Jump to content

Riflescope query?


Robby22
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I have recently decided to treat myself to some new (slightly more up market glass for my .243 - mainly for lamping foxes).

 

I have been looking at several brands, inlcuding leupold and have noticed that quite a few of these have a smaller objective lens size, BUT a lot higher and variable magnification.

 

My query is will I still beneift if I have say a 40mm objective lens (instead of a 56mm), but have a higher magnifaction i.e 6.5 - 20 (instead of fixed power of 7).

 

I will be shooting out to 300 yards ish - would this be a suitable sort of spec for this?

 

Thanks

 

Robby22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

depending on your budget I might be about to sell a 6-24x50 swaro that I think is pretty much ideal for your sort of requirements. I'm only selling as I'm upgrading to an IR swaro, pm me if you want more info. It'll be going up when / if sportsman deliver my new one which was meant to be today, story of their life though that one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

I have recently decided to treat myself to some new (slightly more up market glass for my .243 - mainly for lamping foxes).

 

I have been looking at several brands, inlcuding leupold and have noticed that quite a few of these have a smaller objective lens size, BUT a lot higher and variable magnification.

 

My query is will I still beneift if I have say a 40mm objective lens (instead of a 56mm), but have a higher magnifaction i.e 6.5 - 20 (instead of fixed power of 7).

 

I will be shooting out to 300 yards ish - would this be a suitable sort of spec for this?

 

Thanks

 

Robby22

 

Kahles 3-12x56 :good: mine was £899.00 brand new in the box......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use a Schmidt and bender 4-16x50 and for shooting foxes in the evening, or lamping I have it on 8x mag! In the day when I am shooting out to 300 yard crows I have it on 16x but a scope like that is a few hundred above your price range, I am thinking of a zeiss duralyt to go on a 6.5x55 and for £580 it looks very good!

I suggest a fixed power Schmidt like an 8x56 or a duralyt! Maybe a second hand Swarovski.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i dont have a problem with the optical clarity of Leupold myself, they do come in different quality ranges but from VX 1 upwards i have never had a complaint about clarity. The reticule tends to be a little fine at lower light levels but with a million candles burning away this wont be an issue, it can be in woodland at dusk though. I have two leupolds. Sometimes scopes need a lot of setting up on focus, perhaps this was fisters issue? i was certainly disapointed with my NF until i spent near enough a full afternoon twiddling and fiddling the focus in and out.

S+Bender are my favourite hunting scopes end of. The optics are as good or better than my 7X50 swavoski binos, they simply hold zero through hell and back and have a good reticule thickness that can (and i have) be used on bright moonlit nights

My thought are either 6x42 S+Bender or 8X56. light transmission/quality is no better in the German or Hungarian (i have both) and neither is brighter in low light (they both have a 7mm exit pupil). I think they are a little too pricey currently with exchange rates as they are but the variable i have on the .243 is an exelent bit of kit and answers all the non long range dial in hunting you will ever need it the 3-12 x 50 Klassik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There wasn't a book so i had to learn whilst testing and using Leupolds 8, hawke 3, mtc 1, march 2, zeiss 4, nightforce 4, schmidts 10, weaver 3 and those are just the highlights

 

What are you saying? as you aint saying it very well, are you saying journos are the most knoledgable shooters- coz why? they push rubbish for freebies and a tiny cheque based on tiny UK circulation (yeah been there and done that ) can you focus a scope or what? as you said you didn't know how, are you able to? if so try it you might find Leupolds a lot better than you expected

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well theres your problem in a nutshell then! i am assuming your joking?

 

You're asking this of a guy that reviews scopes on a regular basis for magazines and has visited the Leupold factory in the states. I think I know who I'll take notice of. :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you focussing it with Kent the parra lax adjustment or the diopter?

Personally I like a bit of magnification under the lamp and 200 yards is a long way in the dark with an 8x mag. Where the better scopes are worth the money is you can wind them up and still see something. I've just sold one scope as with fine cross hairs I couldn't shoot under the lamp at any range. Best option is try and look through some in the meantime I'm going to get the popcorn out while Kent makes a fool of himself arguing with fister

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damned if i do and damned if i dont.

 

I gave an honest opinion on a scope with justifiable objective relevance to both its price and competition in the market and Kent couldnt help but make a childish dig at my ability to use a scope then ridicules me as a "journo pushing rubbish"

 

I miss ackley, he had the patience for this to go on 5 pages, i dont, now the olympics is finished family guy is back on.

 

fundamentally the only person being ridiculed should be the one suggesting ta 6x42 is ideal for 300 yard shots :good: makes me wonder if they do actually shoot or whether that was a 1950's shooting book they were reading at the time of quoting.

 

I have to say I quite like your reviews fister and after trying a zeiss with that reticle the other night it is simply awesome, makes foxing under the lamp very very simple. However with the price tag it really should be rather good its just a shame in a way when you immediately see why they are the price they are.

 

Fundamentally with the question and budget really it comes down to either a new leupold or second hand European glass or a duralyt for my money it would be either of the two last ones. I much prefer a variable once you've had a decent one not many people go back to fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that. I'd love that reticle in my Swaro PV-s instead of the busy christmas tree thingy. But maybe if I focussed it, it might be better to see through.

 

Chris, remind me to get Lorraine to give you a peek through you her nickel supra 4-16x56. Similar reticle in 1st focal plane. Light gathering is superb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have obviously rattled you cage on this, shame you dont get the freebies- wonder why? is it maybee the small readership and the fact that without advertising there aint a UK mag that can get its distrubution costs back by via the cover price, i wonder? perhaps you dont command enough respect yet- who knows

 

To rubbish the largest producer of quality riflescopes in the entire world is just plain daft. they are genuinely a right swine to set up spot on though, even locking the focus ring is a pain. look at the records set by people using Leupold, the Goverment contacts it has held, the chinese fake Leupolds, the real lifetime warranty. The numpty club dont bother me none, many probebly still have thier subscription in to AGW not much point carrying this on despite the digs from the numpty club i have said what i think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be getting to you though Kent, you're resorting to insults now. Naturally you're right and everyone else in the world is wrong. :whistling:wanker.gif

 

Sorry mods if the second emoticon is out of order. If it is please remove it.

Edited by DaveK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rubbishing is a strong word but I don't think I've read anywhere of anyone who thinks leupold glass is in the same league. I had a vx3 for a while because it was supposed to be the best to work with my nv add on, it didn't stay long as simply having used decent glass before it was too much of a compromise.

Edited by al4x
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...