Rifle Optic Questions

[nixdorf]

I now have my first centerfire bolt-action rifle. I picked up a Ruger M77 manufactured 1979 chambered in 30-06. It came with a cheap Tasco 3-9x40mm scope. I've put 50-60 rounds through it since buying it. I've also come to really love the rifle. I intend to hunt deer with it at less than 250 yards.

Unfortunately, I think I've pretty much hit a wall with accuracy. Given my lack of experience with centerfire rifles, I suspect its likely me and not the rifle. I've gotten 3-shot groups down to 1.5" at 100 yards, but that is exceptionally rare. Most groups are anywhere from 3" to 5" at 100 yards. This is shooting my own reloaded ammo from a bench with a Lead Sled Solo. Bullets are Nosler Ballistic Silvertips in 180g and Hornady SSTs in 150g.

I'm beginning to think my accuracy problem is caused by the optics. With this cheap Tasco scope, the bullseye is a tiny spot at 100 yards. It gets mostly covered by the reticule. Clarity is okay, but I can't consistently see the bullseye to put rounds consistently on target.

Lets assume I'm going to replace the scope. Would a higher-quality 3-9x40mm scope improve my accuracy? I'm not convinced that this Tasco is actually doing 9x magnification. Is 9x sufficient at 100 yards?

If better quality 3-9x40mm scope won't help, do I really need to jump up to the 50mm scopes to get a good bump in magnification? I don't like the idea of a huge scope on a hunting gun.

Thanks in advance.

 

[pikid89]

bushnell elite 3200
redfield (any)
Leupold Rifleman/VX-1/VX-2

going to a higher magnification won't help you anywhere but the on the bench (you will want to hunt on 3x most likely)...get a quality 3-9x40mm (or possibly a higher quality 32mm objective) and mount it a low as possible...the m77 will allow a 40mm to fit with the low rings

the groups you are getting if extrapolated to 250 yards are still within the kill zone of a deer and you should only need one shot
my m77s barrel heats up pretty quick doing 5 shot groups
take your time and just ensure that your first cold bore shot is going exactly where it needs to and you're golden

 

[Abel]

I've gotten 3-shot groups down to 1.5" at 100 yards, but that is exceptionally rare. Most groups are anywhere from 3" to 5" at 100 yards.

1.5" groups are normal for a hunting rifle. Its good to know that both you and the rifle are at least capable of this size group.

Lets assume I'm going to replace the scope. Would a higher-quality 3-9x40mm scope improve my accuracy? I'm not convinced that this Tasco is actually doing 9x magnification. Is 9x sufficient at 100 yards?

9x is great for sighting in & seeing what your rifle is capable of. But your hunting is typically done with a setting that allows for more field of view. 4x or 5x is usually the highest that I set mine while hunting. 50mm, in my opinion, sets the scope too high off of the rifle. Many people love the 50mm scopes for their perceived light gathering advantage. With all other things being equal, a 50mm objective will deliver a brighter view in low light than its 40mm counterpart. Do some research and spend as much as you can afford on a 3-9x40mm scope. It should improve your accuracy, but if it doesn't, you still will have a great scope for your rifle.

 

[G27RR]

A good 40mm scope will have more light and clarity than an inexpensive 50mm scope. I would go with an upgraded 40mm. Make sure your scope and/or rings aren't moving on you.

 

[BADUNAME37]

For a decent scope, one must pay good money, in my humble opinion. Over the years I used different scopes and found Tasco to be the absolute worst. Even to the point of knowing one could not stay sighted-in, I arranged to send it to Florida to have it repaired and they sent it back telling me there was nothing wrong with it, nothing to fix.

After that, I learned.

Now, I will buy nothing but Leupold. My time is worth more than sitting around at a range trying to figure out why sometimes the groups are good, other times, terrible. Add to that all the aggravation it puts one through and you quickly come to realize that the cheap optics are not really a "deal."

Plan on spending about $500 for a decent scope, mount and rings, a Leupold Vari-X-III 3-9x40-mm should suit you well. At least, with this setup, you can eliminate the scope, mount and rings as your problem. Then, should you want to accurize, you have a good start.

I suppose the inexpensive scopes are OK if all you are putting it on is a .22 rimfire that isn't even worth $90 to begin with and you just want a scope on it. With a gun having fairly-heavy to heavy recoil (like your '06), you want a scope you can rely on. You cannot rely on junk.

The above reflects my opinion.
Take it for what it's worth.
After looking at numerous scopes over the years, I have decided Leupold to be the best scope for my needs. Other user's mileage may vary considerably.

 

[redneck2]

You can only shoot as well as you can see. There's a reason target shooters use 36x. In your situation (which I'm at right now), I'm using a 3x12x50 Burris Black Diamond. It's going on a .35 WSSM AR for deer. Should be good to 300 yards.

More expensive scopes are clearer (helps in dark areas, at dawn & dusk). You can tell the clarity by looking into a dark area with the magnification turned all the way up. Cheap scopes are like looking thru fog or haze.

I had a Simmons on my muzzle loader. Wouldn't hold zero and fogged up during a deer hunt. Cost me a 14 pt. buck that I'd been after for four years.

I wouldn't worry as much about brand as quality. Any brand name's best scope will be better than their competitor's cheapest scope. Places like SWFA and Midway run sales from time to time. You can get some screaming deals if you are patient.

 

[1goodshot]

The Zeiss 3x9 are on sale for $400, I got 1 an really like it.

 

[whalerman]

I have to very respectfully disagree with Friendly somewhat. I would advise you not to get wrapped up too tightly in one name brand or model level. Sure, if you buy junk you will get junk. And don't expect a $100 scope to compete with a $500 scope. But there are huge variances from model to model in quality, clarity etc. Go shopping with your eyes. Look through one scope then another and try not to look at the price first. I had a experience recently with a Redfield Revolution 2-7 33mm outperforming a Leupold costing much more. Had I purchased with reputation only and looked with my own eyes, I would have wasted money and received less. Decide on what you need. Then shop with an open mind. Look for yourself.

Again Friendly, I agree with you on most everything you're saying. I'd just shy away from a one brand loyalty thing.

 

[jmr40]

A good 40mm scope will have more light and clarity than an inexpensive 50mm scope. I would go with an upgraded 40mm. Make sure your scope and/or rings aren't moving on you.

Good advice

The Zeiss 3x9 are on sale for $400, I got 1 an really like it

More good advice.


You defintely need an upgrade on your scope. It may, or may not improve your accuracy. Rugers are solid dependable rifles, but have never been known for extreme accuracy, especially the original 77 models. The newer MK-2's and Hawkeyes are usually a bit better.

1.5" accuracy is about what I'd expect from that rifle and is good enough for a hunting rifle. You should be able to do that consistently however. Good luck.

 

[redneck2]

FWIW.....I was at the LGS looking at scopes a few weeks ago. Just once in my life I wanted a Swarovski on a really good rifle. One of my friends just got a Leupold VX-R for a Canada trip.

I compared a VX-R to an equivalent Swarovski. Same magnification range, set at the same power (both at max). They both had the same size objective. The VX-R was very slightly clearer than the Swarovski. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. Swarovski was maybe $150 more.

As noted, simply saying "X" brand is best, or better than ______ is foolish unless there's a huge difference in their total price line (Swarovski vs Simmons).

The Leupold I looked at is supposedly the top of their line, and you pay for it.

 

[Art Eatman]

3x9s are great: You can see .30 bullet holes at 100 yards on 9X and you have a good field of view for hunting on 3X.

But you can get sub-MOA groups with a fixed 4x, and it's good for Bambi to at least 400 yards and more.

My own preference is for the Duplex cross hairs.

IOW, lots of good scopes out there for around $200 in variables; a lesser cost for fixed power.

 

[TCU]

the bushnell 3200 elite is an amazing scope, i love mine. I have one on my SPS Tactical and i usually shoot .5 @ 100 with good ammo.

 

[RickMD]

The biggest difference in most optics isn't so much the quality of the glass but the quality of their mechanics. Same thing applies to camera lenses. That's why most professional photographers use Nikon, Zeiss, or Canon lenses. They're not all that much sharper than cheap after market lenses but when your living depends on durability they're the only way to go.

Personally, after years of screwing around with sub-par scopes, I now buy only Leupold. Burris, Zeiss, Nikon, and several others are good as well. The Leupold VX-1, 3X9X40 is an excellent buy for 200 bucks. (It's the same scope as the older VX-II). Nice, bright, and comes with a lifetime guarantee. Don't get much better than that.

 

[dldbrandon]

Vortex Diamondback for 189.99
Solid scope from a solid company. They will replace your scope if ANYTHING happens to it. Doesn't matter if it was you, your friend, or that rock. Look at some reviews on youtube. I have the 4-12 and LOVE it.

 

[gshipps]

Hey just for kicks, dump the sled an just try bags for a group or two. I'd be willing to bet your groups tighten up or at least stay around 2".

 

[redneck2]

I was gonna mention that(^) and forgot. I have a solid type rest that straps the gun in and absorbs recoil. Got it for my 3" slug gun. Groups were crap. Shot off sand bags and they tightened up a LOT.

 

[godale]

i vote for the 3200 elite natchez and midway still have them on clearence. and you wont have to spend 400.00.

 

[benzy2]

Many have hit key points.

My first thought is the lead sled. While its good to get a high recoil rifle on target, it certainly isn't an accuracy minded rest. I'd try it from a front and rear bag. Let that gun recoil into your shoulder. You may not want to shoot .30-06 off a bench all day, but for a couple testing groups you should be fine.

Second, magnification isn't near as important as image quality. 9x is PLENTY to shoot 1" groups at 100 yards with everything else in the system being sorted. While the guys shooting for the last .01" look for higher magnification scopes, a field rifle meant for bigger game is going to be limited when you raise that minimum magnification from 3x. The guys who are real good shoot better than that with the right irons. Point is, high magnification isn't all that important for 1" groups.

I would be more interested in stepping into a scope that has a good build quality and good glass. Those points mean more to me. To get that, I have given up buying scopes from China. I know some will claim they work ok, but I've had too many from basically all the different labels all be a disappointment. Something like Nikon, Leupold, Sightron, Weaver, Burris, Bushnell Elite, and the non Crossfire line from Vortex all pop up as quality scopes for the money. Some lines have less bells and whistles and are cheaper than others, but they all end up being a fairly well built scope with fairly good glass. That is where I would start looking for a new scope. From there, I'd fit what works on the budget and feature list that you want.

 

[CraigC]

I'm all about dumping cheap scopes in the garbage can but IMHO, a better scope is probably not gonna make your groups shrink. With the proper target (more important than you think) and a good bench technique one can shoot MOA with buckhorns. So a 3-9x is more than adequate to properly test your rifle.

Based on my personal experience, I have to disagree about the Lead Sled. I don't know if those deriding them have ever used one but I have done my most accurate bench shooting across a Lead Sled. Including the sub-MOA shooting with buckhorn sights I mentioned.

I would strongly suggest a better scope. Even the bottom line scopes from Leupold, Burris, Nikon, Weaver, Bushnell (Elite only) and others will be vastly superior to any of the cheap Chinese stuff. Contrary to others, I see little difference between Japanese Tascos and Chinese Tascos. All junk. I have a boxful of busted cheap scopes to remind me that cheap is too expensive.

What you will probably need to look at to improve your shooting will be the rifle's bedding, the trigger and your shooting technique.

 

[pikid89]

i have an elite 3200 3-9x40 FireFly on my M77 canoe paddle 270 and my mom has a 3-9x50 on her M77 Compact (its almost as big as the rifle) and my brother is using my old Bausch & Lomb Elite 3000 (same scope) and all are awesome scopes

get one while you can as bushnell has stopped production on them in favor of the more pricy elite 4200 line

 

[wingman]

The new Redfield scopes are excellent scopes and fair priced, having said that doubt I would have chosen a 30-06 as a starter rifle(I can hear the screaming now)however have you tried a super cleaning of the barrel a gun that age may have a lot of copper fouling but would not hurt to try first prior to firing any more down range. You should be able to achieve 1.25 @100 with that gun "if" scope and bore are ok.

 

[35 Whelen]

With this cheap Tasco scope, the bullseye is a tiny spot at 100 yards.

If the bullseye is a tiny spot with a 3-9X scope, you need a larger bullseye.

I have a beat-up Remington 788 in .223 that wears a scuffed up 3-9 Tasco that's missing one of the adjustment caps. The rifle came to me in this condition and since it's the "around the house" rifle and spends most of its time in the rack in the laundry room waitong for chicken killing coyotes, I've left it as-is. Be that as it may, the rifle shoots sub-one inch groups consistently. Were this to become a rifle that I carried in the field, I'd definitely put a better quality scope on it. Point is, I wouldn't jump to conclusions and blame the scope.
Like someone already said, try without the Lead Sled. If the recoil bothers you, load your ammunition a little lighter. If you're hunting deer at under 250 yds., that Hornady 150gr. SST at 2700 fps would be more than sufficient and would recoil about like a 308 Win.

I'm with you regarding large scopes on hunting rifles. Some of them with gigantic objectives mounted on trim hunting rifles are akin to putting an oversized fiberglass hood scoop on a Masserati.

Like someone already said, you don't need high magnification to shoot good groups. The groups below were fired with rifles that at the time had fixed power scopes. The Ruger 280 wore a 70's vintage Redfield 4X and the Remington 220 Swift an old steel tube Weaver 6X. (They both now wear Burris 3-9x40's)





If you feel you need a better quality scope, go for it. But seriously, it doesn't have to be a $600+ scope to work.

35W

 

[BADUNAME37]

I agree there are really good inexpensive scopes out there that people use on all manner of guns without any problems whatsoever. I also believe that, for every one scope that is an inexpensive scope and working perfectly there are perhaps ten or more of the same scope that do not work properly and are merely a cause of confusion and frustration!

I know, because, during my younger years, when I first started really getting into shooting after I worked up my first load that, on more than just several occasions, I got sick and tired of chasing bullet holes all over the place on 3' x 3' targets at 50 yards, trying to get the bullet to even hit the huge 3' square corrugated cardboard backing!

I have better things to do with my time.

The "Ah-ha!" - Moment of Relief for me came when I finally bit the bullet and bought the Vari-X-III and tightened down the new Leupold scope mount, Leupold Rings and a 3.5 x 10 x 40mm scope on the gun and, somehow, INSTANTLY, whatever way I adjusted the scope, the bullet holes followed - suddenly, instead of wasting 20 to 40 rounds and still getting nowhere, after three strings of three rounds each I moved the target to the 100 yard range and it was about right on. Several more clicks and it was Spot-On! I have NEVER had to readjust it again, as long as I am using the original handloads that the gun really "liked."

I am not saying everyone should buy Leupold, people like vanilla, chocolate, strawberry and about a hundred other flavors, the same goes with scopes. I can, however, say with certainty that, when everything else has been looked at and taken into consideration and there is a $39 scope with free rings on the rifle, to me, the scope and mount and rings are IMMEDIATELY SUSPECT.

 

[Pacsd]

First of all I'd ditch the lead-sled. I loosened the rings on two scopes and cracked a stock using it. I thought my capability went south for a few days til I finally found the problems. I took the thing back and got a store credit. I've heard other stories along the same line about the lead sled. Try the bags and see what happens after you check out your rings and mount.

 

[Cryogaijin]

I'll also cast my vote for Zeiss scopes. I love zeiss optics.