6x18-50 too much?

[stangfan93]

I went to the gun store the other and was looking at another scope for my Remington 700 .270 that is as stated above a 6x18-50. I currently have a 3x9-40 and felt that even at 100 yards it is a little hard to see well. Should is just go ahead and stay with this scope that i have because i still want to shoot anywhere from 75-100 yards and also have the ability to go out to 200yds. How far would i be able to see with the 6x18-50 and will i still to shoot close?

 

[saands]

High magnification is easy to manufacture (even cheaply) and difficult to manufacture well (even at great cost) ... the best bet for clarity is getting a bigger objective (the 40 and the 50 are telling you that the front lens is 40mm and 50mm in diameter). It is almost a guarantee that a Leupold 9x40 will be clearer than a BSA 9x40 (due to the superior optics), but I wouldn't at all be surprised to see more detail from a BSA 9x50 than the Leupold 9x40 ... the extra 10mm of objective diameter gathers a LOT more light and that is what you need. When you raise the magnification to 18x, you dramatically reduce the amount of light that gets in ... that is why a bigger objective almost always accompanies those mags ... BUT ... it may not be enough objective except on the brightest days. I have used a LOT of 15-45x50 variable power spotting scopes that were only marginally useful at 15x due to the tiny amount of light that they gather ... If your problem is seeing detail at 9x on your current scope, then I'd go with better quality optics at 3-9x40 or with a bigger objective (50 or 55mm), but stay at 3-9 ... if you are actually trying to shoot things that are too small to SEE at 9x, well, then I'd just suggest that you find bigger things to shoot Seriously, the higher powered scopes are probably great for benchrest shooters punching holes in paper that doesn't move, but there is a reason that even military snipers use 10x optics ... at least on their 30 cal rifles ... more just isn't necessary.

That's my $0.02 ...

Saands

 

[Jimro]

Quality of glass, not quantity of magnification

A 4x scope can get you out to 600 yards easily, and plenty of shooters use iron sights at 1k. A 270 isn't exactly a varminting cartrige, but I'm assuming that you really want to get a good look at what you are shooting.

Get quality glass instead like Burris, Leupold, IOR, or Bushnell Elite. If you want the best of both worlds a good compromise is a 4-16 variable.

A 6-18 will be fine for shots from around 20 yards to way out there, but why not go ahead and step up to a 6-24.

Remember quality of glass is more important than quantity of magnification.

Jimro

 

[Scorch]

Having had a 6-18 scope on my 22-250 and taken it off, I believe 6-18 is too much for hunting. For varminting where you are shooting at relatively stationary targets it works very well, or for target shooting, but for hunting where you will be looking for your prey at 50-300 yards, it is way too much. You can't find what you are looking for when you need to. And anything closer than about 50-75 yards is impossible to see.

Stick with the 3-9 for hunting. There's a reason it's one of the most popular scopes out there.

 

[CobrayCommando]

Enough for what? For deer hunting it seems like even 6x is somewhat excessive. 18 times... At 200 yards you could aim for the pupil.

 

[Fat White Boy]

I have a 5X20X40 on my .22-250. I shoot most targets, even at distance(300-400yds) usually at the lowest setting. I use the higher power to look for targets.

 

[CamoCop]

i use 4-12x50mm's on all my rifles

 

[Buckythebrewer]

FOV!!,I would stick with the 3-9 for hunting..I agree with Jimro on the 4X.I have an 8-32burris and I can shoot fine with 8X @ 600yrds But I just Love the magnification of 32x when trying to group..But for hunting I would want no more than 4x for under or around 100yrds unless the Deer is willing to wait for me to find him with a higher magnification scope..

 

[FirstFreedom]

As has been said, I'd go no larger than 4-12 for hunting, probably no more than 3-9. But for targets & varmints, no it is not too much. In fact, for targets, 6-24 is not too much.

 

[stangfan93]

Yes it for hunting. I have been hunting with it once and am still pretty new to hunting. (the two times i have gone i have only gone with a buddy of mine who has been hunting since he was young, so i'm not just going at it alone deaf dumb and blind) when i shot my doe i could see her really well at 125 yds. I guess i was trying to compare it as to when i was sighting the rifle at the range. it was fairly hard to see the center but i was able to get it to group very well. No sub MOA's or anything but about the size of a quarter. which is perfect. thank yall for yalls input it really did help.

By the way my scope is a Nikon Prostaff

 

[atblis]

I have

I have a 4-16x42 on my 270, and I think it is about perfect (better than 3-9). It is a nice balance between hunting and paper punching.

4x is good for close up, gives you plenty of field of view.
and if you've got the time 16x is nice for the long shots.

On the bench, I don't think you can have too much magnification (assuming your glass is up to the task).

16x is noticeably better than 9x for paper punching.

 

[Buckythebrewer]

atblis,I agree ,I use 32x at 100yrds with a fine duplex and am very glad I have it for extra precision.The only thing is If it is a darker overcast day I lose a little to much light on 32x.Most of the time 32x works just fine for 100yard paper punching as well as 600 yards as long as the mirage is mostly absent.

 

[mrawesome22]

I have a 4.5-14x40 and shoot crows out to 400 yrds. That takes a very solid rest. The higher in magnification, the shakier things get. Also, as has been said before, to get a bright scope at really high magnifications is going to take a boat load of money. Most of the price of a scope is how bright it is. I remember my buddy bought a 32 power BSA scope. Trust me, I tried to persuade him not too. If you looked through that thing on 32 power in the middle of a bright sunny day, it instantly turned dark outside LOL.

 

[Clark]

I like 40X for targets and ground squirrels at 100 yards.

I like 2X for big game at 400 yards.

But to see the antler eye gaurd, one needs 18X.

 

[Jseime]

I have a 3-9X40 Bushnell Elite 3200 on my .270 and i took down a big mule deer doe with a perfect shot at 300 yards this year. Magnification is not the issue here its optics.

If you go buy a really good 3-9X40 youll be able to hit anything at ranges well beyond your shooting ability unless you are shooting at very long ranges.

 

[atblis]

Nikon

Nikon Profstaff that you have is a decent scope. I doubt you'd notice much of a difference changing brands especially in the 3-9x40 range.

 

[guntotin_fool]

WOW, I use a 1.5 x 4.5 leupold and I hunt out to 300 yards with it in confidence. IT stays at 1.5X unless i have to shoot antlers or bald heads. then I might crank it up to see what I am looking at.

Now for PD or paper, I can see the advantage of a stronger power. but I certainly can not see it for the kinds of hunting i manage.

 

[joshua]

I have a Burris Signature 8x32 on my 22-250 and it is great for varmint shooting on a portable bench or prone w/ sandbags. I also have a Pentax 6x24 Lightseeker 30 on my Rem PSS in 308 and it is great for bolt action matches, but I'm about to replace it with a 3.5x10 30mm tube Sightron. My hunting rifle in 270 has a 3x9 Burris and my light varmint rig has a 3x10 scope, these are the rifles I depend on when a fast acquisition and shoot is very possible. I've never had a problem shooting a 18x24" steel plate out to 400 yards with these scopes. Use your scope for shooting and the binoculars for looking. I hate it when a hunters sweeps me with their high powered rifles out in the field. 3x magnification is enough to shoot deer size games at 100 yards, high magnification amplifies wobbles when shooting using field positions. josh

 

[tulsamal]

I didn't like the 50mm objective bell scopes. They are just forcing that scope to sit too high above the bore. Leupold is making that scope now that has the half moon cutout in the bottom to solve that problem and that's interesting. Just out of my budget!

Use your scope for shooting and the binoculars for looking. I hate it when a hunters sweeps me with their high powered rifles out in the field.

Exactly. You shouldn't be shouldering the rifle and looking through the scope until you have already mentally decided to shoot. Up until then, use your binoculars! Spend some money on a good set and use them for the rest of your life.

As far as magnification, I've got scopes that go to the higher numbers. But those higher magnifications never seem to be useful for anything except the range. Even the one 4-12x scope never gets turned quite all the way to the top. So why accept all the limitations of such a scope? My "most used deer rifle" has had a Zeiss 4x on it since 1985 and I've never been disappointed by it.

Personally, the best scope I've bought in the last couple years was a Nikon Monarch 3.3-10x44 with mildot and AO. I usually find the limitations of my equipment in the field. Hasn't happened yet with that Nikon. And I only paid something like $320 dealer from Graf's. Heck of a deal.

Gregg

 

[FirstFreedom]

Yeah, but do you shoot varmints, tulsamal?