Scope magnification

[Dunkield]

This goes back to the position of the reticle, one of my variables has the reticle in the ocular plane the other one doesn't.

On the one that doesn't the more you wind the mag up the more of the target you obscure, I have to use 4 black squares as a target to zero that on full mag at 100 yards.

[Axe]

cough** 12-42x56 **cough

 

I just bought a 12-42x56 NXS scope (my laser card is still smoking a bit)

 

In general I use as much magnification as is needed. If the cross hairs are covering the target I will zoom in a bit more to make sure I have a clean shot.

 

Shooting at 300 yards I was using an 18x bushnell banner scope (not the best in the world but functional) and the thinkness of the cross hairs nearly blocked out a 1.5 inch bull. So how people are successfully hitting rabbits (well I'd hit the rabbit but a head shot it would not be) at 170 yards with only 8x mag boggles the mind.

 

I use as much mag as is needed depending on the situation.

 

It wasnt a head shot and to be honest, its not the sort of shot I take normally, which would be up to around 120yards. The 8x mag is more than sufficient for this, mind you the Nikko Stirling cross hairs are very fine.

[Vegeta]

It wasnt a head shot and to be honest, its not the sort of shot I take normally, which would be up to around 120yards. The 8x mag is more than sufficient for this, mind you the Nikko Stirling cross hairs are very fine.

 

This is exactly my point, use as much mag as you need. With your scope you know that on 8x with its thin crosshairs you get a clear enough picture to take a decent shot. With my old scope there is now way I could take the same shot with the mag on 8 as the target would be blocked out and I would not be certain of a clean hit.

 

I got the nightforce for long range target shooting hence the high mag.

 

Different strokes for different folks but my mantra is "use as much mag as you need" which differs from person to person and scope to scope

[Axe]

Most of my shooting is done at night as well, so I find that reducing the mag down from the 16 I used to use it on, has made a difference in the clarity of the viewable image. I cant argue with your reasoning though, horses for courses and all that.

[shootit]

Many of my fathers friends have told me stories of my father's shooting ability at running coyotes. These came from men who hunt continuously and take 20 or more coyotes in any given winter. These shots were said to be from very far out.

 

One day I challenged him on this so he went and got out his old rifle. He steadied the rifle and shot three times successively from a rest, at a target placed at a measured 200yds distant. When the firing stopped we went to check. All three shots were roughly one inch, center to center.

 

The Scope? a 1980's production Weaver fixed 6 power.

 

I obtained my Swiss K31 and bought a box of Hornady ammo for it. A buddy and I were sighting in for deer season. The old military rifle had no scope whatsoever. The four shot groups were 1.5 inch center to center at 100yds. Nothing outside of that measure. I've seen better shooters with these rifles shoot one inch groups at 100 yds sans scope.

 

My thought: YES we tend to buy and use more magnification than is necessary.

"Aim small... miss small"

[deadeye ive]

I bought a leupold VXIII 6 x 24 x 40 for the HMR because I wanted a finer cross air to help shot placement at range as my previous scope with it's standard duplex covered alot of a rabbits skull .........Now unbeknown to myself this scope had a premier custom fitted ballistic reticle in the first focal plane which means the higher the mag the thicker the cross airs so at night to see the cross air I have to have it set on 14x but the beauty of setting your own cross air thickness is priceless .

 

I don't know why I bought the above because I'm a great believer in fixed reticle ,I guess I just fancied a change .I think a factor to consider is if you've so much power in the bullet like a .223 then so long as you hit a 3" kill zone then cross air thickness is'nt a concern .If your flavour is to shoot extreme range then a finer cross air will solve one problem but create another when shooting under lamp conditions so make sure it's an illuminated reticle in the very least .

[Eagleman]

I have been one who has certainly confessed to being a high mag fan on several recent posts. It is not that I always use it - rather it is the range which determines which setting I use but, it is probable that for any given range I would set the mag higher than many others would. I have said before that my reason is that I like to see exactly where the cross hairs are on the target and not half-guess which it seems to me you have to do with low powered scopes at ranges of 100 yards plus.

 

Scope / rifle combinations:

 

Mauser 7.62 Target rifle + MTC 8 - 32 x 60

Tikka LSA 65 .270 Deer Rifle + Tasco TR6 6 - 24 x 40

Weihrauch 60J HMR + 8 - 32 x 44 Zeiler

Sako Finnfire .22LR + MTC 6 - 24 x 56

Theoben Eliminator .22 + 6 - 24 x 44 Zeiler

 

And also a Theoben Fenman Profile .20 with a 3.5 - 10 x 50 Loopy clone (the only lowish powered scope I have and on a legal limit rifle)

 

People have noted above that it is a combination of glass quality and mag that enables usefulness. But, at the end of the day, it is whatever floats your boat. I've tried low(ish) mag scopes and I just don't like 'em compared to what i have above.

[conor]

my 5.5-22x56 nxs sits on 5.5 all the time, i think i shoot better at low mag plus alot more can be seen and no paralax adjustment is needed. 22x is handy for spotting hits on target at long distance. the 6x 42 swarvo on my hmr is good nice and clear no messin around. that said the nightforce is better in my opinion. have watched red deer on a moonlit night both at 6x and the nxs won hands down.

[JRDS]

22lr has a 5 - 15 Bushnell Legend which is used at 8 mag nearly all the time.

 

22 Hornet has a Lightstream 4 - 14 x 44

 

223 has a Swaro 3 - 12 x 50

 

243 has a Schmidt 6 x 42 (my favourite)

[Dunkield]

6x42 is seen by many as the perfect stalking scope.

 

The old books say open sights or 4x for woodland and 6x if you are shooting on hills.

That kind of prompted my question in the first place, how come we 'need' 12,16 or even 24 times mag now?

[JRDS]

For most UK hunting I honesly feel a 6 or 8 mag scope with no parallax adjustment is about perfect unless you are into specialised Long Range shooting of small targets. The simpler the better really and the 6 x 42 Schmidt is a cracking scope.