Scopes most used power range / objective

[Tra3]

2.5-15 or a 3-18. Typically set around 5 or lower in the mountains. In the woods, lowest setting always.
The high magnification variability is best for checking something out a long ways away, or for spotting bullet holes on paper at the range. Shooting a rifle at 18 power is a guarantee to not be able to follow up on your shot, it is like trying to find a grain of rice in the living room by looking through a juice box straw.

 

[Ike85123]

2.5-15 or a 3-18. Typically set around 5 or lower in the mountains. In the woods, lowest setting always.
The high magnification variability is best for checking something out a long ways away, or for spotting bullet holes on paper at the range. Shooting a rifle at 18 power is a guarantee to not be able to follow up on your shot, it is like trying to find a grain of rice in the living room by looking through a juice box straw.

Great analogy !

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I do believe that I could get by very satisfactorily with my 1.5-6x42’s, on any thing that they will fit on without extension rings.

I am planning on putting one on my next do-all rifle. It was a mental exercise deciding between the 1.5-6x42mm and a 1-6x24mm.
I have a few 1.1-4x24’s in use and am going to put one on a shorter barrel 30-06.

@Idmay375
I would Have gone the 1.5-6×42 just for aesthetics , straight tubes just look unfinished to me.
Bob

 

[ldmay375]

@Idmay375
I would Have gone the 1.5-6×42 just for aesthetics , straight tubes just look unfinished to me.
Bob

Bob,
This one will probably get a 1.5-6x42. I do think the 42mm’s offer a bit more low light advantage over the straight tubes. And this is intended to be a multi-purpose rifle.
It isn’t anything fancy, a Winchester M70 Classic stainless, New Haven manufacture with the older style M70 adjustable trigger. It is a 325 WSM, which I usually refer to as 8mm Winchester.
I bought the rifle used, and in excellent condition. It had the featherweight walnut stock. I have put it in a Bell & Carlson stock and replaced the bottom metal with PT&G one piece stainless. It was one of the latter production and came with current one piece, but they must make these newer ones out of powdered metal.

This is the beginning of it. I will have the stock bedded. I may have the barrel cut to 22”. I am undecided on that, and may use it at 24” before I make that decision.

 

[ldmay375]

@Idmay375
I would Have gone the 1.5-6×42 just for aesthetics , straight tubes just look unfinished to me.
Bob

Bob,
I am on the opposite end of that view. I think the straight tubes look “just right”. If I could get the same optical performance as larger objectives out of straight 30mm tubes, that would be all that I would own. Within reasonable cost of course.
Those objective bells, they look like after-thought add-ons to me.

 

[Rob404]

When I hunted Africa a few years back I used a 2.5x10x50. I don't, remember ever changing the magnification from 2.5

 

[Longwalker]

I like low powered variables like those explained in many of the posts above. 1.5 or 2x at the low end is good, and necessary for thick cover and fast moving game. I seldom shoot animals with anything over 6x magnification and most of my scopes are set at 4x when I am hunting. I like the compact dimensions and low mounting of straight tube and small objective bell scopes, but I do have a couple of big objective scopes for some specialized hunts like our elk, which are most often shot in very dim light in the first 5 minutes of legal shooting time a half hour before dawn. For that purpose, 50mm objectives and illuminated reticles are very nice. I can't see a good reason for first focal plane reticle hunting scopes. I understand the theory, but I don't like them. And i dislike any sort of exposed high turrets. If it's that far away, I stalk closer. I have exposed "twisty turrets" on one target rifle and one varmint rifle and one big game rifle. But it went on the hunting rifle only when I couldn't buy a scope with the other features I wanted without the turret thing.

 

[ldmay375]

I have a few 1st focal reticle scopes that I really like. Unfortunately, the companies that made straight tubed 1st focal reticles that I found usable, no longer import or make them.
I have quite a few 42mm objective 1st focal reticles that I like.
Range finders and illuminated reticles have definitely lessened the demand of 1st focal plane reticles. Though, some of the 2nd focal reticles are too fine for my liking for very low light. And if the illumination does not go low enough, they are limited for my use.
Tall and exposed turret are not my cup of tea. But, I am definitely not shooting small targets / critters at long distances.

 

[fourfive8]

After a few combinations and several trips, I can't exactly remember each variable setting. I know that I do not fiddle with power settings on the variables once I start a hunt- it will be left at that setting for the duration.

I do know that since one of my DG rifles, a 450 Watts, has a 2.5x fixed power that is what was used- with NO issues for both DG and PG with that rifle from impala to buffalo. On another DG rifle, 416 Rem Mag, I have a 1.5-5x and I left that at about 2-3x for the duration for both DG and PG. On the PG hunts with a 338-06, IIRC, I left the scope set at about 3x and had NO issues with the longest shots on an oryx and a springbuck, both at about 260 yds. On another PG hunt with my 30-06, I know it was 4x because it had a 4x fixed On a combination PG-DG hunt, using the PH's rifles, IIRC I left the scope on the 7mm Mag at about 4x-5x for the PG and on the 375 HH at about 3X for the larger PG and DG.

 

[fourfive8]

Since the thread is within the USA and Canada section, I should to add what I've used for scopes here. Easy, with a couple of exceptions, 4x fixed for everything. From brown bear to Coues whitetails to muledeer to pronghorn to elk to mountain sheep to caribou to moose. The only exceptions are a few different scopes for pdogs and coyotes. No objective larger than 40 with the 4x being a 32 I think.

 

[IvW]

1-6×24 30mm tube For bush and DG
2.5-15×50 30mm tube long range

 

[mark-hunter]

Lower half, or lower third from entire magnification range.
For bush, woods, close range and driven hunts, mimimum, between 1x to 3x.

 

[Bert the Turtle]

1.7-10x42 on the 30-06. Stays in 1.7. If I need more magnification I have time to turn it up.
1-6 x24 on the 404
1-8x24 on the 375. Both stay on 1 power until and unless I want more for a shot at a specific animal at distance. Shot a fair bit of plains game with the 404 and something around 4x was helpful.

 

[davsel]

For Hunting:
1-4 x 24 on a .416 Wby with illuminated circle dot
2.5-10 x 42 on a .300 Wby with BDC duplex and illuminated 1moa center crosshair
3-9 x 40 classic glossy Leupold duplex on a fancy German .300 Wby
3-9 x 40 on a Rem 788 7mm-08 and a Rem 700 30-06
3-12 x 44 on a Rem 700 7mm STW
Shot a lot of game through an ACOG 3.5x on a .308 SCAR17S from 20 yards (elk) to 434 yards (pronghorn)

Low power for walking, mid to high power for sitting in a stand - 7x is probably plenty.

Spent a lot of time behind tactical scopes with mil dots and/or BDC and got comfortable with them at various ranges without messing with turrets. Though, I can't get on board with the busy windage reticles and huge objective scopes that seem popular today - at least with current US scopes.

 

[Woodcarver]

There's a 3-9x40 on most of my rifles. Don't have an objective bigger than 40 as that requires mounting the scope way too high. There's a couple of 2-7x32s and at least 1, 2-8x34. Bigger, slower cartridges get straight tubes in the 1.5-5 or 6 range.
I've never seen the need for higher magnification; typically the mirage will render the image useless when getting above x14 or so anyway. Not to mention exaggerating any shaking that might be going on.
While still hunting, they are all carried at the lower end of magnification. If there's time, they get cranked up. After using an illuminated reticle on my moose hunt, I've become a fan. But not to the point of replacing existing optics, just when new ones are needed.

 

[ldmay375]

I have recently become to appreciate illuminated reticles for some situations.
My preference is still heavier bold reticles. I prefer to not have to rely on the illumination for most lower light shots. I wish more emphasis for illumination was put on Low light not bright light.

For my use they could cut 1/2 the bright light settings and add those to the lower end for hunting. This applies to some of the “Alpha”optics companies. Granted I am a closer range shooter, but how about some uncluttered and low light Visible reticles for hunting.

 

[Nevada Mike]

I have a number of scopes from S&B, Swaro and Leupold to some old Weavers. My best scopes are a 2.5-10 X 40 S&B and my Leupold VX6i 1-6 X 24. I have no scopes over 10X and see no need for them at all in big game hunting.

 

[buffybr]

I have Leupold scopes on most of my hunting rifles, with most of those scopes have the CDS turret.

I recently replaced the Leupold 2-7x33 scope on my .375 RUM with a Leupold 3-9x40 CDS scope because of the possibility of a 300+ yard shot on an upcoming Alaskan moose hunt.

My .300 Weatherby carries a Leupold 4.5-14x40 CDS scope.

I also recently replaced the straight Leupold 6x33 scope on my .257 Ackley with a Leupold 3-9x40 with their B&C reticle. The straight 6x scope worked fine for many years for almost all of my deer, antelope and mountain sheep hunting,

My 7mm Rem Mag and my Weatherby Vanguard .223 Rem both have Leupold 4.5-14x40 CDS scopes.

Although I do use my Vanguard .308 Win for hunting, I mostly like to shoot the steel gongs out to 430 yards at our range with it so I put a Leupold 6-18x40 CDS scope on it.

And although I have shot a few deer and antelope with it, I mostly use my .22-250 for varmints so I have a straight Weaver 10x40 scope on it.

Depending on the terrain and vegetation that I am hunting in, I usually hunt with my scopes set at the lowest 3 or 4 power setting. I almost always have time to turn the power to the maximum setting if I need to take a long shot.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

My 375 Ruger No1 wears a Leica 1-6.3x24i and it very seldom goes above 3x. On the big bore competition shoots, moving targets etc, mostly sub 50m it is always 1x, so a glorified red dot.

The interesting one is my FX air rifle which has a Swarovski Z5 on it with ballistic turret, windage and parallax as well as the power setting. That air rifle is so millimetrically accurate that it justifies using all of those adjustments for every shot - pigeon at 100 metres, set the turret to that (pre-set on the range to the red mark). Then set the paralax to 100m, and finally a bit up on the power for the shot past the branch. Down comes the pigeon!

 

[MS 9x56]

My 308 and 30-06 both wear 3x9x42 scopes but my 35’s tend toward the lower power scopes 2.5 fixed 1.5x5x 24 variables but lately I have become fond of the 2x7 powers on my 358 win, 35 Whelen, and 9.3x62. The 2 power for thick stuff and 7 if I need to stretch their legs.most all start and for the most part stay on the lowest power settings.