A Modern Take on a Bolt Action Hunting Rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
2,251
Has anyone successfully mounted a variable power scope as well as a 45 degree offset mini red dot sight (RMR, DeltaPoint, etc) to a bolt action rifle? The reason I ask is because I think there could be more flexibility if a hunting rifle had a magnified scope for longer shots, but also a mini red dot in case game sneaks up. The issue that I find is that you would have to mount the red dot on the non-dominant side of the rifle in order to not interfere with spent casing extraction. However, I’d like to hear of work arounds.
 
Has anyone successfully mounted a variable power scope as well as a 45 degree offset mini red dot sight (RMR, DeltaPoint, etc) to a bolt action rifle? The reason I ask is because I think there could be more flexibility if a hunting rifle had a magnified scope for longer shots, but also a mini red dot in case game sneaks up. The issue that I find is that you would have to mount the red dot on the non-dominant side of the rifle in order to not interfere with spent casing extraction. However, I’d like to hear of work arounds.
You'd also have to be careful with butt positioning on heavier recoiling cartridges if you tried to rotate the gun so that the sight was vertical.

I'd just mount it off set left of the rail with the 45* adapters, or above or off the side of my scope with one of those add a rails, and sight my rifle offset the distance the mini dot is away from the bore.

Then at least your the same amount right at every distance, rather than having a shot that crosses diagonally.



Personally I don't see any real advantage, and a few negatives.
 
Last edited:
Mount scope. On a 120 degree tip off to left, bringing up red dot to right on an attached rail. A little higher maybe. There must be one out there somewhere!
 
I'd choose a low powered conventional scope 10 times out of 10 over a dot sight for any possible use. Including fast, close shots. A 1-4X variable will cover any shot from 4' to 400 yards.

I have to admit, I've been leaning this way too. I just setup an AR-15 in .300 Blackout for potential hunting. Traditionally I have put 3-9x scopes on my hunting rifles and irons or red dots on my "tactical rifles", but since this one had the chance of being used for a little of both I put on a Bushnell 1-4x scope and I have to say I really like it. Turned down to 1x shouldering the rifle and picking up a target is just as fast as a red dot if it's in daylight (and even at night you can get such scopes with illuminated reticles), and I typically have always left my hunting scopes set at 3x anyways so though its on the higher side of this scope's magnification, I still can get that setting for hunting when desired.

Particularly considering that I have astigmatism and without glasses a red dot is a wild starburst pattern (even with prescription glasses it doesn't clear it up entirely), I may well end up just sticking with 1-4x traditional scopes for the tactical style rifles.
 
I'd choose a low powered conventional scope 10 times out of 10 over a dot sight for any possible use. Including fast, close shots. A 1-4X variable will cover any shot from 4' to 400 yards.

My favorite scopes are 2x7 variables and I keep them on 4 power or less. In thick stuff they stay on 2 power. Thats good enough for a quick snap shot and better for me than a Scout Scope set up. For long range there is always enough time to crank a scope up to see better. No red dots needed.
 
I'll third what jmr40 said. An LPVO just seems like a simpler solution. With 1-8x and 1-10x optics becoming more affordable, you really don't even have to sacrifice much in range anymore either as 8x-10x is plenty for most purposes without giving up a near 1x on the low end.

ThomasT mentioned 2-7x optics, and as an all purpose optic I really like that magnification range. I like the extra FOV on the low end compared to most 3-9x's and really don't notice much difference on the high end practically. I had a 2-7x on my AR until I got a good deal on a 1-6x.

On my extreme budget jack-of-all-trades .243 rifle, I ended up putting a 3-9x on it and it's pretty practical. I'd like a little more on the high end, may bump up to a 3-12x eventually or even a 4-16x because coyote are a significant part of its usage but when I start getting that high it kind of becomes more of a niche use.
 
Shoot both eyes open, practice more than once per year. I hit my buck 3 years ago at 30yrds at 18x, and hit him again running across me at at 35yrds as he rounded the bank of the pond... I shoot at 15-18x all year long, largely regardless of range. If I can do it, anyone can.
 
The Nazi's came up with this arrangement to use either a scope or open sights:

View attachment 953062

Word is German snipers hated it! I kinda like it, but I'm just punching paper and nobody's shooting back at me.

Looks kinda cool but frustrating, at least for shooting quickly...tho having never seen anything but pictures of those I could be way off.

I just had a thought, were the scopes set up like that to allow the use of irons for utility, or because of the scopes not being super reliable?
 
I thought those were cool, but never used one.

I tried see thru rings and hated them, so just went to shooting everything with a scope.
I thought the same thing, can’t remember the maker of the rings and probably weren’t very good for other than short range but they came on a 760 game master chambered 270 win iirc
 
Looks kinda cool but frustrating, at least for shooting quickly...tho having never seen anything but pictures of those I could be way off.

I just had a thought, were the scopes set up like that to allow the use of irons for utility, or because of the scopes not being super reliable?

It is a bit of a soda straw, but you get used to it pretty quickly. The low mag means its not bad when shooting with both eyes open.

All scopes back then were pretty fragile, so the Wehrmacht liked QD, return-to-zero mounting systems that allowed putting optical sights into protective cases until needed. In the case of the ZF-41 forward mount, the scope is positioned just high enough to clear the front sight hood anyway, so it was probably a happy accident to leave simultaneous access to the irons. I believe (SWAG) the Germans were more concerned with making the scope removable in a couple seconds if the situation favored iron sights.

Incidentally, with the field-installable mount on my rifle the rear sight cannot be depressed below the 300 meter position becauser the sight slider runs into part of the mount. This means using the irons with the scope mounted required holding very low; for that reason I don't think iron sight use while the scope was mounted was a priority so much as a bonus. Earlier ZF-41 factory-installed mounts positioned the scope very slightly further forward (note the difference in distance between the front of the mount and the handguard) and didn't suffer this particular issue, however the early mounts also appear to sit lower and may have blocked the iron sights partly or entirely -- I'd like to have a closer look at one someday.

zf41FactoryMount.jpg ZF41FieldMount.jpg

The original idea seems to have been a simple sighting improvement for designated marksmen at typical engagement distances, where it works reasonably well. It ended up being issued to snipers, who needed something much better for precision long-range work -- a classic case of using the wrong tool for the job. One small advantage of the ZF-41 mounting arrangement is that a cheek weld is still possible without adding a riser to the buttstock -- other German scopes had to be mounted on much higher sighting lines to leave clearance for the bolt.



Wide issuance was evidently a matter of availability and cost -- the ZF-41 used small, low-magnification lenses and could be produced in larger numbers than more conventional rifle scopes at a time when the latter were in short supply, thanks to poor production planning early in the war. German snipers were also frustrated by a lack of dedicated high-quality ammo for precision shooting.

The later mounting system for the ZF-41 that could be field armorer installed came with serious zeroing problems.
 
Last edited:
This looks ridiculous, not saying , just saying, I use to have a rifle with scope mount that flipped over to reveal the open sights.
Does anyone remember those ?
I had a pivot mount on a Rem 700 when I was young and stupid. If memory serves, it was a Pachmayr. I don't remember ever needing to use the iron sights on that gun. The 2 1/2 power scope worked swell. I think Weaver made swing-off mounts too. Tally and Leupold have removable rings. I would consider these on a heavy rifle for dangerous game, but Arkansas doesn't have many Cape Buffalo.

I've not shot one, but have had a couple of 94 Winchester consignment guns that had side mounts. Awkward! Hard to get a good cheek weld when nothing lines up.
 
I'll second Varminterror and say practice more than once per year, take the time to get your rifle and scope set-up properly, buy a quality, reliable scope and you shouldn't need a "backup" sighting system for close-range shooting. Most of these offset red-dot solutions were developed for playing shooting games, where fractions of a second matter and any perceived advantage will be chased. Out in a hunting stand, there's no timer to measure the .23 seconds between you and the next competitor in the standings. It IS possible to learn to shoot a higher magnification scope with both eyes open; I usually shoot my fixed 2.5x and 4x scopes with both eyes open, and have done it even with a variable turned up to 9x. Practice is the key.

As for see-thru rings, those should be thrown down a black hole where they can be forgotten completely! They're entirely too tall for a good cheek weld, they universally hold some cheap blister pack Wal-Mart scope with shaky optics, they're usually mounted on rifles where the iron sights aren't particularly great AND they're owned by shooters who squint and hunt in the field of view of their scope because they haven't taken the time to get comfortable with the equipment. I had one set of those rings on a scope that was given to me once, so naturally I tried them for a range session on a 10/22. They couldn't come off fast enough! I bought a set of proper height standard rings on the way home, thus ending that short-lived experiment.
 
I'll third what jmr40 said. An LPVO just seems like a simpler solution. With 1-8x and 1-10x optics becoming more affordable, you really don't even have to sacrifice much in range anymore either as 8x-10x is plenty for most purposes without giving up a near 1x on the low end.

ThomasT mentioned 2-7x optics, and as an all purpose optic I really like that magnification range. I like the extra FOV on the low end compared to most 3-9x's and really don't notice much difference on the high end practically. I had a 2-7x on my AR until I got a good deal on a 1-6x.

On my extreme budget jack-of-all-trades .243 rifle, I ended up putting a 3-9x on it and it's pretty practical. I'd like a little more on the high end, may bump up to a 3-12x eventually or even a 4-16x because coyote are a significant part of its usage but when I start getting that high it kind of becomes more of a niche use.
I agree. With your thoughts.
For me a pure hunting rifle scope is 2.5-10 with a 30mm tube.
I do have rifles that are relegated to target only or long shots because the scope is useless at close range.
For coyotes, I prefer a lower power scope to pick up more light.
Good glass with a 50mm objective can seen under a full moon. I don't coyote hunt during daylight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top