Pistol scope for .357 mag

[Piotr Fita]

I thought that I might put a pistol scope on one of my .357 mag 6" barrel revolvers, Ruger Security-Six or Ruger Blackhawk, just for having different shooting experience that just paper-punching with open sights. What I can easily get are scopes from the Simmons ProHunter Family but I wonder if they will hold with .357 mag catridges. Can you please advice me on that or suggest a better solution?

 

[sabbfan]

I have no experience with the Simmons but would think they would hold up. I used an old Bushnell Trophy on my 44 mag Super Redhawk and it held up fine, I know you can find used ones cheap on eBay

 

[Varminterror]

I have a Simmons ProHunter Pistol scope which has been on 44mag and 454c revolvers for literally thousands of rounds. It is a better scope than the Bushnell Trophy Pistol scope for optical quality - much more edge distortion on the Bushnell than the Simmons, although the Bushnell isn't as bad as a Nikon riflescope, for example. The adjustment knobs are better in the Bushnell Trophy, but the image is better in the Simmons, so unless you are dialing on your pistol, I'd recommend the Simmons over the Bushnell Trophy.

The Bushnell Elite handgun scope is considerably better than either, however, and the Leupold VX3 is a great handgun scope. Nikon handgun scopes give me headaches, way too much edge effect.

 

[DWFan]

Just my opinion, but red-dot or reflex sights are better suited to handgun shooting distances.

 

[Steve in PA]

I have about half dozen handgun scopes on everything from Super Redhawk to T/C Contenders. All are Bushnell 2-6x; two are Elites, the other four are Trophy. Never had an issue with any of the scopes. One Trophy has been on my SRH for over 25 years.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Just my opinion, but red-dot or reflex sights are better suited to handgun shooting distances.

A reflex works better for me. I dislike trying to find the crosshairs in a pistol scope.

A Burris Fastfire III works great for me on handguns.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I also prefer Bushnell scopes over Simmons. I feel they are much better and they do handle heavy recoil.

 

[CraigC]

I've been using magnified pistol optics for a good many years so for me, it's very natural to use them. However, they do take a lot of getting used to. You're not going to just throw up a handgun with a scope and find it as naturally as a rifle. The first thing you need to decide is what kind of shooting you're going to do. Are you shooting strictly off hand or off the bench? What range, 25, 50, 100yds? If you're only shooting 25yds at the local indoor range, than a big variable is a lot of weight, magnification and parallax you don't need. If you're bench shooting at 100yds or more, then it becomes an advantage. For me, these are hunting guns and since shots may be taken off hand or at close range, I find little use for anything more than a fixed 2x. In fact, I have a Burris 2-7x that I've been struggling to find a permanent home for for nearly 20yrs. It now resides on a CVA Optima pistol and I doubt it will stay there either. For a revolver that may be used on deer sized game up to 100yds, I think a fixed 2x is ideal, like this Burris.



For a revolver that may be used in the deep, dark woods up to perhaps a bit over 50yds, I like a red dot like the UltraDot 30.



Although I did just put an older Burris 1.5-4x on my 6" GP-100 but that's for playing with.

 

[22250Rem]

I'm with CraigC on this one. 2x is where it's at for me on a handgun unless it's a handgun chambered for a rifle cartridge. A bigger variable is just a lot more of things you don't need like excess weight and size. 2x also opens a wider field of view ( the higher the magnification, the narrower the field of view), which is great for closer range. There's only one handgun around here with any more than 2x magnification on it and that's a T/C Encore handgun with a 15" barrel chambered in 7mm-08 and wearing a 2.5-8x Leupold scope. That gets zeroed at 100 yds and sometimes shot even further and that's the only reason for any more than 2x but even that could get by with 2x and would even be lighter and handier with a fixed 2x. There's a 2x Leupold on my 7.5" 44 Mag. Redhawk that's just about perfect for anything like 357/44 Mag IMHO. I've no experience with Simmons handgun scopes and if finances were tight my advice would be to delay the scope purchase a bit until you save up enough for the 2x Leupold. Don't have a picture of the Encore on the computer (yet) but here's the Redhawk with the 2x. :

 

[Salmoneye]

My 686-3 wears an old T/C 2.5x with a lighted reticle...

I left it on there as that is what Dad mounted when I gave him the revolver as a gift...

 

[ColtPythonElite]

That is a sharp looking outfit.

 

[Piotr Fita]

Thank you for all the comments. I'll have a closer look at Bushnell's pistol scopes. I think that I won't invest much more in the pistol scope as it'll be used just for recreational shooting at a range, most likely at 50 metres. About 10 years ago I set up a Crossman Benjamin EB22 for plinking with a scope, so more-or-less I know what to expect from a scoped handgun:

 

[chicharrones]

That looks like the 4x Simmons. I had that model scope for several years, but didn't like the 4x for true hand held handgun shooting.

The 4x worked for me pretty well with handguns long enough to rest the barrel on shooting sticks. However, I prefer 2x after that experience.

 

[sabbfan]

Don’t be afraid to check out eBay, there are some good deals to be had, especially for inexpensive plinking fun.

 

[anothernewb]

The Gp100 looks positively evil wearing a Nikon monarch 2x

 

[Varminterror]

Thank you for all the comments. I'll have a closer look at Bushnell's pistol scopes. I think that I won't invest much more in the pistol scope[...]

The Bushnell Trophy 2-6x will be more than serviceable for low expectation shooting.