A lot of hunters still believe this rifle myth: that a bigger scope automatically makes you a better shot. But the truth is, magnification doesn’t replace practice, good fundamentals, or knowing your rifle. Do you think bigger scopes actually help hunters shoot better — or is it just a waste of money?
#hunting #rifle #scopes
43 Comments
Ya, you see some guys running some budget behemoths because everyone here is addicted to the Grey ghost and can kill deer at 1209 yards. Unfortunately, most of these " just as good as" scopes do not punch above their price point. I do like 20-22x in a NF for down south but up north for elks ill run 10-12x. I just find a NF tracks and is sturdy. You need those sturdy good tracking things with a bit of see stuff gooder in them down south. The glass isnt swaro though. I hear those GPO are really good glass. I haven't used one. I'd love to see how they stack up against swaro glass. Good luck with the channel. Its been refreshingly normal so far. Lol
They're just compensating for something.
Good optic, GPO are good scopes
I am about to mount a low mount VX6 on my carbine
Actually i have one brand new that will change his mind!! If its to small its hard to find focus.. respond if you want a free small scope failure!!
10x is my favorite.
I put a Leupold mark 5 3-18 on my son’s rifle. If I could be a terrible dad…… I would take it back and put it on my rifle.
Magnification is useful if you want to shoot small groups and you know how to handle it. What’s crucial is the ratio betweeen magnification and glass quality. 25x won’t serve me well if the image becomes blurry at 12x.
Glass and reliable tracking of the turrets >>>
As light as some of these rifles manufacturers are making in calibers like the 7mm’s and 300s I like the bigger scopes for the added weight.
I get sub moa groups out of my old Ruger 358 Winchester at 100 yds every time with my old Bushnell Trophy 2×7 1” tube scope. Just a good example of your video. 😊
my eyes 👀 are old and tired I gotta be able to see 👀
The SIZE of a scope doesn't really matter, It won't make you more accurate. It's the quality that matters. Meanwhile in competition 22LR matches, (looks for button to insert picture of a Boing 747 sized scope on a Ruger 10-22-damn it isn't there. But you can see it and know it's true, cantcha?) Course, that's not hunting, its benchrest stuff. Could use one of those to see the landers on the moon except it'd burn your retinae out.
I use my scope for viewing the mountain side. I can get more zoom on my scope than my binoculars. That’s why I put a Leupold mark 4Hd 6-24×52 on my rifle.
That’s what I tried to tell her
I like the magnification sometimes, so I don't have to use binoculars. I can view the target well enough with the higher magnification, then pull out a bit for the shot (as it's not always easy to shoot on those high magnifications.)
Have you been following the rokslide drop tests for scopes? I think their most highly recommended is the new maven rs 1.2, swfa which are all pretty affordable and night force optics.
A the 2.5×10 FF Burris is just about perfect for woods and fields around me. 240bucks its budget and good quality.
For the last 40 I have been trying to get my wife to understand that quality is so much better than quantity 😂😂😂😅, she still hasn’t learned to read a ruler lol
Glass is not cheap!
Light gathering is Topps for me. I'm always gonna go for a 50mm Leupold, or a 56mm German glass.
I have a monsterum 6x24x50 on a savage apex 110 and I hit half in group at 100
It absolutely allows you to be more accurate. You're almost guaranteed to shoot tighter groups with increased magnification, as it allows for a smaller point of aim.
I think it just depends on the yardage your going to be shooting
A 40 dollar tasco years ago 4 power could see animals in the dark shot predators in the dark.
5-25 does really well for me and whole bunch of other friends that Hunt and target shoot with the same rifle.
1
I have a 2-7×32 Leupold on my 270 Winchester. I can shoot MOA with it out to 300 yards. I don't hunt any further with it than that, so why put a heavier scope on it? Guys who think they need more scope shoot almost exclusively from a rock solid rest, where all of the extra wobble isn't a problem. In real world hunting situations, the high magnification scopes are more of a liability.
Mine is are 1-inch tube, and a 40mm objective lans 3×9..
Leupold are my favorite
Most deer are killed inside 100 yards so a 3-9 should work
Shoot a quality fixed 4x scope at 2 inch target @100 yards vs shooting the same target with a 3-9 scope…
You'll shoot tigher groups with the 3-9 all day !!!
This isn't rocket science
I think weight is also very important. The Vortex Razor LHT (lightweight Hunter tactical) is one of my favorite scopes at 20 ounces, available in a couple of different magnifications. I went to the 4.5x22x50. I also have a NF8 2x20x50 that weighs 26 ounces that I like. I have these on Tikka T3x lightweight rifles
Clarity trump magnification alll day. I can see much better out of a Swarovski 10x than I can a vortex razor 20x
Any thing over 10 power in my book is useless,
It's crazy how many guys think they're gonna be shooting dime size groups at 1,000 yards because they got a Hubble Telescope on their rife.
Go fixed power where you can.
Agreed!!!
30 years ago, the conventional wisdom was that magnification above 9x or 10x was not needed for big game hunting, and that fixed 6x scopes and the slim, trim Leupold 2.5-8x scopes were excellent for this purpose. They weren’t wrong. I own multiple Leupold 6x42mm scopes, and the Trijicon 3x-9x is one of my very favorites. As far as I’m concerned, the dumbest trend in scopes is dialing for elevation and/or windage before taking a shot. How many guys have missed out on an opportunity because they got confused in the heat of the moment and messed up when turning the turrets.
Ive got a vortex viper 2.5-10×44 on my deer rifle. Its got enough magnification, and i like the 30mm tube just being a bit stronger, and the slightly larger objective so it takes up a bit more light
All of the "best" debates are irrelevant if they don't come with criteria or a use case. Hunting from a tree stand isn't the same scope needs as hunting out west. I hunt out west with my rifle about 2-3 weeks a year. The rest of the time I'm shooting 100-800 yards on paper or gongs. Therefore I want at least 15x on the max size and about 2.5-3x on the min, FFP, illuminated reticle. If I only hunted in a tree stand and did minimal range work a 3-9 SFP would be more than adequate.
In my experience the smaller the scope (within its class) the lower the quality and durability. I’d happily own the worlds most durable 16” long 1-8×24, and I would never own a super duper ultra light, low profile and short scope of the same 1-8×24. Longer scopes tend to be more forgiving, heavier scopes are almost always significantly more durable against worst case scenario drops. I’ll cut weight from my rifle just to be able to mount a heavier scope for the same scoped weight package. In my opinion it’s videos like these and articles in similar vain that are the reason there is so few reliable scopes made these days. They are usually sacrificing length (optical quality) and wall thickness (durability) to meet the size and weight standards of the gun tubers and writers.
And no, leupolds are not reliable and lightweight. Having a warranty fix your damaged scope is not the same level of reliability as something that is practically indescribable in the first place.
There are still some very rugged scopes being made today but they are not cheap like the leupolds and other brands of old like the older Burris and Athlons. Now to get the cheapest scope I would personally consider bulletproof you have to spend over $1000, and the more you spend, the less reliable they get. Swarovski’s are a particularly bad offender of spending more for less, although you get the worlds best glass with those at least.
Can you tell this is a topic I care about lot about? lol sorry for the book of a comment
I prefer fixed power
I run a fixed 6x scope. All you need from 10 yds to 400+ on a hunting rifle.
I run a 5×25 i know the magnification is over kill but being able to have a larger field of view at say 20x so that i can make an easier follow up shot is what i like