I have been searching for a scope to put on a H&R 45/70 Handi-Rifle. I am looking at the Burris Fullfield II in 3-9x40 because I can get it in a package deal with a free set of Burris binoculars. The only reservation that I have with the Fullfield II scopes is the eye relief that the factory list...3.1 to 3.8 inches. I know that the scope will have 3.8 inches at 3x power and 3.1 inches at 9x power. Is 3.1 inches at 9x power a little too short considering the recoil that a 45/70 can generate, especially in the Hand-Rifle? I looked at the Nikon Prostaff and Leupold Vari-X I for comparison and both companies list a eye relief of 3.6 inches. Does that mean that the Nikon and Leupold maintain the same eye relief throughout the entire magnification range or are they only listing the eye relief at the lowest power setiing..i.e. 3x power? Any comments back will be appreciated. I need to get a move on so that I can purchase the scope and get it mounted before deer season. Since I live in Mississippi, I will be using the Handi-Rifle during muzzleloader season this year.
Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40 scope question...
- Thread starter BBush
- Start date
- Status
Although i have never owned a Burris scope i can tell you that i do own a Leupold VX-1 in 2x7 that is mounted on my old Remington 600 in 308 a lightweight carbine that has some recoil and the eye relief on that VX-1 is very adequate on that rifle.
I personally dont like any scope that does not have at least 3.5 inches of eye relief.
One thing i will mention is Leupold scopes have a wonderful eye box and as soon as a rifle is brought up to your shoulder you have a perfect sight picture without ever having to realign due to the infamous black donut that some scopes seem to have.
The VX-1 scopes have an eye relief of 3.7 to 4.2 inches.
So at the highest setting it's 3.7 then at the lower it is 4.2 inches.
Very adequate.
My two Nikon Monarchs are very similiar in eye relief but the Leupold has a tad more and again the better eye box.
Of course the Monarchs are superior in clarity.
Hope that helps.
I personally dont like any scope that does not have at least 3.5 inches of eye relief.
One thing i will mention is Leupold scopes have a wonderful eye box and as soon as a rifle is brought up to your shoulder you have a perfect sight picture without ever having to realign due to the infamous black donut that some scopes seem to have.
The VX-1 scopes have an eye relief of 3.7 to 4.2 inches.
So at the highest setting it's 3.7 then at the lower it is 4.2 inches.
Very adequate.
My two Nikon Monarchs are very similiar in eye relief but the Leupold has a tad more and again the better eye box.
Of course the Monarchs are superior in clarity.
Hope that helps.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Pushing aside the specifics of the FFII for a moment, IMO 3x-9x is likely waaaay too much magnification for a 45/70. I think that a 1.5x-6x or a 2x-7x would be far better of a match to the chambering.
I'm not saying that the 45/70 can't/shouldn't be used for longer range stuff - just suggesting that most folks don't shoot 'em that way.
I'm not saying that the 45/70 can't/shouldn't be used for longer range stuff - just suggesting that most folks don't shoot 'em that way.
Ben Shepherd
Member
I have one on a 6 lb 30-06 that doesn't have a recoil pad, just the hard plastic butt cap. Recoils harder than a couple 300 mags in the family due to being pretty light. No one has gotten scope eyebrow from it yet.
Should work. But it'll be close with monster loads I'd imagine.
Should work. But it'll be close with monster loads I'd imagine.
- Status