Price, caliber, purpose. As you see your just going to get a bunch of random answers without any parameters. In the 1k range the hd5, vx6 and z5. Glass to the Swaro, price to the zeiss, and features to the leupold.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Which scope do you run?
Collapse
X
-
Leupold's are the sweet spot of performance/price for a lot of guys, I have been very happy with all of mine. My .30-06 wears a VX-2 in 3-9x50 and I have killed deer with 1-2 minutes of legal shooting hours, where all I could see was their silhouette.
I sat until the end of legal hours a couple weeks ago in a very thick patch of woods, I told myself it was getting too dark to shoot about 15 minutes after sunset, but every time I picked the scope up and checked I could still see clearly all the way until the end. By the time I finally left I had to turn on my headlamp within 1-2 minutes to see the ground at my feet.
I also have a 2-7x33 and 3-9x40 Mark AR that are similar. For deer within 300-500 yards, there is really no need for anything over 9x magnication IMO. Some people like it, but higher powers create smaller exit pupils and make it harder to hold the crosshairs steady. Sure, you can always dial the scope down some, but you lose the low-end powers which are much more valuable to me.
I may upgrade my rifles to VX-6 glass at some point, but what I have now is working well for me. Personally, with a limited budget I'd prefer to have a pair of high-end binoculars that can be used with any of my rifles, shotguns, or bows, and solid mid-range scopes on my guns.
Comment
-
Which scope do you run?
Leupold VX6 3-18x50 I think
Leupold VX7 3.5-18x56
Night Force NXS 3.5-15x56
Meopta Meostar 3-12x56
Zeiss HD5 3-15x42
Nikon M-308
Nikon Gold 2.5-10x50
And several Nikon Monarchs in 14 power. Don't have a problem with any but the Meostar is probably the best in low light(haven't hunted with the nightforce yet).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
I like using something with a mil or moa based reticle for drop compensation. Lots of the bdc reticles like Nikon are pretty close but aren't always spot on. That's where moa and mil based reticles are great. Set you zero at you preferred distance shoot and check your drop at 25, 50, 100 yards or whatever distances increments you prefer and record your bullet drop and do simple math for matching it up with how many moa or mil hold you need at that distance. Then there is the advantage of being able to use the reticle as a range finder if you don't have one handy. Right now I am set up with SWFA 10x42 with moa quad reticle $300 on 223. Primary Arms 4x14x44 with an r-grid mil based reticle $300 on 6.5 Creedmoor. I have been able to take jack rabbits out past 500yds prairie dogs past 200 yds. I have been most impressed with the quality clarity and performance of the swfa. I am a Nikon fan I have a 4.5-14x40 mildot buckmaster on my 300 WM and 4-14x40 buckmaster bdc reticle on my 270. As far as versatility quality I am liking the swfa. In my opinion I like to best match my equipment to the intended purpose and your budget. So sitting in a deer blind shooting 100yds to a feeder a good clear scope 40-50mm objective 1" to 30mm tube 9 to 12x magnification (just cause I like high magnification) $200-$400 Nikon or Leupold would be great with a plain duplex reticle. If you are thinking spot and stalk unknown distances definitely a mil or moa based reticle up to $600 the SWFA above that Burris and Leupold have great options.
Comment
-
A few leupold VX 1's and one VX2 all 3x9x40. One Zeiss Conquest 4-12x50 and one Victory 3x9x40 and about 6 of the newer Redfields, Revolutions 3x9x50 and Revenge 2-7x32.
With how glass has improved the last 10 years. I do not feel the school of thought is correct now when they say you have to put a scope on the gun, worth as much as the gun. These mid range scopes, with the exception of the Ziess Conquest, do their jobs very well for the cost.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tony Pic View PostA few leupold VX 1's and one VX2 all 3x9x40. One Zeiss Conquest 4-12x50 and one Victory 3x9x40 and about 6 of the newer Redfields, Revolutions 3x9x50 and Revenge 2-7x32.
With how glass has improved the last 10 years. I do not feel the school of thought is correct now when they say you have to put a scope on the gun, worth as much as the gun. These mid range scopes, with the exception of the Ziess Conquest, do their jobs very well for the cost.
Did the zeiss conquest not perform how you wanted?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
You will appreciate the top shelf glass when you have sun glare & dusk/dawn...it's the coating that really helps over the others.
I would rather have great glass & a decent bolt gun vs the opposite...I still run a few Vari-x III's but have jumped to swaro & the VX6 on most everything else. I'm slowly moving all my glass to 30mm tubes accept for the mountain style guns.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jmsck12 View PostI know I've made a few threads about scopes now but I'm hoping to get all the information I'll ever need in buying a scope from this one. I want to know what scopes you guys run and how you like them. I'm talking scopes on bolt action deer rifles not tactical scopes on ar platforms. Please include magnification and objective size. Thanks everyone.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Comment
-
Deer rifle= leupold vx6 3-18x50 with fire dot , AR= Zeiss victory 2.5-10x50 most other guns are leupold vx3 4.5-14x50.. I think I'm gonna change out the vx6 and Zeiss for a night force shv this off season.. Gotta Swarovski on my 22-250 varmint gun that I like as well.. Have 2 vortex vipers I don't really care for..
Comment
Comment