Scope help?

[WAB]

I have a gloss 4.5-14x VX3 on my .22 hornet. It’s in good shape and I’d be willing to part with it, but I’d need enough $ to replace it with the matte version.

 

[HookMeUpII]

I can't comment on your gloss question but I am running a Leupold VX5HD 3.5-15x44 on a Browning X-Bolt in 300WM. Being that you wish to hunt both PG and potentially take longer shots here in the USA for NA game, I think something in the 3.5-15x44 or 2-10x42 would be how I would go. You could also find something comparable in Leica or Swaro I imagine as well. So far, I've been really happy with objective and mag. It's clear glass, for starters. Dialed down to 5-6x. It's quite easy to quickly bring into frame smaller targets within 100 yds. Dialing up to 15x you can pretty much see a hair on a gnats backside at 200-300 yds. I am also running the Talley LW integrated mounts in medium height. I spoke to them, did lap them, and they fit the scope well. I imagine you could undo the screws and remount a lower power scope. It still is a pain though. Re-leveling, re-torquing, re-zeroeing is just not fun. It's do-able but, well, just a pain really. I have all the tools in-house: Gun vise, scope lapping and aligning kit, torque wrench, and all the levels. It's still groan-inducing any time I have to fuss around.

I know it's probably not what you want to hear but really, I would probably want two guns in your case. When it came down to selecting an optic, I felt going lower than 3.5-15x and a 44mm objective on a 300WM rifle was sort of short-changing the abilities. With how flat the 300WM shoots and the energy it carries throughout the range, I feel like I wanted to be able to really dial it up for longer shots. a 2-10x42 I really think is also acceptable. But it really is all what you're looking to do. If you want the penetration and energy of a 300WM within closer ranges, it does the job probably just as well if not more so. Granted, we've been told our first SA safari most PG shots will need to be quick and anywhere from 50-150 yds, mostly.

 

[rookhawk]

i'm trying to catch up to the conversation since January on this thread. Not sure if the gun already went to G&H or not?

In short, NO, you do not want a G&H sidemount.
1.) Very expensive
2.) It isn't providing a valuable solution worth paying money for.

The reason for a G&H is to allow an optic to be set extremely low to the action. This is because most fine guns of eras bygone were iron sight guns and stocked accordingly. Thus, you had to have ultra low mounts, mounts even lower than the lowest rings could provide you, in order to get fast target acquisition with an optic.

The OP doesn't have this issue. The factory stock on a modern win70 has a stock built for scope mounts. So there, I saved you $1400+ for a G&H mount and installation.

Oh, and a G&H mount doesn't provide you with swap-back-and-forth multiple optics very well either. The optic is measured and that is where they decide to permanently deface the side of your action and stock to permanently install the mount. The eye relief will be set for that particular scope and the eye relief may not line up suitably for the next optic. A change of optic exit objective bell size for scope #2 may preclude its use altogether.

Also, its putting a spoiler on a toyota camry. The scope mount exceeds the value of the gun.

So in conclusion, don't do this.

What you can do that is plenty viable for a fraction of the price would be:

1.) $200 Talley Mounts and QD rings. You can get different height QD rings for multiple scopes because the 1-6x24mm needs LOW and a 4-12x40mm needs MEDIUMS. Eye relief will probably work with both.

2.) If that won't work, or you want a better system while expending more money, get EAW pivot mounts for all your optic arrangements. $700 for the first setup, about $350 for each additional ring set. You can get various ring heights and diameters and offsets to suit a variety of optics all on a single rifle. 1", 30mm, 34mm, RMR mounts, etc.

Can't help you on the gloss scope question. All I know is i wouldn't want one on a safari rifle shining away in the noonday sun when I can hunt closer with matte finished scopes, guns, and barrels.

 

[rookhawk]

Postscript:

It would take a lot of searching, but for less money and more elegance, you could hunt for the next year looking for a 1962-1963 era Pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in 300WM. They made some. They are valuable. If they had a G&H mount on them, collectors scoff at them. So you'd get it for a song, less than a new Win70 and with quite a bit more soul. Probably comes with a vintage gloss scope in the mount already. I'd think you'd pay less than $2000 if it had a G&H installed, with optic, since it has no collector value remaining but it is a fine shooting iron.

If you want a supergrade, you could find one in 300HH with a G&H sidemount that is pre-64 for peanuts as well, probably less than $2000 as well.

Or for the ultimate, and for about the same budget as newly made win70 + G&H mount + Optic, you could buy a vintage Griffin & Howe rifle for the $4000-$5000 price range that will be build on a win70 action, will have the mount, will be engraved, will be world class, will have the optic, and will go up in value rather than be worth $800 at a pawn shop like the original approach would be appraised.

Sorry if I seem blunt (intended) but don't take that as mean (not intended). Just trying to set the stage you're putting really good money into a bad investment. Its not a real winchester, it will never be collectible, and its worth half as much with the G&H mount on it as the gun was worth naked the day it arrived unfired.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I agree with the others, the G&H mounts work well, but there is no reason if your rifle is already drilled and tapped. Talleys are great.
As for the scope, I would use a quality 3x9 or 2.5x8. I prefer my scopes to have a maximum power no more than 10.

 

[Rubi_300]

Did you say side mount? If so it won’t be a good long range rig.

Why is that? Is it not a stable base?

 

[Flewis]

Why is that? Is it not a stable base?

There are some that are fairly solid, but as a whole not. Too much play for long range work.

 

[Rubi_300]

Postscript:

It would take a lot of searching, but for less money and more elegance, you could hunt for the next year looking for a 1962-1963 era Pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in 300WM. They made some. They are valuable. If they had a G&H mount on them, collectors scoff at them. So you'd get it for a song, less than a new Win70 and with quite a bit more soul. Probably comes with a vintage gloss scope in the mount already. I'd think you'd pay less than $2000 if it had a G&H installed, with optic, since it has no collector value remaining but it is a fine shooting iron.

If you want a supergrade, you could find one in 300HH with a G&H sidemount that is pre-64 for peanuts as well, probably less than $2000 as well.

Or for the ultimate, and for about the same budget as newly made win70 + G&H mount + Optic, you could buy a vintage Griffin & Howe rifle for the $4000-$5000 price range that will be build on a win70 action, will have the mount, will be engraved, will be world class, will have the optic, and will go up in value rather than be worth $800 at a pawn shop like the original approach would be appraised.

Sorry if I seem blunt (intended) but don't take that as mean (not intended). Just trying to set the stage you're putting really good money into a bad investment. Its not a real winchester, it will never be collectible, and its worth half as much with the G&H mount on it as the gun was worth naked the day it arrived unfired.

For the maple m70 I am kinda rethinking about adding sights or a side mount to it now. Tossing around the idea of something in 300H&H or 7x57mm to keep as my iron sight rifle.

I actually was talking to G&H this morning about a separate rifle, a m70 safari express. On that I was wanting to get the matte finish stripped and have it blued, kinda to create my own super grade. We came to the conclusion I can get a used G&H in 375 or a pre 64 for the same price and it would defiantly have higher value than a customized new m70.

I am not too worried about keeping value since these will become heirlooms one day but also don't want to just destroy a nice guns value when I could've gotten something that will hold its value.

 

[Rubi_300]

i'm trying to catch up to the conversation since January on this thread. Not sure if the gun already went to G&H or not?

In short, NO, you do not want a G&H sidemount.
1.) Very expensive
2.) It isn't providing a valuable solution worth paying money for.

The reason for a G&H is to allow an optic to be set extremely low to the action. This is because most fine guns of eras bygone were iron sight guns and stocked accordingly. Thus, you had to have ultra low mounts, mounts even lower than the lowest rings could provide you, in order to get fast target acquisition with an optic.

The OP doesn't have this issue. The factory stock on a modern win70 has a stock built for scope mounts. So there, I saved you $1400+ for a G&H mount and installation.

Oh, and a G&H mount doesn't provide you with swap-back-and-forth multiple optics very well either. The optic is measured and that is where they decide to permanently deface the side of your action and stock to permanently install the mount. The eye relief will be set for that particular scope and the eye relief may not line up suitably for the next optic. A change of optic exit objective bell size for scope #2 may preclude its use altogether.

Also, its putting a spoiler on a toyota camry. The scope mount exceeds the value of the gun.

So in conclusion, don't do this.

What you can do that is plenty viable for a fraction of the price would be:

1.) $200 Talley Mounts and QD rings. You can get different height QD rings for multiple scopes because the 1-6x24mm needs LOW and a 4-12x40mm needs MEDIUMS. Eye relief will probably work with both.

2.) If that won't work, or you want a better system while expending more money, get EAW pivot mounts for all your optic arrangements. $700 for the first setup, about $350 for each additional ring set. You can get various ring heights and diameters and offsets to suit a variety of optics all on a single rifle. 1", 30mm, 34mm, RMR mounts, etc.

Can't help you on the gloss scope question. All I know is i wouldn't want one on a safari rifle shining away in the noonday sun when I can hunt closer with matte finished scopes, guns, and barrels.

The gun hasn't even arrived to me yet..sigh. Still have a few months to go. I am defiantly leaning away from a side mount and iron sights all together for this. For the reasons like you have listed above. Looking at some other guns that will just be exclusively iron sights. I was unaware that there isn't any adjustment left with the scope once the side mount goes on.

 

[0002S]

OP, your rifle and your dime. But here is my two cent.

Gloss isn’t popular today, because well, gloss. But that being said, the VAR-XII and III from the 80’s would be your best choice. The glass and coatings are not even close to what’s available today. The turret adjustments are friction. You’re not going to be able to adjust come ups based on a known ranges in the field. You’ll have no illumination either. If you do go this route, I’d send it into Leupold and have then go over the scope and rehab anything wrong with it.

As far as the mount, as was mentioned above, you’re throwing good money chasing something Tally QDs will give you.

Honestly you’d find a 50’s custom rifle set up to your gloss/gloss iron sights side mount specs for less that you’re going to spend on this rifle.

I can’t tell you how many Weaver, Redfield, Leupold, Burris, and random Japanese glass scopes I have in a box that I’ve taken off rifles and replaced with modern optics. On some of the older rifles, I’ll keep 1” tubes because the lines of the rifle warrant it.

The way I look at it, I’m hunting to successfully harvest an animal. At the current cost to hunt, I don’t want to risk wounding and loosing an animal because I chose older equipment and or technology when I didn’t have too.

 

[ActionBob]

I would second the Swarovski Z5 3.3-18x44. I would do it in a W4 reticle (wind hash marks) and a Balistic Turret. In Tally or other good mounts depending if sights on the gun. Its a fantastic quality scope in a 1" tube. I love mine and have taken Game out over 500 yards.

A lower cost 1" Tube, also great option is a now discontinued Zeiss Conquest HD 5 in 3-15 with hash marks in the Christmas tree configuration. I have one on 338 Wind Mag that is very accurate. Issue is you have to be at he right magnification for it to be accurate at range. Like 12.7x at 300 yards.

If you are happy with a bulkier 30mm tube, the Leupold VX 6 in a 2-12 x 42 illuminated (why not go with illuminated at that point?). No reason to need lower than 2x. I'd go this route before a 1-6 or maybe even 1-8. Or the aforementioned VX 5 in 3-15.

 

[Rubi_300]

OP, your rifle and your dime. But here is my two cent.

Gloss isn’t popular today, because well, gloss. But that being said, the VAR-XII and III from the 80’s would be your best choice. The glass and coatings are not even close to what’s available today. The turret adjustments are friction. You’re not going to be able to adjust come ups based on a known ranges in the field. You’ll have no illumination either. If you do go this route, I’d send it into Leupold and have then go over the scope and rehab anything wrong with it.

As far as the mount, as was mentioned above, you’re throwing good money chasing something Tally QDs will give you.

Honestly you’d find a 50’s custom rifle set up to your gloss/gloss iron sights side mount specs for less that you’re going to spend on this rifle.

I can’t tell you how many Weaver, Redfield, Leupold, Burris, and random Japanese glass scopes I have in a box that I’ve taken off rifles and replaced with modern optics. On some of the older rifles, I’ll keep 1” tubes because the lines of the rifle warrant it.

The way I look at it, I’m hunting to successfully harvest an animal. At the current cost to hunt, I don’t want to risk wounding and loosing an animal because I chose older equipment and or technology when I didn’t have too.

Since I’ve been thinking of it and with the knowledge of yours and others I think I won’t put a side mount on and instead go with Talley rings.
As for the scope itself, I have word that the custom shop is going to be opening up sometime this year. I was speaking with leupold on options and they said to just wait and I can get a vx6 or vx5 with all the modern features but I can order a gloss finish. It’s exactly what I want but it’s defiantly going to get pricy but worth it in my opinion to get the gloss finish.

 

[Rubi_300]

I would second the Swarovski Z5 3.3-18x44. I would do it in a W4 reticle (wind hash marks) and a Balistic Turret. In Tally or other good mounts depending if sights on the gun. Its a fantastic quality scope in a 1" tube. I love mine and have taken Game out over 500 yards.

A lower cost 1" Tube, also great option is a now discontinued Zeiss Conquest HD 5 in 3-15 with hash marks in the Christmas tree configuration. I have one on 338 Wind Mag that is very accurate. Issue is you have to be at he right magnification for it to be accurate at range. Like 12.7x at 300 yards.

If you are happy with a bulkier 30mm tube, the Leupold VX 6 in a 2-12 x 42 illuminated (why not go with illuminated at that point?). No reason to need lower than 2x. I'd go this route before a 1-6 or maybe even 1-8. Or the aforementioned VX 5 in 3-15.

I absolutely love the Zeiss conquest scopes. I have two of them on Remington 700’s one in 270 and the other in 17 centerfire. The one recently took a drop too hard and had to be replaced and they happily just sent me a new scope. it was great dealing with them. However I will never buy another ziess product again. I hate to be “that guy” but last year when they were going on how they don’t want their brand associated with youth and guns or “assault rifles” it put a sour taste in my mouth. I’ve always been a leupold guy at heart anyways.

I’m not too familiar with swarovaski but obviously you don’t get so many people that swear by them when making junk. the couple times I’ve looked through them they defiantly are nice. Do you prefer one over say a leupold vx5 or vx6? Still in the same price range and quality level.

 

[0002S]

Since I’ve been thinking of it and with the knowledge of yours and others I think I won’t put a side mount on and instead go with Talley rings.
As for the scope itself, I have word that the custom shop is going to be opening up sometime this year. I was speaking with leupold on options and they said to just wait and I can get a vx6 or vx5 with all the modern features but I can order a gloss finish. It’s exactly what I want but it’s defiantly going to get pricy but worth it in my opinion to get the gloss finish.

Is your Win 300 going to have a gloss blue (I‘m assuming high polished) or gloss black?

Are you getting steel rings/bases and going to have the gloss matched to the rifle?

If blued, will Leupold do a gloss blue or just their gloss black?

 

[Rubi_300]

From the models I’ve looked at of the m70 super grade maple it’s a gloss black. Not much blue in it at all. It’ll match nicely with the gloss black of the leupold. Talley offers they’re in a gloss black from what I can tell from pictures online. It should match up nicely, I can live with some slight variance in the blueing just really wanting the gloss look on all metal.

I’m not sure if leupold with do a gloss blue. I’ve never heard of it before all that I know they’ve done is stainless steel, glossy and they’re normal matte. I’m sure with enough time and money the custom shop will do whatever you want. I just hope when the custom shop opens back up that they will still do just about anything you want and not try to make it condensed to just a few options.

 

[ActionBob]

I absolutely love the Zeiss conquest scopes. I have two of them on Remington 700’s one in 270 and the other in 17 centerfire. The one recently took a drop too hard and had to be replaced and they happily just sent me a new scope. it was great dealing with them. However I will never buy another ziess product again. I hate to be “that guy” but last year when they were going on how they don’t want their brand associated with youth and guns or “assault rifles” it put a sour taste in my mouth. I’ve always been a leupold guy at heart anyways.

I’m not too familiar with swarovaski but obviously you don’t get so many people that swear by them when making junk. the couple times I’ve looked through them they defiantly are nice. Do you prefer one over say a leupold vx5 or vx6? Still in the same price range and quality level.

There are certain differences within different lines of a companies products. Such as the lower end Zeiss Terra vs Conquest and then Conquest HD, etc. Or Leupold with the Freedom line vs VX 5, VX6, etc.

And don't get me wrong, Leupold makes great scopes, we have many. But as a general observation I would rank Zeiss a bit higher and Swarovski well above. The difference becomes very noticeable as you age

@Just Gina refers to Swarovski as "jewelry scopes"

My problem is she keeps claiming our best stuff as her own. We have hers and ours Hahaha

She's worth all the best though