Scope for Win70 in 375

Some of these fancy scopes ... should come equipped with a defibrillator in case hunter falls and bangs it up. I just cannot justify spending that kind of money for a tool I intend to use hard. But I guess for some folks hunting is not supposed to be hard. Personally, I don't enjoy hunting unless it's challenging.
Did you really just say your high fenced ranch hunts in the eastern cape are harder than hunts in Zim, Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania or other wild parts of Africa where many are using these higher end optics? I guess when the military is using these high end brands they not using them hard? Never saw Uncle Sam have a heart attack when they got scratched or dented
 
Used Schmidt & Bender 1-6x42mm. They sell for $2500 new, they hit this site and others with great regularity for $500-$800. Enough light gathering for nocturnal hunts with 375HH, enough clarity to take the occasional 300 yard shot with ease.
This advice on the S&B is super true. The older 1.1-4x20 or gen 2 1.1-4x24's are a GREAT optic but often bring more than they were new now. The 1-6x42 is a great in between priced optic and the 1-8 Exos is a great option as well.

I personally have 375's set-up with the following

M70 (no irons) w/ Leupold VX6HD 2-12x42
M70 (has irons) w/ Leupold VX6HD 1-6 in Warne QD's, w/ spare 3-15x44 in Warne QD's
M70 (has irons) w/ S&B 1-8x24 in Tally QD's
375 Double w/ S&B 1.1-4x20
 
Did you really just say your high fenced ranch hunts in the eastern cape are harder than hunts in Zim, Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania or other wild parts of Africa where many are using these higher end optics? I guess when the military is using these high end brands they not using them hard? Never saw Uncle Sam have a heart attack when they got scratched or dented
20220825_173734.jpg
20220826_170712.jpg
20220827_135821.jpg

20220828_110857.jpg


I haven't hunted Zim, Tanzania, Mozambique, etc. But Eastern Cape is plenty rugged.

And my elk hunting grounds in Montana are not for the faint hearted.
20221127_105452.jpg
20221127_125646.jpg


Sadly, this was helicopter logged in the late eighties. I shot a pair of muley bucks on that ridge when it was still virgin timber. That was four years after I took a bull elk a few hundred yards further up the ridge. I pulled him down the mountain whole by myself. My Weaver scope got a bit banged up that day when I became tangled up with the carcass and rode it fifty yards as a toboggan ... praying it didn't go end over end ... again. I also pulled the two bucks down to the truck. Used my belt looped over their horns with adjacent legs tied together with flagging tape. Hard hunting.
1980 bull.JPG
 
Last edited:
Some of these fancy scopes ... should come equipped with a defibrillator in case hunter falls and bangs it up. I just cannot justify spending that kind of money for a tool I intend to use hard. But I guess for some folks hunting is not supposed to be hard. Personally, I don't enjoy hunting unless it's challenging.
And some of us will hunt hard with that good equipment.
 
Lot's of great suggestions. All personal or wallet dependent. Vortex PST Gen 2- 1 x 6- mil reticle and illuminated red dot. I now really like it, used on Buffalo twice at between 80 and 100 yds and a wildebeest at 260 and Eland at 160. I like it enough now, just threw a new one on a deer country rifle because I love the way it throws up and the variable red dot illumination. Get what you like, and can afford.
 
I haven't hunted Zim, Tanzania, Mozambique, etc. But Eastern Cape is plenty rugged.

And my elk hunting grounds in Montana are not for the faint hearted.
So why say for some folks hunting must not be hard, if they're using higher end optics? Especially if you've never done that type of hunt? We get it, you've got 1 good eye and the name number of good brain cells but why always narrow everything down to your extremely limited personal view?

There's a reason those High End optics are more durable and have a better warranty than the stuff you choose to penny pinch on. There's a reason the military uses S&B and Leupold optics on SWS. If my life or the life of others might depend on my chosen tools don't you think it's better to not be a cheap SOB? But hey, you also think it's foolish to spend more on just daily rates to hunt wild parts of Africa than your high fenced EC game ranch, and that you're getting the same African experiences.

Also for reference, I've hunted the EC both ranches and free range conservancies. I see nothing wrong with those hunts only that you can't open your one good eye and mind to others opinions.
 
I'd like to take a moment to bounce my thoughts off the collective brain trust here....

Got a Model 70, cal .375H&H. Was thinkin' about an optic, and my thoughts seem to be settling on a Leupold VX Freedom 1.5x4x20

I can't currently imagine taking a shot more than 200-250 yards. My thought was to keep the magnification low for the closer shooting most likely, and to put the scope on Talley quick detachable rings/mount just in case I need to revert to irons.

Quite honestly.... I may shoot irons most of the time, so I'm not wanting to sink a huge amount into an optic, even considered a fixed magnification red dot.

Open to all thoughts on this.
Unless this setup is exclusively for dangerous game up close, at that price point I would go with whatever iteration of a vx3 2.5-8 that you wish. I'm sure you can find a used one for the same or less than a Freedom and it is a step up in quality.

Of if strictly a DG rig, a vx3 1.5-5 or if open to a 30mm, a VXR in 1-4. The VXR is illuminated so basically a built in red dot! Or if you can find one, a 2-7 would give a little more reach if using it on PG.
 
So why say for some folks hunting must not be hard, if they're using higher end optics? Especially if you've never done that type of hunt? We get it, you've got 1 good eye and the name number of good brain cells but why always narrow everything down to your extremely limited personal view?

There's a reason those High End optics are more durable and have a better warranty than the stuff you choose to penny pinch on. There's a reason the military uses S&B and Leupold optics on SWS. If my life or the life of others might depend on my chosen tools don't you think it's better to not be a cheap SOB? But hey, you also think it's foolish to spend more on just daily rates to hunt wild parts of Africa than your high fenced EC game ranch, and that you're getting the same African experiences.

Also for reference, I've hunted the EC both ranches and free range conservancies. I see nothing wrong with those hunts only that you can't open your one good eye and mind to others opinions.
tmp.gif
 
So why say for some folks hunting must not be hard, if they're using higher end optics? Especially if you've never done that type of hunt? We get it, you've got 1 good eye and the name number of good brain cells but why always narrow everything down to your extremely limited personal view?

There's a reason those High End optics are more durable and have a better warranty than the stuff you choose to penny pinch on. There's a reason the military uses S&B and Leupold optics on SWS. If my life or the life of others might depend on my chosen tools don't you think it's better to not be a cheap SOB? But hey, you also think it's foolish to spend more on just daily rates to hunt wild parts of Africa than your high fenced EC game ranch, and that you're getting the same African experiences.

Also for reference, I've hunted the EC both ranches and free range conservancies. I see nothing wrong with those hunts only that you can't open your one good eye and mind to others opinions.
You forget I did my time in the US military. I recall not so fondly the first time I was handed an M16. Really? They're sending soldiers into Vietnam combat with this pop gun? Thankfully, my duty weapon was a 1911. And then that was replaced with 9mm. Brother! So I'm supposed to be impressed with the scope choices Uncle Sam makes in outfitting soldiers?

The point I have made is expensive does not always equate to quality. But somehow that makes me close-minded? :D :D
 
Last edited:
The point I have made is expensive does not always equate to quality. But somehow that makes me close-minded? :D :D
When it comes to optics, you usually do get what you pay for. I started with Redfield and Tasco when I was a kid but quickly moved to Leupold and Ziess, with some Vortex (not a fan) and a few others tried in between, but now mostly Swarovski. There IS a difference.

He did not call you closed minded that I recall
... He correctly stated that you seem to have as many brain cells as good eyes. I believe that equates closer to small minded than it does to close minded.
 
I’ve had a 1-5 on my CZ550 375 but changing to a Leupold VX5 2-10. It’s such a versatile calibre I think you are limiting yourself by going too low magnification
 
Where do the Nikon Monarchs stack up? I thought I've seen a lot of praise of the Monarch 1-4x on here and had the impression it's an adequate DG scope. But it sold for only a few hundred dollars not that long ago before Nikon bailed.

There has to be a lower limit of what is adequate for a potentially dangerous hunt. No Vortex Crossfire, for example (out of curiosity I once asked their service desk and they confirmed: the Crossfire was not designed for a 375 or up!)

I thought the Monarch was above the line but I'd like to hear what people think, especially given the above discussion.
 
There is a tremendous difference of opinion on optics. The 375 is not a heavy kicker so many scopes will work, however mine 20 years ago destroyed a Burris with posi-lock. that is when I bought the Leupold
What is really necessary to determine the difference is to look at the same object through several scopes in a hunting situation. Did that once a long time ago, ordered 5 scopes from Cabela's , nailed a newspaper on a tree 100 yards from my front porch and spent several days at different times just looking. Ended up buying a Bausch & Lomb 4000 and sent the others back
 
The Nikon 1-4 Monarch that was made in Japan has a great reputation for being able to stand up to heavy recoil from the biggest rifles.

I have one, it’s mounted on a 458 Lott that I’ve never hunted with.

Optically it’s decent and usable. It has a heavy 4 reticle and a lot of eye relief.

They are now very hard to find and cost more than double what they sold for new.
 
The Nikon 1-4 Monarch that was made in Japan has a great reputation for being able to stand up to heavy recoil from the biggest rifles.

I have one, it’s mounted on a 458 Lott that I’ve never hunted with.

Optically it’s decent and usable. It has a heavy 4 reticle and a lot of eye relief.

They are now very hard to find and cost more than double what they sold for new.
I didn't know they had made some in Japan. I've only only seen Monarchs that were made in the Philippines.
 
Gents (@Ontario Hunter). If someone wants to spend $100 for a used scope to put on their $800.00 dangerous game rifle, that is their business. At the same time, if someone wants to put a $3000.00 scope on their $13,000.00 dangerous game rifle, that is their business. Spending less or more on our equipment doesn't equate on how hard or easy we hunt. Why do we have to criticize what the other guy/gal buys, or what they hunt with, or where they hunt. My grandparents taught me to respect to be respected. Respect their choices in life, and if that doesn't go with your believes, budget, etc, move on and live your life and let the others live theirs.

Now, let's get back on track and to our regular scheduled program, which is "Scope for Win70 in 375".
 
I don’t see the point in running a scope that small on a 375. How many people have actually been killed due to having a low end minimum zoom of > 1 x? I’d rather make sure my first shot is a bullseye, and for me that’s a 3-9. I don’t want milk jug accuracy at 125 just in case I have a 10 yard shot in cover.
 
Where do the Nikon Monarchs stack up? I thought I've seen a lot of praise of the Monarch 1-4x on here and had the impression it's an adequate DG scope. But it sold for only a few hundred dollars not that long ago before Nikon bailed.

There has to be a lower limit of what is adequate for a potentially dangerous hunt. No Vortex Crossfire, for example (out of curiosity I once asked their service desk and they confirmed: the Crossfire was not designed for a 375 or up!)

I thought the Monarch was above the line but I'd like to hear what people think, especially given the above discussion.
@PHOENIX PHIL ?

I have a couple Monarch scopes on smaller rifles and they are on par with a Leupold VX3 in my opinion. I would rate them as one of the better values available when it comes to cost vs. quality however these days @Just Gina and I both choose to use higher quality scopes.

I have always said the quality vs cost is on a declining scale. In other words on the low cost end you can double the quality of glass for doubling what you spend. However as you move up, you may gain 25% quality for 50% increase in cost. But you still get increased quality for the extra cost... plus very likely extra features.
 
Note: I was writing this as some of the more recent ones were being posted. I think I'm in general agreement with the last few posts above.

Regarding "you get what you pay for". I agree, but I think need to make distinctions about what we're paying for.

Speaking of two scopes I've never even touched but I'm pretty sure these details are widely accepted: a NightForce SHV is more durable than a Swarovski Z8, but the NF costs about 1/4 as much. The difference is in the quality of the glass, and you pay increasingly more for that. The NightForce has good enough glass and exceptional durability, while the Swaro has exceptional glass and good enough durability. There are different dimensions of quality that don't aren't always packaged together in the same way and the slopes of the cost graphs may be different.

At the low end, the question becomes how good is good enough? Assuming that Leopold isn't lying through its teeth (and I don't think they are) they make everything to a high standard of durability. You get better glass and more features from spending more. I'm open to hearing information that may prove otherwise, but I don't think someone is risking a fogged scope by using a Freedom.

Regarding the Bushnells, I think the new Elites are too new to know how they'll hold up. The old Elites only had about 3.25" of eye relief so they weren't good for DG rifles for most people. But the old Elites were generally regarded as pretty tough. The new ones have 4" of eye relief so on that basis they can be considered for DG. My impression from trying them is that the new Elites are comparable in build quality to the Philippines made Monarchs. Time will tell. Anyway, while I don't agree with Ontario's implication about the personal toughness of expensive scope owners, I also don't think his scope choice is stupid. Marginal, perhaps. He even admitted so himself. But I think he's doing a worthwhile experiment and I'd like to hear the range report after 100 or so rounds of .404 Jeffery.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
55,583
Messages
1,182,335
Members
96,939
Latest member
EmiliaBrya
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

cwpayton wrote on Goat416's profile.
Goat416 welcome to the forum ,youve got some great pics and Im sure trophy's
ghay wrote on professor's profile.
Hello,
Would you consider selling just the Barnes 235's and 250g TTSX's?
Hunt27 wrote on Tra3's profile.
Spain, i booked through a consultant, i book almost everything through him now and he's done me right. his contact 724 986 7206 if interested and he will have more info to share,
I hunted elephant with Luke Samaris in 2005. It was my fourth safari and I tell you he is a fine gentleman the best. I got the opportunity to meet Patty Curtis, although never hunted with him but enjoyed our conversation around our tent in the Selous. Very sad for a tough guy to leave this world the way he did. Let’s pray the murderers are caught. I hope to see Luke in Nashville.
RLP wrote on professor's profile.
Good morning. I am a Ruger fan myself. Have you sold to anyone on the site before? How old is the ammo?

RLP
 
Top