Scope for a 7mm

[gramps73]

Looking to replace the scope on my sons 7mm
Never shooting further then 400 yards.
looking for a 50mm objective.
priced no more the 1500 as he is paying for it.
Thank you and Merry Christmas

[stob]

Look into a swarovski at that price point - 3.5 x 18 x 44mm

[ghfalls]

I just picked up a z3 3-10 for under $1000. It’s my first premium scope an it’s real nice and very light.

[sns2]

Why a 50mm objective?

[wallz]

I have a Bushnell 4.5-18x44 LRTS with scope caps, G3 Reticle, in FDE I was contemplating on selling.

Nothing wrong with it, had it for 2 years, but just want to upgrade.

Link to the one that I have. https://www.precisionoptics.net/Bushnell_Elite_Tactical_LRTS_4_5_18x44_G3_FDE_p/et45184ga.htm

Let me know if your interested.

[Pathfinder76]

Why a 50mm objective?

X2

[brewster29]

I am a big fan of the Leupold 4.5-14 vx3 scopes. The Swaro scopes have a tad better glass but I will bet they are not as tough.

Not a fan of 50mm objectives though, I find because they stick out well past the stock they are prone to getting scratched up if you backpack, and sometimes knocked out of alignment.

[elkhunter11]

I am a big fan of the Leupold 4.5-14 vx3 scopes. The Swaro scopes have a tad better glass but I will bet they are not as tough.

Not a fan of 50mm objectives though, I find because they stick out well past the stock they are prone to getting scratched up if you backpack, and sometimes knocked out of alignment.

So how do you know how tough Swarovski scopes are? Have you ever owned one? I will agree on 50mm scopes, but mostly because they must be mounted higher, which results in a poor cheek position on the stock.

[brewster29]

So how do you know how tough Swarovski scopes are? Have you ever owned one? I will agree on 50mm scopes, but mostly because they must be mounted higher, which results in a poor cheek position on the stock.

I bought my first Swaro in 1987. Have three right now. Did have one that fogged up…otherwise no mechanical issues. Also have two sets of binos.

Currently own 9 Leupold scopes, still using some from the 1980’s, have previously owned another half dozen, zero issues with any of them. The older var-x iii scopes I own have been on some hard kicking rifles: 7lb3oz 340 wby, 1895G, Ruger 375.

[huntwat]

Shooting only 400 yards in hunting situation. What advantage does a $1500 scope have over a $600 scope? Light gathering? Precision? Ruggedness? Clarity?
Enough to make a noticeable difference?

[MountainTi]

I am a big fan of the Leupold 4.5-14 vx3 scopes. The Swaro scopes have a tad better glass but I will bet they are not as tough.

Not a fan of 50mm objectives though, I find because they stick out well past the stock they are prone to getting scratched up if you backpack, and sometimes knocked out of alignment.

Seems one of the big selling features of leupold is how close the repair/warranty center is and the great customer service. Are they really tougher than European glass?
Don't get me wrong, Leupold makes a fine scope, but personally I believe the European is a step above. And they are plenty tough. Any of mine that have bounced around on ATV's, horses, wagons, rocks, ect...have yet to lose zero once.

[marky_mark]

zeiss v4 4-16x44

[elkhunter11]

I bought my first Swaro in 1987. Have three right now. Did have one that fogged up…otherwise no mechanical issues.

No mechanical issues since 1987 sounds fairly tough to me. I have owned nine Swarovski scopes, and no issues at all.

[Twisted Canuck]

zeiss v4 4-16x44

That is a nice scope, with firedot reticle. That's what I chose for my .338. I spent quite some time comparing it to a VX5 HD, through full magnification range, and the Zeiss was just noticeably better to my eye. Would be dandy on a 7mm rm.

[32-40win]

The Z3 4-12x50 sounds like it would be about what you want for any version of 7mm hunting gun, and they are running about 11-1200.00 currently.

[Jerry D]

Leupold have a great reputation and are durable. But the glass is nothing special in the vx3 line.

The vx5/6 are much better in terms of glass and I haven’t checked out the vx3hd.

[270person]

zeiss v4 4-16x44


30 mm tube yes?

[wallz]

Shooting only 400 yards in hunting situation. What advantage does a $1500 scope have over a $600 scope? Light gathering? Precision? Ruggedness? Clarity?
Enough to make a noticeable difference?


Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.

If you have not used $1500 optics or better you have nothing to compare to.

Don't get me wrong, there are some nice $600 scopes, but they will never compare to $1500.

[fishnguy]

I wouldn’t go with 50 mm myself, but here is one that fits the 50 and the budget:

https://northprosports.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=15365&search=Zeiss

Yes, 30 mm tube, 270person.

[Twisted Canuck]

30 mm tube yes?

Yes

[raised by wolves]

50mm sit too high unless you have an adjustable cheek piece. Most hunters are running a 40mm as they can usually be mounted much lower allowing for a more natural site alignment with the shooter's cheek weld.

The Swarovski Z3 and Z5 are great options. I have several of the Z3, 3-10X42 with either the BRX or BRH reticle, three with a German #4, and a couple Z5s, also with the BRX. Great hunting optics.

[EZM]

Money spent on good optics is worth it. Personally I have had excellent results with Leupold, Zeiss and Swarovski optics. All of my center fires have one of these scopes now. All seem durable, scratch resistant and none of them have had any tracking issues.

I cannot say the same for other brands I've tried and eventually dumped. I won't get onto bashing other brands because people take it personally - but how many times do we see threads on the same brands with the same issues before some sets pride aside and begins to be pragmatic in their choices of how they spend their hard earned money.

I agree that if you go with these 3 brands, you will be a step ahead of the other brands out there at that price point. By a long shot.

Sure ....there are higher end products like Nighforce, Tangent Theta, Leicia and some higher end Zeiss Hensoldt, Leupold and Swaro's - but these don't fit the $1500 price point (or intended application in many cases).

I also think $1500 is a perfect price range for a scope.

Best of luck ..... let us know how you make out.

[-JR-]

How are those Vortex Diamondbacks ?
I know of someone who is looking to buy his first Riffle and might buy one in the new year .

[GrandSlam]

For the money, hard to beat the Burris E1 and FF IV.

[Smokinyotes]

Out of all the different scopes I own, one of my favourites is my Zeiss conquest 4.5-16x44. I have it on my 22-250 and would say the glass is pretty comparable to my NF’s

[270person]

I'd go Leupold VX-3i 4-14 if you don't want to spend the extra 4-500 $$ on a Euro. If you're hard and fast on a 50 objective the Swaro Z3 4-12×50 is a very nice scope in the $ 1200 range.

Or watch for an older Zeiss Conquest MC 4.5-14 × 44 in the various for sales sites. Will run you 650 - 750. Excellent scopes. You'll save considerable cash if a 3-9×40/50 will get the job done of course.

[huntwat]

Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.

If you have not used $1500 optics or better you have nothing to compare to.

Don't get me wrong, there are some nice $600 scopes, but they will never compare to $1500.

Oh I certainly agree with you. But with the parameters given. I can’t see a more expensive scope giving you any advantage at 400 yards.

[elkhunter11]

Oh I certainly agree with you. But with the parameters given. I can’t see a more expensive scope giving you any advantage at 400 yards.

When an animal is on the edge of the brush at first or last light , a scope that transmits more light is a huge advantage. You can see the branches that will deflect a bullet.

[marky_mark]

When an animal is on the edge of the brush at first or last light , a scope that transmits more light is a huge advantage. You can see the branches that will deflect a bullet.

Easier to tell if its legal or not also

[huntwat]

When an animal is on the edge of the brush at first or last light , a scope that transmits more light is a huge advantage. You can see the branches that will deflect a bullet.

Easier to tell if its legal or not also

I rely on my binoculars, or spotting scope for that.
To some it’s worth it I guess.

[gramps73]

[QUOTE=sns2;4459813]Why a 50mm objective?[/QUOTE

I have a 40 VXIiI and find it not enough.

[marky_mark]

I rely on my binoculars, or spotting scope for that.
To some it’s worth it I guess.

You don’t think it’s important, until a situation comes up where it is
🤷*♂️

[marky_mark]

[QUOTE=sns2;4459813]Why a 50mm objective?[/QUOTE

I have a 40 VXIiI and find it not enough.

Good quality hd glass. You won’t notice a big difference from a 44 mm to a 50mm

[gramps73]

[QUOTE=gramps73;4460184]

Good quality hd glass. You won’t notice a big difference from a 44 mm to a 50mm

Thank you
I thought there would be a noticeable difference between the 2

Again thanks again for all the replies.

[gramps73]

Again if there are better option please do tell.

[6.5 shooter]

Any decent fixed 6X scope sold on EE at the moment. When did we need the Hubble telescope to see critters in the dark recesses of the timber? Buy some Bino's it will be money well spent. Using a riflescope as a spotter is just wrong.

[marky_mark]

Any decent fixed 6X scope sold on EE at the moment. When did we need the Hubble telescope to see critters in the dark recesses of the timber? Buy some Bino's it will be money well spent. Using a riflescope as a spotter is just wrong.

I have yet to pull the trigger on an animal when I’m using my binoculars or spotting scope

[Arty]

The Zeiss Victory scopes I use have been discontinued, but at highest magnification are just as good as my Swaro spotting scope at 300 to 400 meters. The scope can be cranked up to higher magnifications, but can't carry detail any better at that point unless there is a lot of mid-day summer sunlight or snow-reflected sunlight around. No idea what the prices of the new V8 line are.

But if you are using the flat shooting of the 7mm for distance impact, instead of just extended 'point-blank' range, then I'd want a clear scope with at least 20x. Zeiss offers a 4.8 to 35x now but I've never seen one or looked through one. No idea why they changed their product lineup. I briefly owned a 'Hubble' several years ago that had awesome visuals, but just turned out to be too clumsy.

A great way to afford a good scope is to use it interchangeably across multiple rifles, spreading the cost over all of them. The Near Alphamount system works well for that.

[fishnguy]

^ You would need to triple the budget for that, lol.

[gramps73]

I’m not sure where or what has brought you to think that I don’t use bino. I have and never will use my scope to identify anything.

[marky_mark]

The Zeiss Victory scopes I use have been discontinued, but at highest magnification are just as good as my Swaro spotting scope at 300 to 400 meters. The scope can be cranked up to higher magnifications, but can't carry detail any better at that point unless there is a lot of mid-day summer sunlight or snow-reflected sunlight around. No idea what the prices of the new V8 line are.

But if you are using the flat shooting of the 7mm for distance impact, instead of just extended 'point-blank' range, then I'd want a clear scope with at least 20x. Zeiss offers a 4.8 to 35x now but I've never seen one or looked through one. No idea why they changed their product lineup. I briefly owned a 'Hubble' several years ago that had awesome visuals, but just turned out to be too clumsy.

A great way to afford a good scope is to use it interchangeably across multiple rifles, spreading the cost over all of them. The Near Alphamount system works well for that.

I had a 4.8-35 v8
Glass was good but it had a terrible elevation range
It’s hard to believe but the glass is noticeably better with the v8 that the victory fl’s.

[EZM]

It is VERY EASY to see the difference between a cheap scope and expensive scope - next time at the range look at the same target 300-500 yards out at the same magnification and the crisp detail, color and bright image will be painfully obvious to you. The small sharp lines of the target grid marks are one hint, or previous bullet hits.

[fishnguy]

I’m not sure where or what has brought you to think that I don’t use bino. I have and never will use my scope to identify anything.
I think some guys just get carried away easily :)

IMO, $1,500 is a solid and generous budget for a scope to put on a hunting rifle to be shot inside 400 yards. That Zeiss I put a link for on the first page is a good deal if you want such a reticle (I know someone who bought one of those just a couple of weeks ago from that very shop and called a couple of stores in AB trying to price match in order to keep it in AB, no one was willing to do so because “too much of a discount”). Simple illuminated reticle (I’d go illuminated if the budget permits) V4’s will be in the same price range, maybe a little less (?). I don’t think you can buy a Swarovski Z5 under $1,500 anymore, but Z3 will keep you under that budget. Boxing day is just around the corner, so see if there is a bit of a deal somewhere. This past black friday Dante’s had 10% off all optics, maybe they will do the same. They are in Quebec though, if that is a deal breaker.

[elkhunter11]

I rely on my binoculars, or spotting scope for that.
To some it’s worth it I guess.

Default
Any decent fixed 6X scope sold on EE at the moment. When did we need the Hubble telescope to see critters in the dark recesses of the timber? Buy some Bino's it will be money well spent. Using a riflescope as a spotter is just wrong.

I use my binoculars to identify the animal, then I put them down , and use my scoped rifle to take the shot. If the animal takes a step I don't put my rifle down, and use my binoculars again to check whether the target is still unobstructed, and that the shot angle hasn't changed .

[Jerry D]

Throwing this out there. But look at the meopta r1 series.

Meopta made in the past the Zeiss conquest line that everyone said was the best value.

[270person]

[QUOTE=marky_mark;4460187]

Thank you
I thought there would be a noticeable difference between the 2

Again thanks again for all the replies.


Only thing a 50 mm objective gives you is slightly better low light performance but the tradeoff is weight and having to mount the scope higher as has been mentioned. You likely won't see much difference looking through good glass in the 40-44mm range. Only if you're looking through same brand/model in comparison in near dark.

30 minutes after sunrise or before sunset difference give or take 15 mins is basically zero. No advantage whatsoever in typical daylight unless there's an eclipse happening. Pretty much any brand Leupold 3 and up will more than get the job done.

[Dick284]

Drop $1K on a Leupold Vx3HD 4.5-14x40 and use the left over funds for a range membership and practice ammo.

[JBE]

x2

[catnthehat]

Drop $1K on a Leupold Vx3HD 4.5-14x40 and use the left over funds for a range membership and practice ammo.

I agree
Cat

[madcarpenter]

Vortex Razor HD LHT 3-15x42. Excellent scope for the money and awesome warranty! They do make a 50mm as well.

[huntwat]

I use my binoculars to identify the animal, then I put them down , and use my scoped rifle to take the shot. If the animal takes a step I don't put my rifle down, and use my binoculars again to check whether the target is still unobstructed, and that the shot angle hasn't changed .

And this is what I’m getting at.
You “spot” with binos. Your shoot with a scope.
At 400 yards the difference between a $1500-$600 scope is minimal.
Especially with modern glass.

[marky_mark]

And this is what I’m getting at.
You “spot” with binos. Your shoot with a scope.
At 400 yards the difference between a $1500-$600 scope is minimal.
Especially with modern glass.

Your not getting “modern glass” for 600 bucks

[huntwat]

It is VERY EASY to see the difference between a cheap scope and expensive scope - next time at the range look at the same target 300-500 yards out at the same magnification and the crisp detail, color and bright image will be painfully obvious to you. The small sharp lines of the target grid marks are one hint, or previous bullet hits.

What do you consider cheap??

[sns2]

[QUOTE=sns2;4459813]Why a 50mm objective?[/QUOTE

I have a 40 VXIiI and find it not enough.

Not enough what?

The human eye cannot take in more light than is transmitted by a quality scope in 40mm. Justsayin.

Are you possibly getting magnification confused with the size of your objective lens?

What are you using now that you want to replace?

[270person]

Drop $1K on a Leupold Vx3HD 4.5-14x40 and use the left over funds for a range membership and practice ammo.


You're talking used yes? 3-12 is $1200 everywhere. May not want a 30mm tube either. Dunno. I dont need 800 moa but some might.

[270person]

What do you consider cheap??


Id guess under $550

[fishnguy]

You're talking used yes? 3-12 is $1200 everywhere. May not want a 30mm tube either. Dunno. I dont need 800 moa but some might.

Crazy how prices picked up in the past little while. Just a year ago (maybe a little more), I could pick up a 5HD for that price at the local Canadian Tire. I kept looking at it for months until I saw someone at the checkout line with it in their hands. That’s when “regret” settled in, hahha.

[Speckle55]

i have a 7mm n use Bushnell

here is a nice scope
https://www.bushnell.com/elite-tactical/elite-tactical-6-36x56-xrs3-riflescope-g4p-reticle/BU-ETXRS3G4.html

on sale maybe boxing day

if later u want to try a little distance u can

trusted company in my books

Old Guy too can not see so good

just saying

David:)

[JBE]

You're talking used yes? 3-12 is $1200 everywhere. May not want a 30mm tube either. Dunno. I dont need 800 moa but some might.

The scope he is talking about with zero lock just under 1k.

[Pathfinder76]

I’m the odd guy out. I love fixed 6x36 Leupolds. Now discontinued. They are clear and bright. Hold zero like grim death, have an enormous amount of adjustment, and can be mounted very low over a receiver. They go into scabbards well, and pack on the back nicely too.

[270person]

The scope he is talking about with zero lock just under 1k.


P&D has very good pricing on Zeiss. V4 HD 3-12 has been 1199 for 6 months. Prophet River the same or more. Precision same or more but seldom have inventory.

[catnthehat]

I’m the odd guy out. I love fixed 6x36 Leupolds. Now discontinued. They are clear and bright. Hold zero like grim death, have an enormous amount of adjustment, and can be mounted very low over a receiver. They go into scabbards well, and pack on the back nicely too.

I love them too!
The only reason I have the 1.5-4x on my hunting rifle is because it was a Christmas gift from my son a few years back:)
Cat

[fishnguy]

I’m the odd guy out. I love fixed 6x36 Leupolds. Now discontinued. They are clear and bright. Hold zero like grim death, have an enormous amount of adjustment, and can be mounted very low over a receiver. They go into scabbards well, and pack on the back nicely too.
I could never find one in Canada when I was looking for a scope for one of the rifles. I started looking for one after your comments in many threads about those scopes, lol.

Curious, do you have any other scopes on any of your rifles, Chuck? Pretty sure every picture I saw you post had one of those scopes.

[6.5 shooter]

[QUOTE=marky_mark;4460197]I have yet to pull the trigger on an animal when I’m using my binoculars or spotting scope[/Q

Never mind. I would respond but you would miss that point as well.

[Dick284]

You're talking used yes? 3-12 is $1200 everywhere. May not want a 30mm tube either. Dunno. I dont need 800 moa but some might.

You aren’t looking in the right place.

https://store.prophetriver.com/leupold-vx-3hd-4-5-14x40mm-cds-zl-sfp-1-duplex-ret-matte-180619/

[JD848]

For me to pick out a scope that I really like meaning reticle to boot thinking the guy will like what I like I don't agree with I don't care if it's 250 , 500 bucks or 5000 bucks, my eyes like certain glass and a certain reticles with certain eye relief.

To suggest what's out there is fine ,but the rest is up to the guy and how it feels when he lifts that gun as it is has to be right there in a blink, could be the best for another and garbage to the next guy.

Lots of great well made rifles for one person and the next guy hates them when shooting , because we all have different fits and our eyes and brain process everything in a different way from everyone on how they see things. No person has the same eyes as the next or the same reflexes or motor functions to make it all work the same as another person, to think different would be saying were all robots.

So the op has to look and try before he buys on what turns his crank to be his best behind that bolt.

Chuck said he was the odd guy, hell no he does very well with the tools he uses ,so he's better off then 90 percent of most shooters. And you won't change him or myself or most others that know what they like that turns there crank in there melon when they lift that rifle .

Cheers
JD

[outofbounds]

Haven't used my scoped rifles for some time, mainly archery hunt these days or go to the Win Model '71 if turning to rifle season.
Prefer the up close of archery and spot and stalk of late season rifle.

Two Sako rifles I own both have Leopold scopes mounted.
7mm has the Vari X3 4-14-40, 300 RUM has the Vari X3 4-14-50.

Both have done me well, solid mounting with Sako rings.
More glass than I required at the time.
No issues.
At time of purchase both were within $$ range listed.

[Pathfinder76]

I could never find one in Canada when I was looking for a scope for one of the rifles. I started looking for one after your comments in many threads about those scopes, lol.

Curious, do you have any other scopes on any of your rifles, Chuck? Pretty sure every picture I saw you post had one of those scopes.

I have and use other scopes.

[jayquiver]

Looking to replace the scope on my sons 7mm
Never shooting further then 400 yards.
looking for a 50mm objective.
priced no more the 1500 as he is paying for it.
Thank you and Merry Christmas

Does he want dials or a BDC reticle?

IMO the Leupold's VX5's are a great optic, you should be able to get one in your budget. Big fan of the 2-10 or 3-15. Love the Aluma Caps too.

I've owned Swaro Z3 with BRH reticle, didn't like the reticle, sold it. Now I own Leupolds with a simple duplex reticle and can dial if I need too, in most of my hunting situations I don't need too, I usually hunt bush.

If you have a problem with it or want to change something on it, Korth Group is in Alberta and have great service.

For a 400 yard max range I would go with the VX5HD 2-10 or a VX3HD 2.5-8...I have 2 of these and love them. Lightweight, great glass, good magnification range for 400 yards.

[Grizzly Adams1]

Why a 50mm objective?

x multiple. Unnecessary and can be problematic in the field.

Grizz

[270person]

You aren’t looking in the right place.

https://store.prophetriver.com/leupold-vx-3hd-4-5-14x40mm-cds-zl-sfp-1-duplex-ret-matte-180619/


Or the right brand. Was thinking Zeiss V4 3-12 for some reason. As you were sir.

[huntwat]

Does he want dials or a BDC reticle?



For a 400 yard max range I would go with the VX5HD 2-10 or a VX3HD 2.5-8...I have 2 of these and love them. Lightweight, great glass, good magnification range for 400 yards.

Why the need for dials or bdc. 400 yards is not far. Sight in for 275-300 yards (depending on which 7mm) duplex reticle. Know your trajectory and shoot.
I sometimes wonder how Elmer Keith or Jack O’Conner ever managed to kill anything?????

[marky_mark]

Why the need for dials or bdc. 400 yards is not far. Sight in for 275-300 yards (depending on which 7mm) duplex reticle. Know your trajectory and shoot.
I sometimes wonder how Elmer Keith or Jack O’Conner ever managed to kill anything?????

There has been advancements in technology and it would be foolish not to use them

[Pathfinder76]

There has been advancements in technology and it would be foolish not to use them

I disagree Mark. Over the years, my observation has been, that the biggest hinderance to success in the field is ability to quickly make things happen. To me, the ideal scope has reference to 400 and maybe 500 yards. With these two aiming points you can be very quick, and very efficient.

I’ve used turrets in the field off and on for over 15 years. To me they are too much of a good thing.

[brewster29]

I disagree Mark. Over the years, my observation has been, that the biggest hinderance to success in the field is ability to quickly make things happen. To me, the ideal scope has reference to 400 and maybe 500 yards. With these two aiming points you can be very quick, and very efficient.

I’ve used turrets in the field off and on for over 15 years. To me they are too much of a good thing.

This is why I am a big fan of the Leupold B&C reticle. Very fast to use and gets you more than adequate big game accuracy to 500 yds for pretty much any load in the 2900-3050 fps range. With a +3" at 100 zero I am within 2"+- to 600 yds.

[huntwat]

There has been advancements in technology and it would be foolish not to use them

Well, I guess at 60 years old, I’m a fool.

[Ackleyman]

It is VERY EASY to see the difference between a cheap scope and expensive scope - next time at the range look at the same target 300-500 yards out at the same magnification and the crisp detail, color and bright image will be painfully obvious to you. The small sharp lines of the target grid marks are one hint, or previous bullet hits.

I have a NightForce 15 x 55 x 52 [on bench gun] and have a real tough time seeing 6mm holes . 500 yds no way. Blisters on steel no prob. But my eyes are old. You must have excellent vision... and shoot larger caliber

[Smokinyotes]

As far as a hunting reticle I really like the NF MOAR reticle. On my 257 wby with a 300 yard zero holding 2 moa puts me bang on @ 400, 4 moa at 500 and just a hair over 6 moa at 600.

[marky_mark]

Well, I guess at 60 years old, I’m a fool.

Or you need to expand your horizons

[huntwat]

Or you need to expand your horizons

Not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford the new technology.

[marky_mark]

Not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford the new technology.

It’s the same price

[CanuckShooter]

Why the need for dials or bdc. 400 yards is not far. Sight in for 275-300 yards (depending on which 7mm) duplex reticle. Know your trajectory and shoot.
I sometimes wonder how Elmer Keith or Jack O’Conner ever managed to kill anything?????

I don't recall O'Conner ever suggesting to sight in @ 275-300 yards? Personally I can't imagine why you'd do that unless that was the distance you were always shooting?

[GrandSlam]

I don't recall O'Conner ever suggesting to sight in @ 275-300 yards? Personally I can't imagine why you'd do that unless that was the distance you were always shooting?


And not everyone shoots game at 400+ yards. 100-250 is more likely.

[JD848]

P&D has very good pricing on Zeiss. V4 HD 3-12 has been 1199 for 6 months. Prophet River the same or more. Precision same or more but seldom have inventory.

Nothing special about that scopes, the V6 is a good tool, but the v4 isn't anything special.

JD

[Arty]

The problem with the BDC is that it's a manufacturer's guesstimate of what a 'typical' trajectory would be. It's 'hard-wired' to some presumption which makes it cluttered at best and misleading at worst.

Trajectory can change from one week or elevation to another, even from one time of day to another; certainly between bullet weights and shapes and shooting elevation. You have to have a measured and finely calculated estimate of the corresponding trajectory, and have a graded index in your reticle to adjust for things that can change immediately like range, elevation, windage etc. You're never going to 'know' it off hand exactly because of all those things that change.

So you have to take measured samples of muzzle velocity (using a chrony) of the hand-loads or factory cartridges you'll be using in a specific rifle. Once you have that, say an average of 2950 fps with small standard deviation for a loading you're happy with, you run the calculations of trajectory from 50 meters to 800 meters for that load, zeroed at 100, and record the density altitude at the range at the time of day you're doing your tests.

You run those calculations at intervals of 1000 feet of density altitude, to make a different reference card for each one. You print the results of range and windage and elevation trajectory calculation results onto a wallet card for each density altitude, then laminate each card with plastic over at a Staples shop. Punch a hole into the corner of each one, and mount the short stack of cards for one rifle onto a split ring. Take your Kestrel out with you to measure the density altitude at dawn where you're hunting, pull off the card with the closest density altitude and one higher and one lower. Put the dawn one into your shirt pocket and the other two into your wallet.

Each card has rows and columns of how many clicks to adjust for, at each range and shooting elevation and windage. As I always use mil-dot recticles, you just know how many clicks make one mil, say 20:1, and can print it one time on each card too. Then there's two ways you use the turrets.

First, you can start off with the scope zeroed at 100 meters at the range or whatever you've chosen to reference your calculations from. When you see your target, determine the range and shooting elevation, say he's grazing at 447 meters down 45 degrees in a valley. Estimate or measure average cross-wind speed and direction and maybe how fast he's walking. Just look at your wallet card table and see how many clicks to crank the range and windage turret to for a particular magnification. The cross-hairs will be nearly perfectly on POI, without any thinking or guessing or humming and hawing. That works well if you have the time to pull out a card and look at it, then crank a couple turrets.

Or secondly, you could just crank the range turret to 300 meters first thing in the morning. Then look at the card to see how many mils you have to push down, for 100 meters and 200 meters and remember that. If an animal walks out and looks up at you at 95 yards down low in a draw, you know you just have to push down 1 1/2 mil that day. Or push down 1 mil if it's a flat field. Quick, easy, and exact; all based on measurements and accurate calculation, no guessing and hoping involved. Same with windage, if you know you've got a 10 km/h adiabatic wind blowing through a valley in the morning, you'll know to push into the wind a 1/4 mil if it's wide open, or nothing if it's in the trees.

I like to push down instead of up, because it's easier to see the cross-hairs at distance than a mil-dot. At closer range, it's easier to see where the milt-dot is on the target.

[Bushrat]

The problem with the BDC is that it's a manufacturer's guesstimate of what a 'typical' trajectory would be. It's 'hard-wired' to some presumption which makes it cluttered at best and misleading at worst.

Trajectory can change from one week or elevation to another, even from one time of day to another; certainly between bullet weights and shapes and shooting elevation. You have to have a measured and finely calculated estimate of the corresponding trajectory, and have a graded index in your reticle to adjust for things that can change immediately like range, elevation, windage etc. You're never going to 'know' it off hand exactly because of all those things that change.

So you have to take measured samples of muzzle velocity (using a chrony) of the hand-loads or factory cartridges you'll be using in a specific rifle. Once you have that, say an average of 2950 fps with small standard deviation for a loading you're happy with, you run the calculations of trajectory from 50 meters to 800 meters for that load, zeroed at 100, and record the density altitude at the range at the time of day you're doing your tests.

You run those calculations at intervals of 1000 feet of density altitude, to make a different reference card for each one. You print the results of range and windage and elevation trajectory calculation results onto a wallet card for each density altitude, then laminate each card with plastic over at a Staples shop. Punch a hole into the corner of each one, and mount the short stack of cards for one rifle onto a split ring. Take your Kestrel out with you to measure the density altitude at dawn where you're hunting, pull off the card with the closest density altitude and one higher and one lower. Put the dawn one into your shirt pocket and the other two into your wallet.

Each card has rows and columns of how many clicks to adjust for, at each range and shooting elevation and windage. As I always use mil-dot recticles, you just know how many clicks make one mil, say 20:1, and can print it one time on each card too. Then there's two ways you use the turrets.

First, you can start off with the scope zeroed at 100 meters at the range or whatever you've chosen to reference your calculations from. When you see your target, determine the range and shooting elevation, say he's grazing at 447 meters down 45 degrees in a valley. Estimate or measure average cross-wind speed and direction and maybe how fast he's walking. Just look at your wallet card table and see how many clicks to crank the range and windage turret to for a particular magnification. The cross-hairs will be nearly perfectly on POI, without any thinking or guessing or humming and hawing. That works well if you have the time to pull out a card and look at it, then crank a couple turrets.

Or secondly, you could just crank the range turret to 300 meters first thing in the morning. Then look at the card to see how many mils you have to push down, for 100 meters and 200 meters and remember that. If an animal walks out and looks up at you at 95 yards down low in a draw, you know you just have to push down 1 1/2 mil that day. Or push down 1 mil if it's a flat field. Quick, easy, and exact; all based on measurements and accurate calculation, no guessing and hoping involved. Same with windage, if you know you've got a 10 km/h adiabatic wind blowing through a valley in the morning, you'll know to push into the wind a 1/4 mil if it's wide open, or nothing if it's in the trees.

I like to push down instead of up, because it's easier to see the cross-hairs at distance than a mil-dot. At closer range, it's easier to see where the milt-dot is on the target.

In my simple pea brain I'd rather not have to go through all of that horse**** I'll just get closer or keep going till I find another animal where I can simply point and shoot. If you guys want to turn hunting into a mathematical thesis go ahead, I'd rather just go hunting.

[huntwat]

I don't recall O'Conner ever suggesting to sight in @ 275-300 yards? Personally I can't imagine why you'd do that unless that was the distance you were always shooting?

Because the op said max 400 yards. 275-300 would be a happy medium. Never suggested those two old hunters ever said to sight in at those yardages. I just suggested it was amazing they could kill anything with old technology.
There is way too much marketing in new technology. If you listen to all the advertising, all optics are garbage except for whomever is the sponsor of the day.

[Dick284]

In my simple pea brain I'd rather not have to go through all of that horse**** I'll just get closer or keep going till I find another animal where I can simply point and shoot. If you guys want to turn hunting into a mathematical thesis go ahead, I'd rather just go hunting.

Most of these mathematicians don’t have a clue about Maximum point blank range.

If you figure a 7” vital zone(3.5” high, 3.5” low) you can take a factory loaded 150 grain 7 RM and set it up to be, 2.8” high at 100 yds., which is around 265-270 yd zero and 13-14” low at 400 yds.

It’s pretty simple to hold where you want to hit all the way out to around 315 yds, and ghee whiz anything beyond 315 you hold on the back line of a deer all the way out to around 415 yds.

Easy as can be, and zero twisty turns mind numbing calculating required, remember 2 distances 315, 415 yds how hard is that.

Fits into the original parameters pretty darn good I’d say.

[Arty]

In my simple pea brain I'd rather not have to go through all of that horse**** I'll just get closer or keep going till I find another animal where I can simply point and shoot. If you guys want to turn hunting into a mathematical thesis go ahead, I'd rather just go hunting.

Well, the whole point of the exercise is to avoid any mathematical considerations when you have to pull the trigger. All the work and worry is done beforehand. Sort of like using metallic cartridges instead of a flintlock with priming powder in the rain.

[huntwat]

:scared0018:Most of these mathematicians don’t have a clue about Maximum point blank range.

If you figure a 7” vital zone(3.5” high, 3.5” low) you can take a factory loaded 150 grain 7 RM and set it up to be, 2.8” high at 100 yds., which is around 265-270 yd zero and 13-14” low at 400 yds.

It’s pretty simple to hold where you want to hit all the way out to around 315 yds, and ghee whiz anything beyond 315 you hold on the back line of a deer all the way out to around 415 yds.

Easy as can be, and zero twisty turns mind numbing calculating required, remember 2 distances 315, 415 yds how hard is that.

Fits into the original parameters pretty darn good I’d say.


Thank you Dick. I’m not good at putting my thoughts in to writing. You have hit the nail on the head.

[sns2]

[QUOTE=Dick284;4461112]Most of these mathematicians don’t have a clue about Maximum point blank range.

If you figure a 7” vital zone(3.5” high, 3.5” low) you can take a factory loaded 150 grain 7 RM and set it up to be, 2.8” high at 100 yds., which is around 265-270 yd zero and 13-14” low at 400 yds.

It’s pretty simple to hold where you want to hit all the way out to around 315 yds, and ghee whiz anything beyond 315 you hold on the back line of a deer all the way out to around 415 yds.

Easy as can be, and zero twisty turns mind numbing calculating required, remember 2 distances 315, 415 yds how hard is that.

Fits into the original parameters pretty darn good I’d say.[/QUOTE

Well, rooty toot toot to you too. Wat you trying to prove, coming on here and talking common sense for. Fun killer.

[catnthehat]

Most of these mathematicians don’t have a clue about Maximum point blank range.

If you figure a 7” vital zone(3.5” high, 3.5” low) you can take a factory loaded 150 grain 7 RM and set it up to be, 2.8” high at 100 yds., which is around 265-270 yd zero and 13-14” low at 400 yds.

It’s pretty simple to hold where you want to hit all the way out to around 315 yds, and ghee whiz anything beyond 315 you hold on the back line of a deer all the way out to around 415 yds.

Easy as can be, and zero twisty turns mind numbing calculating required, remember 2 distances 315, 415 yds how hard is that.

Fits into the original parameters pretty darn good I’d say.

This is how it USED to be described for best hunting scenario out of a particular cartridge- MPBR.
Lots of newer hunters I talk to these days do not even know what that means even without the acronym!:thinking-006:
I use a range finder, but still run my favorite hunting rifle with a MPBR zero
Cat

[JD848]

This is how it USED to be described for best hunting scenario out of a particular cartridge- MPBR.
Lots of newer hunters I talk to these days do not even know what that means even without the acronym!:thinking-006:
I use a range finder, but still run my favorite hunting rifle with a MPBR zero
Cat

x2 Been doing this same thing for 45 years ,so far so good.

JD

[jayquiver]

Why the need for dials or bdc. 400 yards is not far. Sight in for 275-300 yards (depending on which 7mm) duplex reticle. Know your trajectory and shoot.
I sometimes wonder how Elmer Keith or Jack O’Conner ever managed to kill anything?????

why not? CDS ZL turrets are standard on the Leupold's VX3HD and VX5HD both lines are within the OP budget. You can dial if needed or when practicing out to longer distances.

I have them on my scopes with simple duplex. 90% of the time I don't need to dial when hunting but if I have to I have the option...seems to be the perfect option for me...clean reticle and the ability to reach out there.

...yes you can hold on a deer back to 400 yards but what happens when it moves to 450 yards and you can't close the gap? You either hold over its back or you don't take the shot. I'd prefer to dial it in...all day long.

[huntwat]

why not? CDS ZL turrets are standard on the Leupold's VX3HD and VX5HD both lines are within the OP budget. You can dial if needed or when practicing out to longer distances.

I have them on my scopes with simple duplex. 90% of the time I don't need to dial when hunting but if I have to I have the option...seems to be the perfect option for me...clean reticle and the ability to reach out there.

...yes you can hold on a deer back to 400 yards but what happens when it moves to 450 yards and you can't close the gap? You either hold over its back or you don't take the shot. I'd prefer to dial it in...all day long.

Well, the op did say 400 yards max. So, I guess the shot isn’t taken with any scope.

[EZM]

I have a NightForce 15 x 55 x 52 [on bench gun] and have a real tough time seeing 6mm holes . 500 yds no way. Blisters on steel no prob. But my eyes are old. You must have excellent vision... and shoot larger caliber

No bionic eyes here but Agreed - the main point was, a really good scope allows you a real good chance to see paper hits up to 300, and, a less expensive one doesn't. I compared my My Swaro at 25 power to a "far less crisp" Vortex (I think it was 24x IIRC) and there was no way - the sharpness wasn't there. Difference was dramatic. I'm sure the extra 1x made no difference. The outside lines of the target paper were also very crisp on mine, whereas on the other scope, no matter what adjustments you made the edges were not.

That "side by side" in the exact same conditions, same time, same holes was the first time I had ever seen the difference.

I don't shoot anything but steel over 300 (as I am not a bench guy) and even with a spotting scope 500 yards can be tough even on steel some days.

[MountainTi]

Most of these mathematicians don’t have a clue about Maximum point blank range.

If you figure a 7” vital zone(3.5” high, 3.5” low) you can take a factory loaded 150 grain 7 RM and set it up to be, 2.8” high at 100 yds., which is around 265-270 yd zero and 13-14” low at 400 yds.

It’s pretty simple to hold where you want to hit all the way out to around 315 yds, and ghee whiz anything beyond 315 you hold on the back line of a deer all the way out to around 415 yds.

Easy as can be, and zero twisty turns mind numbing calculating required, remember 2 distances 315, 415 yds how hard is that.

Fits into the original parameters pretty darn good I’d say.

Sounds as easy as remember 2 hashmarks on a BRH reticle.

[Jerry D]

I personally feel the mpbr formula should use a vital about half the size of the actual vital zone to account for error. At 300 yards you may squeeze the shot off a few inches low, maybe more.. your elevation is already on the lower end as the bullet is on the down curve And most guns are at best a 1 moa rifle. You may hit another few inches low in a worst case scenario. That could put you 6-9” low. Maybe more.

Bdc reticles are easy to use if you put the time in. Simple hash marks. Out to 4-500 yards your not going to see too much error caused by elevation or changing conditions that will make your bdc reticle be wrong.

Leupold has the cds system on every scope now. Send it in a get a custom dial made and test it out. Just turn to the range you need and shoot. Pretty simple as well or just dial the elevation.

You can also use a 100 yard zero and Kentucky windage it ;)

[sns2]

Sounds as easy as remember 2 hashmarks on a BRH reticle.

Good one!!!

All these systems work. Even Nikon’s BDC worked really well, but what a reticle:)

[jayquiver]

Sounds as easy as remember 2 hashmarks on a BRH reticle.Haha.

Sent from my SM-G781W using Tapatalk

[6.5 shooter]

While your all busy twisting dials, I will just go down and start skinning.

As for twisting dials on the range that is fine, I do it as well. Big heavy scopes with large objectives with stellar glass, parallax etc. do help, but that is not what the OP was looking for!.

If you can't hit a deer in the boiler room with a fixed 6X scope then you need to practice more or get closer. A deer can move a half step between the trigger squeeze and the flight time of the bullet turning a kill shot into a gut shot or if your lucky a total miss. 400 yards is a LONG shot on a animal which can move, unlike a stapled up target mounted on a nice back stop with 20 wind flags between you and the X ring.

[fishnguy]

So… OP, did your son settle on anything yet?

[270person]

Nothing special about that scopes, the V6 is a good tool, but the v4 isn't anything special.

JD


As good as any other Euro 4x. 30mm tube out there. Making it a large chunk better than anything made/assembled in NA

No idea where you pull V4 not being anything special from to be honest. Yet the 6x is?

[gramps73]

So… OP, did your son settle on anything yet?

nothing yet but......
ruled out the 50mm for sure and learned a lot about scopes.
He would like to have a CDS system and it can be added at anytime as he improves his shooting skills.
Thinking of the something with a simple reticle like the Leupold 4.5-14x40 would do the trick

thanks for all that answered

[catnthehat]

nothing yet but......
ruled out the 50mm for sure and learned a lot about scopes.
He would like to have a CDS system and it can be added at anytime as he improves his shooting skills.
Thinking of the something with a simple reticle like the Leupold 4.5-14x40 would do the trick

thanks for all that answered

My son put a Leupold 4.5-14x CDS on his 6.5 Wildcat rifle, it works super out to the extended ranges it was designed for.
Cat

[gramps73]

My son put a Leupold 4.5-14x CDS on his 6.5 Wildcat rifle, it works super out to the extended ranges it was designed for.
Cat

Thanks Cat
we both are shooting way more now, so the more trigger time he gets the more comfortable he will be come a further distances.

[jayquiver]

nothing yet but......
ruled out the 50mm for sure and learned a lot about scopes.
He would like to have a CDS system and it can be added at anytime as he improves his shooting skills.
Thinking of the something with a simple reticle like the Leupold 4.5-14x40 would do the trick

thanks for all that answered

sounds like a great set up. Throw some Aluma Caps on it and some good rings and you are set.

[Pathfinder76]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.

[jayquiver]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.
https://www.precisionoptics.net/Leupold_VX_3HD_3_5_10x40_CDS_ZL_Duplex_180617_p/l180617.htm

get it while you can. 9 in stock.

[sns2]

https://www.precisionoptics.net/Leupold_VX_3HD_3_5_10x40_CDS_ZL_Duplex_180617_p/l180617.htm

get it while you can. 9 in stock.

Nice sale. I am a bigger fans of the 3.5-10 for the op’s application as well.

This was a success as soon as you deep sixed the 50mm objective.

[catnthehat]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.

I have a 3.5-10 Leupold on my 280, I like it as well.
Neither that one OR the 4.5-14x would be are my first choice , mind you! LOL
Cat

[270person]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.


Not much to get behind?? Or user friendly??

Swarovski 4-12 and Zeiss 4.5-14 sold due to the Leupolds weight, balance, and near equality in low light. Not sure what isn't there to get behind. They certainly "get behind" their scopes better than the Euros do.

[Pathfinder76]

Not much to get behind?? Or user friendly??

Swarovski 4-12 and Zeiss 4.5-14 sold due to the Leupolds weight, balance, and near equality in low light. Not sure what isn't there to get behind. They certainly "get behind" their scopes better than the Euros do.

Their eye box sucks. Big time.

[270person]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.

Their eye box sucks. Big time.


Interesting. I don't notice a difference between mine, the 3-10×, any of my Zeiss, or the Swaro Z3.

Amazingly bright to boot. I'd prefer a max focal of 12x but the 14x does everything I need it to do at the range and in the field. And for that light a package?

I think you've posted prior about your dislike for Zeiss scopes as well?

[Pathfinder76]

Interesting. I don't notice a difference between mine, the 3-10×, any of my Zeiss, or the Swaro Z3.

Amazingly bright to boot. I'd prefer a max focal of 12x but the 14x does everything I need it to do at the range and in the field. And for that light a package?

I think you've posted prior about your dislike for Zeiss scopes as well?

I’m posting my opinion based on my usage of these scopes. That is the point of this thread. You or anyone else can take it or leave it. It makes no difference to me really.

[elkhunter11]

Not much to get behind?? Or user friendly??

Swarovski 4-12 and Zeiss 4.5-14 sold due to the Leupolds weight, balance, and near equality in low light. Not sure what isn't there to get behind. They certainly "get behind" their scopes better than the Euros do.

While the Zeiss scopes tend to be heavier, the Swarovski Z3 scopes are as light or lighter than comparable Leupold scopes.

[brewster29]

I honestly don’t like Leupolds 4.5-14. They aren’t much to get behind and not user friendly. The 3.5-10 has it beat by a country mile.

As much as I like them them (have 4 in the 40mm) I will be the first to admit the eyebox is a lot smaller than the 3.5-10. You need a well fit stock/ring setup to get the scope centered without having to move year head. Once you get over 10x you need some sort of parallax adjustment as well.

In terms of scope for the money I think they are hard to beat.

[EZM]

Dialing is awesome .......... when you are the range. I have yet to dial a scope on the field .... if I know my MPBR and know that "I'm good to 325" and have references (taped to stock on hold overs) out to 450 that's good enough for me. I don't take shots past that typically.

I guess maybe, if I had a ton of time, and something was bedded down 600 yards out, and there wasn't a big wind, maybe I would dial it in and take the shot. I don't know.

[270person]

While the Zeiss scopes tend to be heavier, the Swarovski Z3 scopes are as light or lighter than comparable Leupold scopes.


Yep. Didnt care for the two I've owned. Prefer pretty much everything about the Zeiss lineup.

I love the Euros but if and when something happens you aren't getting a replacement quick.

Leupold still excellent product and service for the price.

[elkhunter11]

Yep. Didnt care for the two I've owned. Prefer pretty much everything about the Zeiss lineup.

I love the Euros but if and when something happens you aren't getting a replacement quick.

Leupold still excellent product and service for the price.

And using European hunting scopes exclusively for over 20 years, I have never had one fail on me, so it couldn't be used. The best warranty, is the one that I don't have to use, and I am not paranoid enough to choose optics based on the warranty.

[gramps73]

OP has another question

I have not heard the term “eye box”
Meaning please

Thank you

[fishnguy]

OP has another question

I have not heard the term “eye box”
Meaning please

Thank you
This may help: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qGoEjh7LXRM

[270person]

And using European hunting scopes exclusively for over 20 years, I have never had one fail on me, so it couldn't be used. The best warranty, is the one that I don't have to use, and I am not paranoid enough to choose optics based on the warranty.


Missed the part where I said I use Leupold & Zeiss elk? Both fine scopes in their own rights and I've never had a problem with a scope of either brand.

I'm not paranoid either. Just well aware of what you get for the money, and IF Swaro made all the models and versions Leupold does...I still wouldn't buy one because theres not a big enough difference to justify the price dif. Imo of course.

My how elitist some at AO have become the past while. I should say 4 or 5 have become. Leupolds aren't good enough now. LOL. Probably had a hand in shooting more game than any other scope manufacturer in the last 20 years but hey. Still not good enough.

[elkhunter11]

Missed the part where I said I use Leupold & Zeiss elk? Both fine scopes in their own rights and I've never had a problem with a scope of either brand.

I'm not paranoid either. Just well aware of what you get for the money, and IF Swaro made all the models and versions Leupold does...I still wouldn't buy one because theres not a big enough difference to justify the price dif. Imo of course.

My how elitist some at AO have become the past while. I should say 4 or 5 have become. Leupolds aren't good enough now. LOL. Probably had a hand in shooting more game than any other scope manufacturer in the last 20 years but hey. Still not good enough.

At one time, every one of my rifles wore a Leupold, but other companies kept improving while Leupold pretty much just raised their prices, until other companies caught up in the mid priced scopes, at similar prices. So now I find that I find more for my money with other brands. It's nothing to do with being elitest, I could spend as much or more for Leupold, I just choose not to.

[marky_mark]

Missed the part where I said I use Leupold & Zeiss elk? Both fine scopes in their own rights and I've never had a problem with a scope of either brand.

I'm not paranoid either. Just well aware of what you get for the money, and IF Swaro made all the models and versions Leupold does...I still wouldn't buy one because theres not a big enough difference to justify the price dif. Imo of course.

My how elitist some at AO have become the past while. I should say 4 or 5 have become. Leupolds aren't good enough now. LOL. Probably had a hand in shooting more game than any other scope manufacturer in the last 20 years but hey. Still not good enough.

How do you figure a ZEISS v4 or a Swarovski z3 or z5 is elitist?
They are the same price as a mid range leupold?
Leupold was popular because there wasn’t many other options
Now their is better choices for the same money

[JD848]

As good as any other Euro 4x. 30mm tube out there. Making it a large chunk better than anything made/assembled in NA

No idea where you pull V4 not being anything special from to be honest. Yet the 6x is?

I have a brand spanken new V4 right here sitting in the box, for some reason I like the HD 5 3x15x42 a bit more, in fact I like my 6500's better then it , for me I find better I relief ,but that just me .

Since when does one guy like an optic for all to shoot or one other person, I put my own scope on what my eyes like not yours . There is no way i can tell you what your eyes really like out of all the scopes out there. To suggest is fine and nothing wrong with that at all ,but I've been using euro scopes since 1985 ,80 percent of my hunting life.

No big deal to me at all, the V6 I thought was holding it's own to the HT'S ,but for that kinda loot and the amount of time I hunt these days I past on it.

The V4 was a gift ,so I will use it ,just tried it out in a hurry and put back what I had on my 7mm. I sold 90 percent of my rifles 2 years ago when i had my aneurism, but I did hang on to several scopes, just in case .

Depth perception is a personal thing on how we all see stuff ,even in bino's ,no big thing that's new .


CHEERS
JD

[catnthehat]

I have a brand spanken new V4 right here sitting in the box, for some reason I like the HD 5 3x15x42 a bit more, in fact I like my 6500's better then it , for me I find better I relief ,but that just me .

Since when does one guy like an optic for all to shoot or one other person, I put my own scope on what my eyes like not yours . There is no way i can tell you what your eyes really like out of all the scopes out there. To suggest is fine and nothing wrong with that at all ,but I've been using euro scopes since 1985 ,80 percent of my hunting life.

No big deal to me at all, the V6 I thought was holding it's own to the HT'S ,but for that kinda loot and the amount of time I hunt these days I past on it.

The V4 was a gift ,so I will use it ,just tried it out in a hurry and put back what I had on my 7mm. I sold 90 percent of my rifles 2 years ago when i had my aneurism, but I did hang on to several scopes, just in case .

Depth perception is personal thing on how we all see stuff ,even in bino's ,no big thing that's new .


CHEERS
JD

A very well respected gun writer said the very same thing not too long ago on a different forum, basically not everyone sees the same through a particular scope, because all our eyes are different .:)

It's Same as aperture sights, what I need for a good 500 meter sight picture as far as front and rear diopters go , is not automatically good for someone else, another shooter may need more or less opening for either of them or both on the same target ........
Cat

[JD848]

A very well respected gun writer said the very same thing not too long ago on a different forum, basically not everyone sees the same through a particular scope, because all our eyes are different .:)

It's Same as aperture sights, what I need for a good 500 meter sight picture as far as front and rear diopters go , is not automatically good for someone else, another shooter made need more or less opening for either of them or both on the same target ........
Cat

Thank you CAT, I have a brother who shoot's very well, but we both like different scopes or how my eye relief isn't like his, at first he thought I was doing this to egg him on and finally it sunk in. We both see or need different optics ,but i have 5 bro's so arguing isn't new .

JD

[Madocmike]

I've owned most brands of scopes that a guy that has been a blue collar guy his whole career could hope to have. I really believe in the optics world you do indeed get what you pay for though. Here is a list of what I currently have and every one of them have been awesome for me and honestly that is all I care about.

Leupold on my Browning 30.06
Vortex on my Winchester .270
Nikon on my Browning 12 ga slug gun
Bauch & Lombe ( was originally on my .270 back in 1988) now on my late dad's Marlin.22 mag
Scorpion on my Howa 22.250
Tasco red dot on my Winchester .22 semi
Leupold on my T/C black powder

So you can see, I'm not brand loyal so to speak. I don't ever feel like I'm under gunned or under scoped. These simply work for me and will continue to do so until I'm done.

~ Michael