44mm or 50mm objective for Sako.17HMR

[phil mcwilliam]

I've decided to buy a new rifle, being a Sako .17HMR. While waiting for permits to come through for the rifle, my excitement of the prospective new purchase led me go & buy a new scope- a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x 44.
I just returned home from the 2 hour return trip to the gunshop & of course started to admire and play with my new toy. Problem is I just discovered they mistakenly supplied me a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14, but with a 50mm objective.
I'm mainly going to be using the .17 for hunting varmits & head shooting goats up to 150 yards. I like the clarity & light gathering ability of the 50mm objective in this Zeiss.
What to do? Keep the 50mm objective , or do the 2 hour round trip to the gunshop to exchange for the 44mm objective?
I don't get the rifle for a week.

 

[Fullboar]

I would say just keep the scope with the 50mm objective. IMO a 4.5-14 is a lot of scope for a rimfire, a 3-9 is good for at least 200m (220yards) and is plenty of scope for a rimfire that is going to be used for hunting/varminting. Also IMO you want to pick non varminting (explosive) ammo (if it is available) if you are going to be head shooting goats and if you are using it out to 150 yards you should be careful using it when it is windy.

IMHO Sako's (quad rimfire and 85 centerfire) are the best factory production rifles money can buy. The Zeiss Conquest scopes are a great scope for the money, you cant go wrong with that combo of gun and scope.

 

[Art Eatman]

It's about your conscience and the price differential, if any. You'll be going back to the shop for the rifle? And mounts for the scope?

The primary advantage of a 50mm over a 44mm would only be in low-light conditions such as at dawn or dusk. Shooting at night with any sort of light, there's no advantage. I've had quite good success at night with 32mm.

Just remember that the 50mm necessitates higher mounts, which possibly can reduce one's ability for a firm cheek weld unless a pad is added to the stock.