What magnification??

[hardguy007]

Ive a Simmons 4-12 x 40 on my Anschutz .22 mag at the minute. This will probably sound fool but the problem im having is actually seeing the bulls eye as such and this is only at 50 yards. I haven’t shot it at 100yds but i dread to think.lol. Remember years ago i used a high magnification on the air rifles (x40 or x50) and was wondering if this still applies with regard to hunting.

 

Basically wanting to know what magnification you’s recommend. Ill also be in the hunt for a .243 rifle so info on a suitable scope for that too will be greatly appreciated.

 

James

[Bewsher500]

its not so much the magnifcation but the reticule I find can be the problem.

if you have low(ish) mag and less than wafer thin reticule it can be covering the bull at longer ranges.

 

They are useful for fast target aquisition on larger species (wide field of view and low mag means you can pick up the target quicker if needed, also means you have a better chance of seeing the target if it runs and you are not shooting with both eyes open)

 

with a .22mag I would probably go higher than 12x personally.

i use a varmint reticule 6-20x40 leupold on mine (and HMR), very fine christmas tree style reticule with mil dot style windage markers as well.

 

You are going to be shootting smaller targets so move up a mag level.

 

for the 243 it depends what you are shooting IMO.

Red hinds inside 100yds, roe deer inside 100yds or foxes out to 2-300!?

think your simmons would work fine for either of the first two but again, smaller targets at longer ranges need higher mag IMO

[Dunkield]

Should have gone to Specsavers

[mikee]

I haxe an 8x50 swarovski on my .243 and a 8x56 schmidt and bender on my 17hmr, both have big fat #4 reticles, I have posted a zero target on another thread at 160yds and the 25Ø middle is just being covered by the reticle, so as far as I can see you dont need huge amounts of mag to shoot a fairly long way

 

mikee

[al4x]

with larger rifles in daylight shooting 8x56 is fine but if you start lamping and shooting foxes at night having more magnification is a definite plus point.

[Dunkield]

Remember years ago i used a high magnification on the air rifles (x40 or x50) and was wondering if this still applies with regard to hunting

IIRC they use those high mag scopes in FT mainly so they can then range find with the parralex setting(?)

I have shot rabbits at well over 100 yards with 7x scope, it does have a fine reticle though.

[hardguy007]

My scope has a standard reticle which is half the battle. When i am shooting rabbits i very seldom use the full 12x anyway but i would like more mag for targets.

[mikee]

with larger rifles in daylight shooting 8x56 is fine but if you start lamping and shooting foxes at night having more magnification is a definite plus point.

 

Ive shot foxes to 300yds at night and never felt that I couldnt see it well enough to hit where I wanted, I find that with too much mag I struggle to find the thing in the scope before it runs off

 

mikee

[ellebarto]

I have to say that mag sounds more than fine to me. Anything else is borderline overkill on a .22. Cant say I havent had similar problems though. More when I was pushing out to 75 yards or out to 120 with the HMR. I tried a spotting scope if it was the result of a shot you wanted to see. That was a bit of a pain, so much so you can have my spotting scope for a bargain price if you want to try for yourself!

 

In the end I got some shoot and see targets. A coloured halo appears around the bullet strike to make it clear where youve hit. Different colours the closer you get to the bull.

 

If its a matter of not seeing a bullseye at x9 magnification in daylight then youve got a whole other set of problems methinks!

[Bewsher500]

I haxe an 8x50 swarovski on my .243 and a 8x56 schmidt and bender on my 17hmr, both have big fat #4 reticles, I have posted a zero target on another thread at 160yds and the 25Ø middle is just being covered by the reticle, so as far as I can see you dont need huge amounts of mag to shoot a fairly long way

 

mikee

 

160yds is not really a long way in the grand scheme of things

 

I have a 4x32 #4 reticule on a 270. works fine on deer but at the range at 300-600 I cant see the Vbull! The 6" target is the same 6" theroetical target on a chest shot

I can still hit it at the range but that is luck more than judgement. I cant tell if I am off by a CM on an Inch! I certainly wouldnt take a shot at a 300 yard fox with that scope.

 

I have a S&B 4-12x40 on another 270 and longer range work is much easier. you can see!

picking off a rabbit at long range is a 2" target, I like to see it and wind it back from high mag to medium (anything 8-15x is fine)

[bullet boy]

If I'm using my CF rifle I normally leave the variable mag scope on 10x power which is good enough for my eyes.I've got a S&B 8x56 on my Ruger 10/22 which again 8x power is good enough for me.