help

[fiver]

I've been looking for a forever scope for my Bergara hunting rifle.
it wears a vortex cheapie now and it's worked fine for the last 5-6 years, but the rifle is starting to show some age and wear, so naturally the scope is showing more plus it's a 200 dollar scope so you can imagine.

anyway I have been looking for a 4X12X50 can take four wheeler jostling, dragging through the brush, riding in the truck banging against the cup holder, gets covered in dust fine enough to filter inside anything,,, type abuse.

I have been looking at a couple of Leupold X40's and a [just because Allen has one] Swarovski.
is the swaro worth 900 bucks plus tax, or should I hold out till they get a leupold that'll be about 200 bucks cheaper.

or is there something else I'm overlooking that'll take the roughing up I seem to give things.

 

[popper]

Got a vortex 4x12, like it. Life time warranty - mine or the scope.

 

[Spindrift]

I have a Swarovski Habicht 2,2-9x42, bought it used for a reasonable price. This is an older model, with steel tube. As rugged as they come!
I also have a few Leupold scopes (Vx-1, 2 &6). Both are good scopes. But the optics in the Swaro is simply amazing.

An elderly lady I know, lives on a farm. She has an old Swaro binocular, that sees daily use; looking after animals, hunting or whatever. After 30 years of hard use, it was looking a little worse for wear. She brought it to the local Swaro dealer, asked if it was possible to refurbish it a little. Sure, they said, and accepted the binoculars.

A few weeks later, they called and told her to come fetch her binoculars. When she got it, at first she couldn’t believe it was her binoculars, since it looked brand new. It had been sent to the factory. Completely dismanteled, new coating on the lenses, all wear-parts exchanged, new finish- for practical purposes, it was brand new again. At no charge.
No, that is what I call «standing behind your product».

If you’ve never had a Swaro scope, and can afford one, you should treat yourself one! You deserve it!

 

[waco]

I put this Leupold on my Bergara.

 

[Winelover]

My 270 W (Ruger Mark II) wears a Leo 4x14x40 Var III scope. I wouldn't go with 50 mm objective............requires high rings.

 

[Rick H]

For what it is worth: One of my hunting partners had a Swarovski 3-9 on his Win. model 70 in .338 WinMag. While on an Elk Hunt in Montana the rear lens element fell out of the scope. The piece of glass just disappeared. The scope was useless, he used a guides rifle for the rest of the unsuccessful hunt. When he got back he sent the scope back for warrantee work. Evidently they had to send it via slow boat to Europe for service. He got the scope back, repaired after waiting 13 months. He has the scope on a .223 now, he just doesn't trust it. I don't blame him. Perhaps that kind of wait was an anomaly, but they are way too expensive to put up with that sort of service. His calls for answers about what had happened and estimated timeline for the return of his scope were less then satisfactory. Like the folks at SwarovskiOptik USA were angry at him for sending the defective scope back.

 

[L Ross]

You guys have read my drivel long enough to know what an opinionated curmudgeon I am, so with that caveat here goes.

There are range guns and there are huntin' guns. Range guns can be as impractical as a Schuetzen rifle or a S&W .460 handgun. They are toys, often specialized, typically heavy, their raison d'etre is to be played with.

To my way of thinking a huntin' gun needs first and foremost to be portable and pared down to the basics to be practical. I do not want a big, heavy, scope perched way up on a pedestal on my hunting gun. I just took a mental inventory of my practical scopes and came up with some fixed power 3x and 4x Weaver steel tubes, a Leupold Vari-X III from 1991 in 1.5x5, and a couple of Leupold M8 4x scopes. Theres a little slender Leupold 2x7 variable around here someplace that looks at home on a field gun but I think it's in a drawer right now.

The idea of a rugged fixed 4x scope of Germanic origin would certainly hold some appeal. I think one mental handicap I operate under is my life long belief that I have no business shooting at a live critter beyond 250 yards. For game the size of a Pronghorn or bigger, dividing 250 by a factor of 4 gives me an idea of how my quarry would be seen under iron sights or about 63 yards.

For smaller targets such as the .222 needs to deal with I have a 2x7 Burris Full Field that stays set at 7 because I intend to place a single shot into a small spot at an unaware critter.

Do modern scope makers even make a fixed power hunting scope anymore? I only had one Germanic scope for a brief time until the former owner wanted it back. Fixed 4x, one of those Black Forest boar hunting reticles, and a crystalline set of lenses. I didn't care for the odd mounts, and they managed to get it a little higher than I liked, but boy did a deer ever look good through that glass on a cloudy November day 5 minutes before quitting time.

Two years ago I took my Model 700 .308 Varmint in a police wooden stock out to the deer stand for grins. It wears a Leupold Mark AR Mod-1 6x18x40 with a 1" tube scope. I shot a buck at about 50 yards give or take. I had too much scope. Yup, I found the elbow and blew up the heart, but I bleated at that buck to get him to stop running, and I really felt rushed trying to get the shoulder in the scope. Less magnification would have been better.

 

[Ole_270]

I have Leupold's on several of my rifles, 2x7, 2.5x8, and 3x9. All in the 38-42 mm size. I'm a hunter, not a long range specialist. I do tend to swap them around from time to time. I've had to send 2 or 3 back for service over the years, tracking went to pot. Mounted a couple scopes for my son last fall, a VX-3i and a discontinued Nikon. It took about half a box of shells to get close with the Leo after bore sighting, one adjustment with the Nikon. If Leupold would fix their tracking I'd own nothing else, I really like the overall size and weight, but I'm getting tired of the Leupold shuffle when sighting in, back and forth, up and down trying to get to the spot I want.

 

[Winelover]

Choice of caliber and complementary scope should be based on where and what your expect to hunt. When I purchased the 270W and the 4x14 scope, I had designs on retiring out west. It never materialized. At 14 power, it's a bit much for Michigan or Arkansas woods. Being a variable, allows one the option of dialing it down. I have done that and harvested a whitetail at a mere 15 yards. However, also harvested one in the middle of a 40 acre field of soybeans. Thing about variables is that there are viable options. Power selection is based on what range you expect your game. I usually use the lowest power for the closest range expected. If the game is further out, you may have the time to increase the magnification.

 

[Winelover]

I've never used a boresighter. On a lever or bolt action, I remove the bolt and look through the bore at a target at 10-15 yards. Make adjustments, accordingly. Move out to fifty yards and I'm on paper. Once on paper it's a piece of cake.

 

[Petrol & Powder]

I have said it many times before and I stand by this:

In the field of optics - YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.

That doesn't mean you have to get a second mortgage to acquire a scope that is "good enough" but it does mean that a $20 scope will be a $20 scope. There's NO free lunch.

EVERYTHING in the world of optics is a compromise. You want more magnification? the price is less field of view, less light transmission, maybe more weight, etc.
You want more durable adjusting mechanisms - be prepared to pay for them.
You want a larger objective lens, it's going to weigh more than a smaller one and require taller rings
The compromises NEVER end. You will always trade something such as weight, durability, size, cost, magnification, field of view, etc. for something else. Make the compromises work for you.

Pick the traits you want, and be prepared to pay for them.

As for cost. Many of the European scopes are excellent tools but they are very expensive.
In the U.S.A., Leupold is about the ONLY brand I would even consider.

I prefer fixed power scopes for their simplicity, size and low weight BUT in today's world of marketing, variable power scopes tend to be less expensive. I have an old 3.5 x 10 on a rifle and really wish it was just a fixed 10 power.

For a hunting rifle, unless the ranges are huge, I think a fixed 4 or 6 power is all you need.
If you go with a variable, go low on the bottom end of the magnification range. I'd rather have a 1.5 or 1.75 power on the lower end than to have a 8 or 9 power on the upper end.
YMMV

I can't afford a $2K scope but I'll eat cube steak for a couple of months before I'll buy a cheap scope.

 

[RBHarter]

In my searches currently Leopold is the only one offering a fixed power simple duplex as a shelf item . Weaver has them available as an order item for just twice the price .

Bore sighting is where I have the rest bag on the kitchen table and a 2 spots about 1-1/4 " apart vertically on a sheet of paper taped to the back door . Bottom one centered in the bore top one half as big centered on the cross hair . We have a long hallway from the man cave/mud room I could use a laser bore sight and get them closer at 35' I guess .

 

[dale2242]

Fiver, Vortex has a lifetime warranty same as Leupold.
I have one of the cheaper ones and have not had a problem.
Beating them up on an SUV will certainly test one.

 

[Glaciers]

Well P&P has it right on about getting what you pay for. But. There are some good scopes out there that will work for your needs but, affordability is also one of those needs at times. My hunting scoped rifles carry as good as I can afford. Cube steak was on the menu and even more towards beans. But on hunting firearms, were in this country were I live, I want good stuff when you consider that you might bump into something big with teeth, claws and a hump on its back.
But, for other guns a compromise does enter in the discussion. I recently bought a 2x12 power (and a 4x20 as well) Athlon scope that has a 66 foot field of view which is the same as the field of view for the 1x4 Luepold which is considered a good field scope. I have not tried it out yet, but Waco bought two Athlon's recently and I'm waiting to see what he reports.

 

[Glaciers]

I once had an experience when I took my Father Brown Bear hunting down on the coast, where we had to go through some dense brush, alders where any scope above 1 power would have been dangerous. I had a Lyman receiver sight on my gun with the disk removed.
I took away three things from that hunt.. One, always carry enough gun. Two, prefer open sights for dangerous stuff. Three, carbine length rifles are handy compared to that 46 inch long 458 I was dragging through the alders. Sold it.

Replaced that 458 (wish I would have kept it) with a 458x2 built on a Remington 600, 38 inches, 7.5 pounds, with a Luepold Vx 6 - 1x6 which has a 110 foot field of view. Still punching out with 400 grain Barns Originals.

My moose gun is a Savage 116 stainless (did I mention that I don't like stainless guns) 338 mag. You can have some long shots at times for moose, so I put a Bushnell 6500 -2x16. That's another rifle I might bump into teeth and claws with.

 

[CZ93X62]

Yes, I put a Swarovski on my new Tikka 243. I got it for only slightly more money than a Leup VX-3 would have cost, which justified the outlay to me. Leupold is my usual first choice, Burris finishes second. The 243 might get pressed into deer service by Marie, but for me it's a rat ripper. Accordingly, its usage will not be rough-and-tumble, mostly from bench- or table-tops in bluebird weather.

YES, its optical clarity and brightness are good. Are these elements 30%-40% better than those of Leupold VX-3, justifying the 30%-40% price uptick? Not in my experience--I would rate scope clarity and brightness as very close-to-slightly better than that of Leupold. Unless you can scam up a new Swaro at Leupold-level pricing like I lucked into, the Leupold IME remains a the best scope per dollar spent that you can get in the USA.

I don't like complicated or intricate optics on my rifles. My bold rifle at work wore a Leup 3.5x-10x X 50mm, which is the FBI standard recommendation for police sniper rifles. (FBI can get a few things right, from time to time--it requires diligence to locate these anomalies). P & P pointed out some hard & fast optics rules concerning rifle scopes that I agree with in entirety.

ETA and off-topic as h--l.......this same shop that made the cool deal on the Swaro scope has a Win Model 21 on consignment that (per Buckshot) is in nice shape. I will be stopping in to inquire, because the price listed seems too good to be true. He saw this a week ago, and said nothing about it until yesterday on the phone from Buellton.

 

[fiver]

yeah.
the problem I have is I might be looking at deer at 30yds. one minute, and then when I huff and puff my butt over the ridge, or come out the end of that pine tree draw, I'm looking at 300 miles plus of open space, or 20 feet..
I don't need long range shooting capability, but I do need long distance scoping capability, while still being able to look up under a shady pine tree towards the Sun at 200 yds.

it really sucks to see a deer laying down in the sage brush, scrub oak, or under the tree's through the Bino's but not being able to see it through the scope.
so you can see my problem is one more about flexibility and toughness than actual FOV or extreme edges.
simple turn the knob adjustment that's smooth and goes all the way to both ends without losing clarity is important too, because it will get turned up and down 15-20 times every time I get out of the truck, probably half of them will be without looking at the scope.


I think Allen kinda hit the nail on the head as to what I'm really mulling over here.
is the extra 300 bucks warranted?
but then again they got the Swaro and not the Leupold in stock....

 

[Ole_270]

I've never used a boresighter. On a lever or bolt action, I remove the bolt and look through the bore at a target at 10-15 yards. Make adjustments, accordingly. Move out to fifty yards and I'm on paper. Once on paper it's a piece of cake.

me neither. My common method is to pull the bolt, whether bolt rifle or Marlin lever, look through the bore at a distant object(2-300 yards) and center the bore on that object, then move the crosshairs to match. Back when I was younger and y eyes were better I got pretty close this way, once within an inch.

 

[waco]

Waco bought two Athlon's recently and I'm waiting to see what he reports.

So far I have only dialed the rifles in at 100 yards. Here soon(I hope) we will be able to get out and use them at further ranges. These scopes are 6x24x50 and by no means small or light. The optic weighs 3.2 pounds. Weight is not an issue for me but rather welcomed. As for the clarity of this $399 scope, its not too bad. Things get a little fuzzy around the edges up around 20x and glass clarity diminishes a tad. Where this thing shines is the turrets. Very crisp and audible clicks. It has 18 mils of both windage and elevation. Very handy when dialing in shots from 250 yards out to 875 and back to 100 again. The tracking on the scope is very good and repeatable. It also has a very easy to use hard zero stop. No trying to remember how many revolutions up you went or how many to come down to get to zero. The turrets alone are worth the $399, just my two cents...

 

[Ian]

Something yet to be mentioned about the big objective and high magnification....exit pupil diameter. Hunting that tiny speck of image from a 4-12x40 (40/12=3-1/3mm) in low light at full magnification is a bitch and wears out your eyes. 50/12=4-1/6mm exit pupil diameter, or about 20% larger picture to look at. Considering a partially dilated pupil can run around 5mm or more in low light, bigger is better.