope isn't properly focused for your eyes, or the optical clarity of the lenses is lacking

 

[35 Whelen]

Well, Art pretty much beat me to it. It's really amazing how little magnification in a scope is actually needed for hunting big game. The rifle with which my family and I have hauled more game out of the field is a little Scout rifle with a 2 1/2x forward mount scope. My elk rifle wears a Burris 4X and the last bull I shot was at a little over 350 yds. PLENTY of magnification. I have a couple of 3-9x's, but like Art, I keep them on 2x to 3x most of the time. To me the perfect balance in a variable scope is the 2-7x.

Regarding shooting at targets, the key is to match your target to your scope and reticle. I've fired some really nice 100 yd. groups using 4x scoped rifles by using the proper target. Here's an example:



I was developing a load for my Dad's 35 Whelen. The rifle wears a 4x Leupold with a duplex crosshair whose center covers roughly 1/2" MOA at 100 yds. Even at this low magnification the crosshairs can easily be seen when aiming at the white squares that are nestled within the 4 black square.

Too, there are a couple of problems that go with higher magnification scopes; reduced field of view and loss of image quality due to lower light transmission.

You have a dandy rifle there. Years ago I bought a Remington 78 in .270, for my then teenage son. One deer season when he was about 14 years old I set him in the corner of a fairly large wheat field and went off elsewhere to hunt. He wound up shooting a buck at a distance which we later measured to be 385 yds. The old Weaver 4x that I'd mounted on the rifle worked just fine.

35W

 

[sage5907]

I think your problem is with the quality of the scope and not the magnification. My wife's nephew bought a Model 700 a few weeks ago with a Bushnell included in the package. The first thing I noticed when I looked through the scope was the critical eye relief which made the rifle harder to aim and also that the optics weren't as good a a higher quality scope. I would recommend that you buy a Leupold with 40MM objective in VX II, VX 2, or VX III, VX 3 in either 3-9, 3.5 -10 or 4-12 power. The eye relief isn't critical and the optics are great for a 300 yard shot. Used scopes that don't show any damage are just as good as new scopes.

 

[urbaneruralite]

I consider a 4-12x way too much magnification for that. I do it with a 1.5-6x. 6x works fine for 300 yard shots if you know how to use it. Use the reticle like you would an iron sight, rather than using magnification to pick a hair. Learning to use a lower power scope for that type of hunting is important, because most of your shots will be on moving animals at short range; inside 100 yards. A wide field of view of at least forty feet at 100 yards makes those more common shots easier.

Buy the scope that will work for the majority of your shots, not the occasional ones like we all tend to see when we daydream.

You could get a 2-10x scope to have the best of both worlds, but I don't know of a good one in your budget. I think B&H has the Leupold VX3 1.75-6x in your budget these days. I'd get one with the heavy duplex.

 

[gunsrfun1]

Thanks all, these are all great comments (as usual from THR members), so keep them coming. I do realize that I was "target shooting" at 200 yards, not "minute of deer" shooting, so there will be a difference. Good points about trying it with a different type of target. Plus I agree that I need a higher-quality scope.
What type of target would you suggest for sighting in at 200 yards? I am thinking maybe a square of some sort, to confirm that I am hitting "inside the box?" If so, how big should I size it to ensure that I would be in the kill zone on game?

 

[MistWolf]

If you want to know if you're grouping well enough to cleanly take a deer, use a paper plate for a target. If you can keep all your shots inside a paper plate at 200 yards using field positions (we're not talking about shooting from a bench here), you're accurate enough at that range

 

[SVTOhio]

Thanks all, these are all great comments (as usual from THR members), so keep them coming. I do realize that I was "target shooting" at 200 yards, not "minute of deer" shooting, so there will be a difference. Good points about trying it with a different type of target. Plus I agree that I need a higher-quality scope.
What type of target would you suggest for sighting in at 200 yards? I am thinking maybe a square of some sort, to confirm that I am hitting "inside the box?" If so, how big should I size it to ensure that I would be in the kill zone on game?

I would sight your gun in at 100 yards using any old target. Then buy one of the full size deer cardboard targets and set it different ranges. Shoot once and see how you do then move the target. (Shooting tiny little groups at 200 yards doesn't mean much in the hunting world if you don't put one in the kill zone on the first shot every time)

 

[HankB]

I have an older Leupold (specifically, a 3x9 Vari-X II with CPC reticle) on my .30/06 and think that's a fine 'scope for that class of hunting rifle - though I like to get closer, I've taken some game at 400+ yards and never felt I was "under magnified" for that.

I have higher mag 'scopes on rifles I use for longer distance target shooting, but the problem with something like a 6.5 x 20 'scope is that the field of view gets pretty darned small at higher magnifications, and may actually be counter productive in the hunting field.

One thing to consider is rifle FIT - how well does it fit YOU. To test this, assume a firing stance, but with the rifle down at your waist; focus your eyes on a distant target, close them and then raise the rifle to shooting position - and open your eyes. Do this several times - if the crosshairs aren't somewhere close to the target when you open your eyes, or worse, if you have to squirm around to even SEE through the 'scope - the rifle doesn't fit you. FIX IT!!

 

[sage5907]

gunsrfun1, I use a Hoppe's B3 target for most of my target shooting and hunting practice. It's a pistol target but it works better for long range rifle shooting than anything I have found. It has a 3 inch black bullseye on white paper. If you sight that 30-06 with 150 grain bullets to be dead on at 200 yards it will hit at the top of the black at 100 yards and be about 4 inches low at 300 yards. If you shoot at a deer size animal at 300 yards you aim at the upper 1/3 of the shoulder/lung area. Don't let the talk about low power scopes being all you need for hunting keep you away from a scope that fits your needs. If you buy a variable scope with a 3-9 or 4-12 range you can hunt with it at the low setting and turn the power up as the need arises. I hunt open country with the scope set on 6 power.

 

[Snyper]

98% of Deer and Elk are killed at ranges of 200 yds and less

A 3 x 9 or 4 X 12 makes the most sense

 

[jmr40]

You can make hits on big game animals with about 1X for each 100 yards. So a 1-4X scope should be good for up to 400 yards for big game hunting. More magnification is useful if more precision is needed for smaller varmints.

Most people use way too much magnification. I tend to prefer something in a 2-7X as a general purpose scope and use no more than 3-9X. Even at that I can't remember the last time I used one at anything but the lowest power setting when actually hunting.

Most shots even in the wide open western states are under 200 yards. Something with 1X or 2X is incredibly fast for quick snap shots and are still adequate for typical shooting. If you do find yourself in a situation where a longer shot is needed you will always have more time to adjust the scope to more magnification than to reduce magnification for fast close shots.

 

[mike.bayer1]

I agree the problem is likely more about the scope than the magnification. I had a Banner which I had to replace because it was so bad. The new Nikon 3x9x40 is so much better then cheap Bushnell.

 

[X-Rap]

The paper plate suggestion is a good one. There should be no reason aside from a medical condition that would warrant using 12x at that distance. You are not working with the best glass so I would try to shoot with a friend or someone who might have a better scope.

 

[jrdolall]

Someone please explain "Too much magnification". If I am hunting from a fixed blind, which I always do now that I am old, then I don't really see how I can have too much magnification. I don't shoot at running animals but I do understand eye relief and field of view. My definition of too much must be different because I don't think 12x is too much for 200-300 yards. I routinely use 8-9x at 100 or less. Using 4x at 200 yards on a stationary target when 9x is available just doesn't seem right to me.
A decent quality scope, and Banner falls at the lower end of that spectrum IMO, should give the hunter a good chance at making a good shot on a white tail at 300 yards. The entire point of using a scope is to bring the target closer and allow for more pinpoint accuracy. At 300 yards a 4x scope is going to have me aiming at the deer's shoulder but a 9x or higher will have me aiming at the heart which is what I want to hit.

 

[35 Whelen]

Someone please explain "Too much magnification". If I am hunting from a fixed blind, which I always do now that I am old, then I don't really see how I can have too much magnification. I don't shoot at running animals but I do understand eye relief and field of view. My definition of too much must be different because I don't think 12x is too much for 200-300 yards. I routinely use 8-9x at 100 or less. Using 4x at 200 yards on a stationary target when 9x is available just doesn't seem right to me.
A decent quality scope, and Banner falls at the lower end of that spectrum IMO, should give the hunter a good chance at making a good shot on a white tail at 300 yards. The entire point of using a scope is to bring the target closer and allow for more pinpoint accuracy. At 300 yards a 4x scope is going to have me aiming at the deer's shoulder but a 9x or higher will have me aiming at the heart which is what I want to hit.

When the deer of your dreams walks out ar 25 yards, or less, and your scope is set on 12, 9 or maybe even 4 power, you'll then fully understand too much magnification. I'm not quite sure why anyone would want to shoot at a fist-size target (a deers heart) when the lungs are a much larger and just as lethal of a target. Too much magnification also lowers available light transmission through the scope.

35W

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I've gone fixed 2.5x and 4x and my two hunting rifles and consider that good enough. If I wanted a variable I'd go. 2-7x. I know you want more power but I can't recommend something higher. How much shooting have you done at your hunting distances with photo targets of your game? In general, how good of a shooter are you?

 

[Skylerbone]

Too much magnification also results in wobble when shooting from less than ideal positions. I can hold steady at 9X when braced against a tree but wouldn't venture much beyond 5X for a standing shot.

As 3-9X scopes dominate the marketplace, my feeling is that they tend to offer a great value for your dollar and you'll have a myriad of choices. I own several 2-7X scopes which, while not as popular, offer more than enough magnification in a more compact, lightweight package.

 

[jrdolall]

When the deer of your dreams walks out ar 25 yards, or less, and your scope is set on 12, 9 or maybe even 4 power, you'll then fully understand too much magnification. I'm not quite sure why anyone would want to shoot at a fist-size target (a deers heart) when the lungs are a much larger and just as lethal of a target. Too much magnification also lowers available light transmission through the scope.

I agree that magnification of any amount at distances under 30 yards or so is "over magnified". My 10x binoculars really suck for bird watching at 10 yards.
I routinely make heart shots on deer at 100 yards. I have no problem aiming at a 5" or so target on a standing animal. I also hunt in terrain where a deer can run 100 yards and get into stuff I don't want to crawl through if I can help it so the heart gives me a better DRT chance.

I personally like a scope that gives me a great range of magnification. 3.5x10, 3x9 seem to work very well for me because I can crank it down as light fades if needed. As you said, low light conditions change what magnification you can use and most of the deer we shoot in the evening are in very low light conditions. Mornings this is not as often the case, though I did have a friend shoot a buck he should NOT have shot because he saw horns and it was too early for good identification.

 

[sage5907]

The original question was to suggest a scope for 200 to 300 yard hunting. For anyone who has a rifle with a 3-9 variable scope I would suggest setting 3 targets up at 300 yards and fire 5 rounds at 3 power, 5 rounds at 6 power and 5 rounds at 9 power and actually see which setting gives the best group. I know the 9 power would work best for me.

 

[Clint M]

I read over some of the post, and you have received some good advice. Scope power seems to vary among different shooters, however still on medium sized game such as deer this is what I have found works.

Power upper range for me is the 3.5-10/3-9 40mm objective I don't want anything with more power than that and I hardly ever if ever use the upper 50% range of this while hunting. I prefer a 1.75-6x32, 2.5-8x36 this range or close is the cream of the crop for me plenty of scope even upper magnifications is hardly ever used and nice big field of view without lots of weight.

Makers Leupold vx-3 is what I try for but if I find something on sale or used Leupold vx2, Bushnell 3200 and up, Sightron sII, upper end Burris etc etc. I usually end up with around $300 in a scope...it's nice to find used however I have purchased clearance or sale and got great deals.

Mounting hardware I like weaver bases and Burris Z rings with plastic inserts, if you ever decide to sell the scope the rings will pay for themselves by no marks on scope,and they are a fine mounting system.

 

[Fatdaddy]

Sounds like you want a new scope with higher magnification....I say go for it!
Make this your "Bean field" long range rifle.
I used a Bushnell Banner 6x18x50 AO for over a decade.
For woods hunting 6x never failed me but when I'd hunt one spot that was a field on the other side of a 5 acre pond the 18x came in handy (300yard+).
What I generally found myself doing with the higher power was taking a closer look at my groups when punching paper.
Beware the higher powers though, they can make a goat sized deer look huge and will also show you how bad you are really shaking.