Scope magnification

[iblong]

I need to rescope my M77 Mark11 223 and need opions on power levels,I usually go with 3x9x40 or 50 but Im considering a 2.5x7 32 this time as the reallity of my hunting is really heavy cover and a really long shot would be 200 yrds.The farthest shot to date was 180yrds.Most would be 50 to 125yds.
Would there be advantages using a lower magnification in my situation.
Thanks,Bob

 

[speedsixman]

I guess you have to decide which is more important - a lot of magnification for long range use, or a wider field of view. I have found that most scopes have such a narrow field of view that it takes too long to locate the target through the scope.
The last several scopes I have purchased were 1.5 - 4.5 variable power. Not the best for long range shooting, but at least I can find the target for short range shots.
I have never understood the fascination for 3 - 9 power scopes, especially on a .22 rifle. Just about useless for my purposes.

Myron

 

[jeo556]

I also realized this, unfotunately not until after I had aleady purchased my scope, now my main hunting rifles wears a 4-12x scope that really isn't nessecary at all. I've since taken up varmint hunting so I have been using it for that lately....not a total loss.

On the other hand I've also got my hands on a Marlin GG in .45-70 that I plan on using for the thick woods where we usually hunt. She's now wearing a
1-4X Leupold that I traded for a 3-9X that was originally on the gun. I think that is more than enough for what I intend on using it for.

Don't be a knucklehead like me an put a huge magnification scope on your thick-woods gun, only to turn the magnification all the way down and just have more weight to lug around. Just my two cents

 

[sholling]

Nikon's 2-8x32 Monarch is a good compromise for those ranges.

 

[Major Dave (retired)]

My .243 Win (Win Mod 70 push feed Short Action Carbine)

now wears a Leupold 1.75 - 6 X 32 Vari-X III. It is a small rifle, and I use it in the thick cover of the East Texas Piney Woods, where annual rainfall is about 44 inches, and understory really grows thick.

Small rifle, close range, small scope - a well balanced rig, IMHO.

I either sit in a tree stand, or "Sneak and Peak" for bucks in their beds - thick stuff is the norm. Public hunting lands and National Forests, no feeders or baiting allowed.

Works for me.

 

[wpsdlrg]

"A really long shot would be 200 yards." In that circumstance, especially if an average shot distance is something like 50 to 100 yards..... then 4x maximum is ALL you ever need. Anything above that is an absolute waste of time - and it will, it most cases, be detrimental to accurate shooting. Most people go with far too much magnification (the ubiquitous 3 - 9 x whatever is mostly useless, if shooting at 200 yards or less....unless set for 3x or 4x.) You could use a 3 - 9x..... and simply use the higher settings as a "built in spotting scope", like many people do. 5x or above is only really useful if shooting beyond 300 - 350 yards....and 9x is completely ridiculous at less than 600 or more. I've seen legions of people trying to use 6x or even 9x at 150 yards.....and silently laughed my self silly, while watching them try to stabilize a rifle to get a clean shot. They never do....and invariably crank the adjustment down to 4x, or something like that. I've also seen lots of people miss shots on good animals, while playing with the magn. adjustment on their gee-whiz 6 - 24 x 50 super-duper "sniper" scopes. Where people get this concept that one must be able to count the hairs on the side of the animal....in order to shoot it accurately....I'll never know. Probably some stupid cr%p from the movies, I suppose.

Anyway, a 2.5 -7 x 32 would be a good all 'round compromise. A 1.5 - 4 x would be better. Of course, everyone has his/ her preferences. I would strongly advise throwing out the old idea that "more magnification is somehow better", though (it is a load of nonsense). I've found that, as a rule of thumb, one needs an apparent sight picture of no closer that 50 yards, for the best (and most comfortable) shooting. This would indicate approx. 4 x at 200 yards.....3 x at 150, etc. etc. I used to shoot a 2x on a .308 rifle, myself....and was as accurate from 0 to 250 yards as with ANY other setup I've ever used. Now, as I am older (and so are my eyes)....I use a fixed 4x. My maximum hunting distances are like yours - avg. shots at 100 yards, roughly - and a long shot would be 200 - 250.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I hunt in similar situations, only with a 12ga. I chose the Bushnell Dusk&Dawn 3-9x40 with the Circle-X reticle. I really like the circle on the vitals of a deer. It is a very good scope, especially considering the price.

 

[speedsixman]

Unfortunately, Bushnell has discontinued one of the nicest (IMO) low power variables: the Elite 3200 1.5-4.5 with the "firefly" reticle. Not cheap, but a nice scope. I got a couple of them after Natchez ran out of the ones they had on clearance. Had to pay more from a different distributor, but was glad to get them anyway.

Myron

 

[James R. Burke]

I gave my son in law a Browing BLR, in .308. I had a Leaupold 2 x 7 and I believe it was a 32 or 33 mm. It was one of the best scopes I ever had. It was very crisp, gathered light great, and all my shooting never went past 100 yards, and I am sure that scope would have made great shots well past that. I remember at dusk one day after hunting deer we where looking thru everyones scopes to see how sharp, and clear they where in dusk conditions. They all aggreed that little leupold was a lot brighter than most of the bigger mm ones. I am not saying Leupold is the scope to get there are many just has good or better now a days out there, but most folks do over scope there rifles. I see lots of 1200.00 dollor rifles with a big 55.00 dollor scope on it. I guess everyone gets what they like or feel good with but sometimes it just dont make sense to me. I looked thru and shot lots of smaller scopes 1x4, 2x7, straight 2's and 4's, and they all where very sharp and clear. I would not worry about the lower mag for what you want it for, I guess it always comes down to what you like, and feel the best with. Good luck, and have fun!

 

[Art Eatman]

I have the same critter as iblong. I'm heading out to mess with prairie dogs with in in a few days. It has a Leupold 3x9x40 on it. I've had easy hits to 300 yards with it. That scope used to live on my '06, my favorite deer rifle. I found that when set on 3X, the field of view was plenty wide. Wide enough for a 30-yard Bambi, anyhow.

 

[iblong]

Thanks for the input guys,Ill be checking out some 1.5's also.Might be nice
incase a critter is trying to climb into my lap.
Bob.

 

[Ruger4570]

There is of course reasons to own a 3x to 9x and even higher powers. In my experience, deer and Elk hunting has never required any more than 1.5 X magnification for me. 2X at absolute most. Of course I am talking Deer/ Elk in close, 100 yards more or less. If you haven't tried it, you would be amazed at how accurate you can be at low powers with a crosshair out to past 100 yards.
I generally have a 1.5x to 4.5x, a 1.5x up to a 6x or somewhere in between on my hunting guns. I have NEVER felt I needed more magnification. I have also never seen a situation that if I REALLY needed more power than 1.5x, I wouldn't have the time and ability to crank up the power a bit.
There was a time hunters did this kinda shooting with Iron sights and connected at those ranges.

 

[gbran]

iblong

You never really said what you're shooting with the 223. Ground squirrels at 200 yds might justify a little higher magnification. Anything bigger, you'll probably never crank up the power.

 

[jhgreasemonkey]

You know it might sound old fashioned but you should also consider a fixed power. For the use you mention a 4x would do fine and would last near forever. Fixed power scopes are overlooked too often, especially since they have a lower failure rate than variables. Think about why you would need a variable scope for the hunting you will be doing. Close to medium range in cover. Wouldn't a fixed 4x make more sense, be simpler and more affordable?

 

[gbran]

Fixed power scopes often offer better quality for the money.

 

[NWCP]

With a .223 I would think you're using it as a varmint rifle, correct? If so a 4x16x42 is nice. Weaver makes a 2x10x38 if you think you'll be shooting small game at ranges out to 100-150 yards. For larger game I prefer iron sights from up close and personal to 100 yards. Beyond 100 yards the old eyes really need assistance.

 

[Fat White Boy]

A bright, wide field of view fixed power, I'd say a 4X should be plenty. If you do get a variable power scope, leave it on the lowest power when shooting at game. This will make target acquisition more rapid. I only use the high power to pick out details at distance