Scope recomendations

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RIATAC45

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2008
Messages
223
Location
Highlands, TX (Transplanted Okie)
I just acquired a model 70 Winchester chambered in .264 win mag. It is a 1972 vintage, and really clean but has a mediocre scope at best on it (Redfield Tracker 3-9x40). What would be a decent scope to put on it without breaking the bank? The gun will be used for hunting for the most part right now. I may put a heavier barrel and a synthetic stock on later for long range target/hunting. What say y'all?
 

Attachments

  • 2012-12-01 22.57.39.jpg
    2012-12-01 22.57.39.jpg
    59.1 KB · Views: 13
I'm very happy with my Nikon Monarch scope and read plenty of positive comments on the web too. Mine is a 2.5-10x50mm which is a pretty heavy, but I don't carry it around much. I'd recommend the Nikon Monarch line without reservation, it really depends how much magnification and objective lens you want.
 
Depends, qualify "breaking the bank". is $200 too much, $500 or $1,000. For me, I'd drop a scope on that thing in the $250 to $500 range. But you might be very happy with the many scopes that run in the $150 to $200 range. How far are you going to shoot, what are you going to shoot, and how much are you going to do it?
 
RIATAC 45

If I were you I would take a look at either of these scopes in the following groups. They are affordable and offer way more than the other products out there for the money. Great Values boty

Pride Fowler: http://www.rapidreticle.com/Main/ScopeItem.aspx?ID=3&grpID=3

Vortex: http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-viper-pst-2-5-10x44-riflescope-with-ebr-1-moa-reticle

Click on the reticals that you see in the adds and view them. Also check out the rest of their lines and you may see something else you like as well.
 
$200-$400 is about all the old wallet could stand right now. The gun club i am a member of has a 600yrd range, and i will be hunting javalina, hogs, and those little south Texas deer.
 
Last edited:
RIATAC 45

Mostly for your future reference. There is a scope out there that may fill your requirements.

http://swfa.com/Falcon-Menace-4-14x44-Tactical-30mm-Riflescope-P57239.aspx When you go to this site you will see 3 smaller photos directly under the scope. Left click on the retical and it will enlarge for you. This is also a first focal plane scope which means regardless of your power setting the scope will have the same relation to the target. The retical gets smaller with a power decrease and larger with a power increase. Side focus and a reasonable warranty. From what I have learned they stand behind the product extreemly well. Plus it is in Mil which is much easier to work with than MOA.

Things are progressing so fast in the optics for rifles any more that there is absolutly no reason to stay with or even look at the old Redfields, Weavers and Leupolds with the duplex or single cross hair reticals. The optics today have far superior glass and internals than in the past.

There are also 10, 15 and 20 moa scope rails and bases that allow you to get the most from your rifle for range. And they are made for almost all rifles on the market today. The following is just a small example

http://www.triadtactical.com/Badger-AR-Riser-Rail-22MOA.html

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/14...levated-base-remington-700-short-action-matte

http://www.brownells.com/items/20-moa-scope-base.aspx

If I were you I would take a look at either of these scopes in the following groups. They are affordable and offer way more than the other products out there for the money. Great Values both of them. These are hunting optics and if you wish for a long range optic then you may wish to move up.

Pride Fowler: http://www.rapidreticle.com/Main/ScopeItem.aspx?ID=3&grpID=3

Vortex: http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-viper-pst-2-5-10x44-riflescope-with-ebr-1-moa-reticle

Click on the reticals that you see in the adds and view them. Also check out the rest of their lines and you may see something else you like as well.

There are a number of others that may be of interest to you and of course the cost is higher. They will have more on the internals. Not a real significance in the clarity of the optics because they are all very good to excellent.

Long Range:

http://www.vortexoptics.com/category/razor_hd_riflescopes

http://www.horusvision.com

http://www.sportoptics.com/nightforce-rifle-scopes.aspx

http://www.opticsplanet.com

http://swfa.com/US-Optics-Riflescopes-C3333.aspx

http://www.usoptics.com

http://www.valdada.com

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=279840&Number=3175028#Post3175028

http://www.falconoptics.com/

If you check out these sites they will give you information about bullet BC, Bullet drop, ranging, indicators for ballistic stability at long distance this translates to accuracy.

http://www.mildot.com

http://www.impactdatabooks.com

The old time proven antage that you get what you pay for is true here as well as anywhere else.

Yep it will cost you more than the rifle but you have to remember if you can not see it and you can not get a proper range you can not hit. Spend as much time as you can evaluating a large number of possabilities until you are satisfied with your choice. Good Luck with your process.
 
Last edited:
Vortex is making some really good glass and offers the same great service as Leupold. That was hard for me to say, considering I haven't used anything but Leupold in the past 25 or 30 years.

$250-ish is probably the bottom line but will serve well in terms of decent quality glass. Almost anything less expensive is going to be sub standard for high powered rifle applications, in my opinion.

GS
 
Agrizz: Two of the three of your recommendations are out of his price range and all three would need new rings for a 30mm tube. The one scope in his price range, the falcon menace, weights almost 2 pounds. And I thought my scope was a bit on the heavy side.

RIATAC45, now that you've said a bit more about what you are shooting at let me recommend two scopes. First let me say this though, for big game hunting I think most people way over scope. Too big, too much magnification, too much weight, etc. I don't think it's needed. Friday I was shooting a 6x6 steel plate at 300 yards with ease while my scope was zoomed in to an entire 4x...

http://swfa.com/Nikon-2-8x32-Monarch-Riflescope-P11157.aspx
http://swfa.com/Nikon-25-10x42-Monarch-Riflescope-P42338.aspx

Both of these have your basic Waterproof/Fogproof/Shockproof, should fit on your existing rings, and don't break the bank.

This is my scope but with a different reticle, http://swfa.com/Nikon-25-10x50-Monarch-Riflescope-P42339.aspx which is very nice as well but for the most part the 50mm objective is just transmitting more light than my eye can use, and would probably require new rings. I got it used for cheap otherwise I would of gone with a 40mm-ish objective.
 
I have a Redfield Revolution 4-12x40 on my Colt AR. I thought about swapping it and buying something else for it. I believe that I want a 50mm objective and a 30mm tube for maximum light transmission.
 
Well I have Nikon Monarch which is good, the Sightron Big Sky which is better than the Nikon Monarch, and also the Zeiss Conquest which is comparable to the Nikon Monarch. If you want inexpensive go with the bushnell, and vortex, for the price point the glass will not disappoint you. I have a bushnell banner that is over 30 years old and it more than serves its purpose for hunting.
 
This is one of the better demonstrations of the use of reticals in the newer scopes. If you do not like this capability you may wish to stay with the Leupold, Weaver, Burris etc.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B2_RFmfcws

Save up and spend some money on the scope and then transfer it to a different rifle when the time comes.
 
Last edited:
30mm tubes have nothing to do with light transmission. Generally speaking the only advantage to a 30mm tube is it allows more elevation/windage adjustment. For example the Nikon 2.5-10x42mm has 70moa of adjustment while the Vortex that was recommended has 86moa. To put things in perspective, my 6.5x55mm shooting a flat base hunting bullets needs around 35moa of upwards travel to reach 1000 yards. Buying a 30mm tube will have a benefit, once you start shooting at distances over 1000 yards.

A bigger objective lens will gather more light, but your pupil an only accept so much anyway. In broad daylight a 50mm objective lens isn't going to show any difference until about 10x, and thats in a technical sense. The observed difference might still be zilch. At low light, when your eye is more dilated you still aren't going to see a difference below 7x. The actual numbers will be a little different person to person (with less of a difference as ages increase) but the truly limiting factor is the pupil inside your head. It only lets so much light in regardless of how much your scope provides.

Best of luck to you in your research. I'm just trying to provide you with so helpful advice.
 
A scope with a 30mm tube can certainly be brighter than a scope with a 1" tube. Better optics and coatings will do it though, rather than the difference in tube size. Since 30mm tubes have long been associated with high quality european scopes the marketing push is to offer this feature to try to get lower priced lenses associated with them as well.

A forward thinking cynic might even say that 34mm tubes are the next big thing ;).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top