Thread: What magnification scope??

Nikon make really good scopes for the money, sightron you need to get the siii, the others are lower quality glass, the redfield is not in the same class asthe other two. I am biased toward the Nikon Monarch but the sightron siii is a very good scope too, pricier though!

The 2-7 and 3-9 Nikons are as light as virtually anything else, and their optics are pretty damn good even in the cheaper models.
The weight def goes up in the 4-16s, etc

I have a variety of them I got from Natchez, mainly as "refurbs" and none had even a blemish on them nor any faults

thanks guys, I also like the high light transmission (98%) even in the Prostaff range:

Nikon 6729, ProStaff Riflescope, 4-12x40mm, Matte Finish, BDC Reticle

looks like its the Nikon

Appreciate the viewpoints and input guys, thanks

Get the monarch, they are worth the little bit extra, especially if you want to dial them.

Originally Posted by Proudkiwi

Dont do this. Pick one load and stay with it.

Y not ???

To me the great strength of rifles like the 6.5 and 243 is their flexibility ...

I run everything from smoking fast 55 grains to 105 grains in my Tikka 243 ...

I'm sure you've got your reasons and I'd be keen to hear them ...

Originally Posted by kiwi39

Y not ???

To me the great strength of rifles like the 6.5 and 243 is their flexibility ...

I run everything from smoking fast 55 grains to 105 grains in my Tikka 243 ...

I'm sure you've got your reasons and I'd be keen to hear them ...

In your example there is absolutley nothing a 55gr bullet can do that a 105 wouldnt do better.

Multiple loads/projectiles etc are a recipe for mistakes. On top of that you have multiple zeros and drop charts. Unless of course you are running several scopes?

Its all just a bit.....unnecessary.

After too many cock ups (one is too many) I have been running two loads for a long time, in my case a long and short range load/projectile.
If you never shoot past 350y there is probably no point unless you would like to run reduced loads for your young offspring, the wife etc.

I can understand the reduced load thing to a degree but in my 'personal' opinion, a can or brake/earmuffs is a far better option than a reduced load for the kids or wife.

As for the long/short range load, thats a valid(ish) reason I guess. But to be honest, if I thought a shot on an animal was marginal due to the projectile I was running I wouldnt take the shot. Or I would be as careful as possible about placement.

Again, personal opinion only. I like to keep things as simple as possible. Leads to fewer mistakes

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

2x is great in bush, 3 is good, 4 is ok.
12 top end is plenty for any range you should be shooting deer at.

Good glass is better than high magnification.

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

+1 Wise words.

7mm/08 or 6.5x55 are both excellent deer rounds with not much between them. Recoil a little less on the Swede.

Originally Posted by Proudkiwi

Again, personal opinion only. I like to keep things as simple as possible. Leads to fewer mistakes

A lot to be said for that

But if you want to stretch the range and also bust a stag in the shoulder at 20y out of anything 08 case capacity its the sensible option.

I will grudgingly concede the 6.5 and 7mm heavy for caliber frangible projectiles do seem to behave better up close than 30 (because most standard twist of the shelf rifles dont have enough twist to run the heavy for cal 208-230gr)

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

A lot to be said for that

But if you want to stretch the range and also bust a stag in the shoulder at 20y out of anything 08 case capacity its the sensible option.

Yeah, fair call.

While were being in an open/honest mood I actually just ordered a .30cal barrel. Honestly something I never thought I would ever say

You can take your balls out of the wife's purse and put them back in your pants now

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

You can take your balls out of the wife's purse and put them back in your pants now

Ive been married so long I forget what they look like. Besides, even if I did remember I'd never find them in the fucking rubish tip she calls her handbag

Proneshooter,

I think you'd be making a mistake getting the higher powered scope of the two magnifications you mention. 3x is excellent in the bush and 9x is plenty for long range shots with either of those two calibres you are looking at. If you can't see a deer with a 9x scope then you need to have your eyesight checked. Your exit pupil is limited to about 7mm max at dusk so any scope power higher than 6x on say a 3-9x42 is just going to darken the image more.

A 3-9x40/42 scope is more compact and lighter than a comparable quality scope in 4-12x42 and generally makes for a better balanced rifle.

A 2-12x42 or 1.7-10x42 or 2.5-10x42 is a nice compromise but they run kind of expensive.

I'd go 3x10 maybe 4x12 tops
I'd look at Monarch or Weaver Grandslam from Natchez.