Scope power vs. range

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I guess I'm the odd man out, with Afy and a few others perhaps - when shooting targets, there's really no such thing as too much magnification, regardless of bull size. I agree with the benchrest shooters who prefer a 30x45, 40x45, or 50x52, etc., at long range. The better you can see, the better you can hit. I like at least 12-14x top end for 50 yards, and at least 14-20x top end for 100 yards, and the more the better from 200 on.

Hunting is a completely different story. For large fields, a 3-9 or 4-12 is preferred. Beyond that, you might be encouraged to take shots you shouldn't. For mixed terrain, I like a 2-7x. For woods, I like a 1-4, 1.5-4, 1.75-5, or 1.5-6, something like that. Usually keep it on 1.5, 1.75, or 2x when stalk hunting, and 3 or 4 power when sitting/standing in a stand or blind in ambush.

 

[Walkalong]

I guess I'm the odd man out, with Afy and a few others perhaps - when shooting targets, there's really no such thing as too much magnification,

I am with you on this one, at least at 300 yards and in, which is where my experience lies, although I have shot farther informally.

The only downside to too much power with target shooting is mirage on occasion. Folks just learn to deal with it because the high X power is so much better almost all of the time.

Varmint shooters, on the other hand, usually deal with more mirage and want a variable so they can turn down the power when the mirage is real bad.

 

[1858rem]

what exactly do you mean by mirage being worse at a higher magnification? shouldn't it be the same at all x's? i haven't delt much with mirage though

 

[Walkalong]

what exactly do you mean by mirage being worse at a higher magnification? shouldn't it be the same at all x's?

No, it is worse at higher magnification.

Mirage is distortion. The higher you magnify it, the worse it is.

Mirage also displaces the image of the target when the air is moving. You aim where you see the target, but that is not where it is at.

 

[usmc1371]

My .204 has a leo 4.5x14 LR and its a nice scope for varnints and is on 10 for squrils but win calling dogs in I leave it on 4.5 just for the feild of view. MY elk rifle has a bushnell 4x16 and its a nice scope but I would trade it for the 2.5x10 in the same modle in a heart beat. I cary it on 4 and have never had a need to turn it up, elk look big on 4x even at 340 yds, my longest shot ever attempted on big game. No tracking requried. And I hunt southeast oregon wich is a mix of wide open sage and steep wooded canyons.

 

[Art Eatman]

I've used variables from 2x7 to 3x10, since around 1970-ish. They spend most of their lives at the lower magnification, particularly when hunting anything bigger than prairie dogs. I use the higher magnifications for sight-in and playing on paper.

I did buy a Bushie Match Target with a 6x24x40 on it; it was fun at the bench at 24X, but I never used it in the field.

I've come to believe that for most hunting, 4X is the upper limit of "need", generally. Beyond that, it's "want" coupled with affordability.

And if the hunting is not in horrible light, any mid-price scope's glass is plenty good. A Weaver's as good as a Swarovski, if you're gonna shoot Bambi within the typical 200-yard distance in the middle of the day. Not many people plan on a 6x6 elk at 400 yards in the last light of evening...

 

[C5Cruiser]

I have a 3-9 power and I find that anything above 6 I can see my pulse moving my cross-hairs however it good to have that option.