50mm Objective on Mule Deer Rifle?

[Haxby]

"...the 50mm does not give you any light gathering advantage over a 40mm."

That is not true, and since the OP has both, he can easily test it for himself.

 

[mshootnit]

a 50mm looks and feels right at home on ar-10's and some ar-15's

 

[bucktail]

I don't generally go bigger than 40 for big game. When you mount them high, it's tougher to keep a good cheek weld with the stock, and errors from not having the rifle perfectly level are magnified. They're heavier than they need to be as well. I use adjustable parallax on varmint rifles, but on big game rifles, I haven't felt the need for it, and it's something else that can be set wrong.

 

[Longrifle2506]

You know, I never thought about mounting it an my AR-15. I wonder how it would mount up in my Burris PEPR mount; I have Rock River Arms Coyote Carbine: Here's a pic. Right now it has a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-10x40 Compact/Short Action Scope. It's the perfect size for an AR Carbine if you like to keep the whole package tight and compact.

 

[CraigC]

Scopes don't "gather" light, they transmit it. How much depends more on the quality of the glass and its coatings than the diameter of the lens. Given equal quality glass and coatings, a 50mm objective will transmit more light than a 40mm. Whether or not the human eye can utilize it is another matter. As was said, this is really more important in Europe where hunters can hunt until dark. Most places in the US have strict shooting hours that end long before a 50-56mm objective will show any advantage.

 

[shootniron]

As was said, this is really more important in Europe where hunters can hunt until dark. Most places in the US have strict shooting hours that end long before a 50-56mm objective will show any advantage.

Well, in my state the law says 30min before sunrise and 30min after sunset...but, in the river bottoms around here, it gets daylight 10 minutes later than in the area outside of the swamp and it gets dark 10 minutes earlier than in area outside of the swamp...so, a 5o or 56mm objective is a benefit to my huntiing, despite what some may say.

 

[WYOMan]

The quality of the glass is way more important than the size. As far as a spotting scope goes, if you want to carry one that's up to you. I only carry bino's. A pair of either 8X or 10X Stieners.

 

[MachIVshooter]

The benefit (or lack therof) regarding light gathering from 50mm+ objectives has been covered here ad nauseum, so I won't get into it. For me, the bottom line is that 50mm scopes sit too high on a conventional rifle. All of my hunting rifles are equipped with 32mm or 40mm objectives. My varmint rifles are 42mm and 44mm. Only my AR-50 is topped with something larger, a 60mm, but it has an adjustable cheek rest, and height above bore doesn't matter when you're using an elevated base and shooting to 800 yards and further.

 

[shootniron]

The quality of the glass is way more important than the size.

If you want to pay triple the price for that quality...be my guest. In Wyoming, the glass may be worth the price, but in the south...if it cost more than a VX-2, my money won't buy it.

 

[MrDig]

I have a 6-18x50 on a .243 rifle and don't know if it is reall all that different in low light conditions than any of my Rifles with a 40mm objective lens.
For a low end Scope, (Bushnell Banner) it is a fair piece of glass.

 

[shootniron]

I have a 6-18x50 on a .243 rifle and don't know if it is reall all that different in low light conditions than any of my Rifles with a 40mm objective lens.

I think that it is like a lot of things, relative to the individual. Every person's eyes are different and light can have more or less impact on their eyes. In my case, more light helps me see better.

 

[JEB]

im kinda getting the vibe that you like that scope of yours....

mount it up and enjoy the heck out of it!

 

[madcratebuilder]

The mounting height argument doesn't hold water. A 50mm Obj mounts 5mm higher than a 40mm. That's .197 (3/16) inch, pretty insignificant. A 50mm is generally heavier and longer and should have better light gathering if it has quality glass.

 

[jmr40]

A 50mm scope will let in more light, but your eyes cannot use it all. The average human eye will only open up to 5mm. If you divide the scopes front objective in millimeters by the power setting you determine how many millimeters of light are coming through the scope. A 50mm scope set on 10X lets in 5mm of light, all the light your eyes can use. Any more is wasted.

A 1-4X20mm scope set on 4X or less will appear just as bright in low light as a 3-9X40mm set on 8x or less, and the same a 4-12X50mm when set on 10X or less. And this assumes scopes of equal quality. 50mm glass costs a lot more than 40mm. A 50mm scope of equal quality will cost $50-$100 more. If you are paying about the same for the 50mm scope you are getting a lower quality scope. I will guarantee a Zeiss Conquest, or Leupold VX-2 or VX-3 with a 40mm lense will be much brighter than a Simmons 50 mm scope. And you don't have to spend a fortune. There are a lot of decent $200-$300 scopes with 40mm or smaller glass that will do all you need to do legally.

If you need more than 8X of scope power a 50mm scope will offer a tiny bit of useable light transmission, but only between 8X-10X. If your power setting is set at 8X or less it won't do a thing a 40mm won't do. If you need more than 10X, you need an even bigger scope. I can make hits on deer size game at 400 yards easily with a 4X scope. That is as far as I need to shoot in any light so I have no need for more power or bigger glass.

The negatives far outweigh any positives. If you buy cheap, big glass you won't see anything. I also hunt in some pretty thick woods right up till dark, 30 min after sunset, and can still see well enough to make hits several minutes after legal shooting time with any of my 20,32, and 40mm scopes.

 

[jmr40]

The mounting height argument doesn't hold water. A 50mm Obj mounts 5mm higher than a 40mm. That's .197 (3/16) inch, pretty insignificant.

3/16" is huge. To hold and shoot well the more solid contact points you have between the stock and your body the more solidly you hold the rifle. Having a solid cheek weld is vital to accurate shooting. That 3/16" is enough that with most stocks your cheek is not even in contact with the stock. You can make it work from a shooting bench, but not from field positions.

It is possible, but only with stocks designed (or modified) to raise your head that high. With typical factory hunting rifle stocks mounting that high is a horrible idea.

 

[Art Eatman]

If you can get a good cheek weld with the scope, there's no reason not to use it. I wouldn't go out and buy one, but if one came on a rifle and the weld was okay, why worry?

Binocs? I've had no problem with 7x35s and 8x40s, these last 40 years. Quality for sharpness or clarity is more of a criterion than bunches of magnification.

I now have a lightweight Nikon 8x20. Not be best for field of view, but they are razor sharp.