your opinion

[trigger45]

your opinion of a .308 with a weaver k2.5x20 scope for shooting from 25 to 300 yards. looking for quicker mounting of rifle to shoulder and eye on target with the sight lined up. have a 4x but looking for a wider field of veiw up close, 25 yards. dont like veriables.

thanks for your time.

 

[Art Eatman]

My first '06 had a Weaver K2.5 on top. I mostly shot jackrabbits in those days, in the early 1950s.

As far as magnification and distance for deer hunting, one of my longest kills was a one-shot at 350 yards, and the 3x9 was set on 3X. FWIW.

I figure the .308 is a 300-yard gun, for all practical hunting purposes. I'd zero at 200 yards. That's roughly 2" high at 100, and 6" low at 300. That's worked for all my centerfire deer rifles. Close enough for Bambi-work, anyhow.

Art

 

[Tom Matiska]

I'm with you on the field of view of a 2.5. One trade off is the 20mm front end comes up a litte short on light gathering. If hunting in twilight, fog, or drizzle is a consideration you may be disappointed. Also, if your area has antler restrictions like PA does you may not be able to count points at longer ranges. 4X is now what a 2.5 used to be for me.

Do spend some time looking at specifications on the various scope makers web sites. It is possible to buy 2.5's that have less field of view than some 4's.

 

[Picher]

Hard to believe it, but I had a Weaver K2.5 mounted on my first 30-06 for about 6 years while a teenager, and beyond. Funny thing is that I never shot a deer with it back then, only lots of woodchucks and a few crows.

One year, I averaged 220 yards on woodchucks and another year, I killed a chuck at 450 yards, though a bit of luck was involved and he had a huge mound on a side hill to use for sighting. I had to aim almost 5 feet high and a foot left to get him on the second shot.

Variables were very expensive and not very well made back then. Today, all my hunting scopes are variables and I wouldn't go back to a straight power. Of course, today we often need to assure that the deer is a buck before shooting. A quick twist of the power knob will usually let you know, then bring it back down to shoot.

Picher

 

[MrGee]

strickly hunting Oh yeah ! .. i have a .35 Marlin [not a 300yrd gun] with a 2.5X ole Redfield scope on it, its the best way to go..... fast two eye shooting , open fields are not a problem, but when your in th woods i really helps

 

[Olaf]

A 2.5 x 20mm scope has an exit pupil number of 8.0 mm. The human eye, at best, can only process a maximum exit pupil number of 7.0mm....and that is when the eyes are young (normally, less than 40 years of age). After 40, roughly 5.0mm is the usual number. But, a 2.5 x 20mm scope will NOT "come up short" as regards light transmission to the eye. A fixed 4 x 32mm scope will only have an exit pupil of 8.0mm, also. Exit pupil is the TRUE determinant of how much light is transmitted by an optical device. Of course, a 2.5 x 28mm scope would have an exit pupil of 11.2mm, better than the 2.5 x 20....but it would hardly be noticeable.

The only issue with a 2.5 x 20mm scope might be field-of-view. Most 2 x 20mm scopes have a FOV of roughly 15 - 20' @ 100 yards. A 2.5 x 20 might be on the low end of that. At 30 yards, for instance, a scope with a larger objective will have a definite advantage in terms of FOV. However, I have always found that a 20mm objective, combined with low magnification, will certainly be adequate. Plus, with low magnification, it is possible to train oneself to shoot with both eyes open, with very little parallax distortion between the "scope" eye...and the other eye. If that can become the normal mode of use, then FOV of the scope becomes almost a non-issue.

As for longer ranges, I have always preferred magnification at 4x or below....for shooting out to 300 yards. Actually, I would never take a shot on game past 250 yards, myself. But, a 2.5x scope will allow accurate shooting, depending on the eyesight of the shooter, out to at least 250 yards.

 

[Ruger4570]

Well if you don't like variables you have something of a problem. The 2.5x scope os good, but it is not going to give you the field of view that a 1.5x will. You also have 4x which will give you some long range capabilities, but is too powerful for up close shooting. I have had many variables in my life and as posted, some of the early ones were really pretty bad. Today's variables are extremely accurate and hold their zero well. Basically what you are looking for is a "do all scope" in a single power. As I see it, you have to either get a red dot sight that is fast and good at short range, but lacking at long range,, or,, get over your dislike for variables and have the best of both worlds and what you are looking for. All of my hunting guns have a 1,5x to 4.5 or up to 6x scope. I set them at 1.5X and can crank them up if more power is needed. Additionally, stick with the better brands as the low end scopes often fail in many respects.

 

[FirstFreedom]

I would *definitely* want more power to see what I'm shooting at precisely (and antlers for example, as mentioned) - at least 4-6 power for 200 yards, and at least 7-9 power for 300, bare minimum, but that's just me. Having said that, 2.5 fixed should work well too, if you have good enough eyes and a thin reticle.