Chocolate and peanut butter: Leupold FX-II 2.5x20mm and lever guns.

[philthygeezer]

It seems like the ideal scope for lever guns is the Leupold FX-II 2.5x20mm Ultralight. Fits the gun like it was made for it, and can take a beating too. Put it on regular low Weaver QD rings and the ocular bell will just clear the scope mount. It's about as low as you can go.

Anyone else come to the same conclusion? Got pics?

 

[Clifford]

Nice rifle. Do to finances I had to sell my Winchester thudy-thudy about a year ago. I sold it to a fellow forum member for 350 bucks (I made 150 bucks profit on the deal, so it was a win-win for both of us). I really miss that rifle and seeing your Marlin just makes it worse.

Your rifle is close to what I'll purchase to replace my old one. Only 2 changes I'd make is a scout style red/green dot optic in the 1-2 magnification range and possibly have a matte black finish applied to help cut down on the shine when hunting. I'm assuming it's the fourty five seventy caliber.

Again.... Nice rifle

 

[Maverick223]

Nope; a good quality aperture sight was made for lever guns. See the following image for confirmation:

 

[philthygeezer]

What do you mean, "Nope"?

This isn't an either/or thing. Me being manly and handsome doesn't make you look any less attractive. That scope is still the bees knees on a lever gun, where mountable.

Nice looking rifle you got.

PS: thanks Clifford!

 

[achildofthesky]

Geezer:

I agree with you completely and have the same setup. The only possible thing I'd like to see Leupold do is a 4x version in the same size format...

Be safe and enjoy
Patty

 

[Robert Wilson]

That is one of my all-time favorite scopes. If I ever decide to scope a levergun that scope will be on the short list - although I am definitely a fan of Scout scopes for such a project...

 

[Maverick223]

What do you mean, "Nope"?

Optics aren't right for a lot of levers, they don't tend to balance right afterwards. As long as you don't go with a scout configuration, I don't see too much of a problem, but a scout scope just boogers up the handling IMO. That said, I do intend to scope an 1895 (the Marlin one) if and when I pick one up...but it still won't be a Loopy.

Nice looking rifle you got.

Thank you...to be honest I didn't care for the fact that it couldn't be scoped to begin with, but now I have come to value a good aperture for the lightweight (rifle isn't light to begin with) and better balance that they afford. Just depends upon the rifle, the use, and the rifleman. BTW, that is a nice lookin' '95-GS you have there.

 

[Asherdan]

Two great lever gun set ups, a low mounted 2.5x20mm (I went with a Weaver before they quit making them) and a Williams aperture. I've done both and can fault neither choice.

 

[Abel]

The 2.5 is not enough for me. I like a 4x fixed for all of my rifles. A 2.5 just doesn't get me into the deer's hair good enough, and I like to pick a hair to shoot at.

 

[geologist]

I went with a scout mount with the same scope. Went muley hunting with it this weekend. Didn't see my deer but it was great to carry in the mountains. The only bad thing is that I keep flipping the rear cover open when I carry it by the receiver.

 

[iamkris]

Nope; a good quality aperture sight was made for lever guns.

I agree!



But then again, I keep wanting to get a low powered scout scope for this...

 

[philthygeezer]

I just find a scope is better in low light on dark backgrounds. Irons are more svelt, but present a few more challenges to accuracy. Scope feels faster to get a sight picture to me. I'll try some peeps again offhand at 55 yards and see how I do relative to a 2.5x20mm just to confirm.

 

[geologist]

philthy, I'd check my manual as Leupold says to mount the rear ring an inch ahead of the occular to prevent reticle damage.

 

[Maverick223]

Use what works for you...whether than be irons, optics, or a rusty nail welded to the muzzle.

 

[CraigC]

While I greatly prefer a good peep sight and have more rifles so-equipped than any other sighting device, I can't begrduge somebody a proper scope on a levergun. Something in a compact 1-4x or a fixed power within that range is about perfect.

 

[philthygeezer]

philthy, I'd check my manual as Leupold says to mount the rear ring an inch ahead of the occular to prevent reticle damage.

I'll have a gander. Thanks for the heads-up Mr. Gollywog sir.

EDIT:

If necessary, it is safe to position the rear mount ring directly on the exposed threaded area near the eyepiece, but only after focusing the eyepiece. This allows a more forward placement of the scope. See page 8 for more details.

NOTE: The windage and elevation adjustments on new Leupold scopes are centered as part of the assembly process. If you are mounting a scope that was previously mounted on another rifle, you should center the adjustments (please see “Zeroing Windage and Elevation Adjustments” on page 20 for more details).

NOTE: Use care in mounting the 2.5x28mm Scout riflescope. It is necessary to place the back edge of the rearmost ring at least 3/4" forward of the ocular bell/tube juncture to avoid possible reticle damage. Because of the longer eye relief of this product, mounting the scope back slightly will not in any way impair its function or effectiveness.

https://www2.leupold.com/resources/downloads/2009_Riflescope_Owners_Handbook.pdf

Seems that this caveat only applies to the Scout scope, not the Ultralight. Thanks for not taking this for granite and being so gneiss as to try to save my scope. I appreciate the sediment.

 

[geologist]

Seems that this caveat only applies to the Scout scope, not the Ultralight. Thanks for not taking this for granite and being so gneiss as to try to save my scope. I appreciate the sediment.

Geological humor at its best!!!!!!!!!!!!