Thread: Are we on the wrong 'No.1" criteria when scope buying?

Yeah I like to see tracking tests like this....more than the 'sun going down' optics tests.

But then I'm into the long-range shooting... the precision, the great mechanical tracking accuracy of the scope.

Depends if you are a MPBR sort of hunter (so glass optics clarity is your #1 criteria and dialing accuracy just doesn't matter).
Or a dialing of turrets sort of hunter (whereas dialing accuracy is your #1 criteria followed by the glass carity)

Originally Posted by Hermitage

Yeah I like to see tracking tests like this....more than the 'sun going down' optics tests.

But then I'm into the long-range shooting... the precision, the great mechanical tracking accuracy of the scope.

Depends if you are a MPBR sort of hunter (so glass optics clarity is your #1 criteria and dialing accuracy just doesn't matter).
Or a dialing of turrets sort of hunter (whereas dialing accuracy is your #1 criteria followed by the glass carity)

I think problems tend to arise when we mix those two categories up, and we expect one scope to do it all.

'Featherlight' and 'reliable tracking/drop proof' don't go together in the same sentence. It's the same as wanting to build a 'long range precision rifle', but then trying to make it as light as possible. You'll just end up working against yourself.

In the event you wanted to put together a carry rifle for shooting out to 300m max, and you're not willing to mount a boat anchor of a scope on it (Nightforce and the likes), there are ways of working around the reduced durability of a lighter scope.

1) A straight tubed/low magnification scope can be chosen. These can be mounted very low, and the width of the objective lens won't exceed the width of the rifle. If you were to drop your rifle, there's less chance of a straight tubed scope getting damaged, versus a 30,40,50mm objective scope where the objective bell hangs out to either side.

Some good models to look into are: Kahles Helia 5 1-5x24....Leupold VX3HD 1.5-5x20...Leupold M8 4x or the newer FXII 2.5x Fixed power...Swarovski Z6i 1-6x24...

I've owned several of the 1-8x varieties. Aside from the extra weight (500gr<) the exit pupils get rather small at 7 & 8x, and the image gets too dim and eye placement isn't all that great. With the low power variables, 1-5 or 1-6x will do the trick, and the scope will be lighter and less bulky to boot (which is kinda the whole point to begin with).

2) You can do as @Moa Hunter suggested and wrap foam or inner tubing around your scope to give it some padding. I haven't tried this, but it might be worth a shot.


I had a chat with someone about this today. You can't have everything. It's important to define what it is you're trying to achieve and select the appropriate tool for the job. If long-range precision is what you're after, you're going to have to carry a heavy rifle and a heavy scope. If you've got to carry it over long distances, you better hit the gym.

Alternatively, you can just stalk in closer, which means you can get away with a lighter rifle and a lighter scope.

As for rangefinders - they can be handy for determining if an animal is within MPBR. Owning a rangefinder doesn't necessarily mean you've got to shoot long-range/start dialing, nor does it automatically turn you into a long-range shooter. Range estimation (and double checking with the RF) can be a fun way to pass time, or determining how far certain landmarks are from an animal.