Using handgun scope instead of scout scope

[Creeping Incrementalism]

Would there be any problems with using a handgun scope instead of a scout scope on a SOCOM II--a rifle with a rail extending almost the entire length of a 16 inch barrel? While handgun scopes have longer eye relief, there's enough of a range that it seems to me that either would work fine.

 

[DeputyVaughn]

That's how most "scout" setups are accomplished.

Scott

 

[Crosshair]

I have a handgun scope on my .308 mauser Works very good.

 

[rbernie]

Depends on the scope and the scout mount.

For example, many scout mounts made for MilSurps use the old rear sight as a mounting platform. This tends to place the scope more than a foot from your eye and allows the use of many LER pistol scopes. However, most of the scout mounts for commercial rifles tend to place the scope right in front of the receiver ring, which makes it harder to get a good match.

Of the pistol scopes, only the Weaver 2x works well on commercial (e.g. AO/XS Sights) scout mounts, since it supports 11" of eye relief. However, the Weaver 4x and 2x-6x variable won't be happy with less than 12" of eye relief, nor will any LER Burris or Nikon or Leupold.

For my commercial scouts, I use the Burris 2.75x or Leupold 2.5x scout scopes or the Weaver 2x pistol scope. (Of these three, the Leupold is by far the best choice.) For my scoutified MilSurps, I use a mixture of Nikon and Burris and Weaver pistol scopes.

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

rbernie, thanks for the reply.

I plan on just justing 1" rings to mount whatever on a Picatinny rail that runs nearly the full length of the barrel--so I have about 15+ inches to play with. My eyes naturally come to 11-12 inches from the breech end of the rail. So I think either should work. I have been using a ruler and looking up the eye relief of every scope I have looked at.

What do you think makes Leupold the best? I looked through the entire Midway scope section, and the scope I'm leaning towards in a Burris handgun model, because of all the versatile features I want--2 to 7 power, and an illuminated dot. I didn't see anything like that from Weaver. I want to make this rifle self-defense capable, so illumination for low light is a criteria for me.

 

[rbernie]

What do you think makes Leupold the best? I looked through the entire Midway scope section, and the scope I'm leaning towards in a Burris handgun model, because of all the versatile features I want--2 to 7 power, and an illuminated dot. I didn't see anything like that from Weaver. I want to make this rifle self-defense capable, so illumination for low light is a criteria for me.

My scout rifles are hunting tools, so things like illuminated reticles are of lesser importance to me than they might be to you. I have never owned a magnifying optic that had an illuminated reticle, so I can't help you there....

One of the things that I've noticed with all of my Burris scopes (pistol, scout, and traditional FF/FFII) is that they do not have nearly the off-axis performance of a Leupold. In other words, they're not nearly as forgiving if your eye isn't exactly just so; the image 'rings' or gets cloudy or some such thing. Of the brands listed (Weaver, Leupold, Burris, or Nikon) Leupold has the best off-axis performance, is generally the clearest, and is certainly the most rugged. Surprisingly, I'd vote the cheapie Weaver pistol scopes into second place. They may not be sexy, but they work.

Be aware that variable-power pistol scopes change their eye relief when zooming far more dramatically than does a traditional rifle scope. This means that eye relief that's OK for 4x may not be enough for the same scope of 6x. For that reason, I've decided to stick with fixed power on scout setups.

Also - scout setups generally aren't designed for long-range precision work. The limited field of view of a scout scope is compensated for by the non-magnified field of view that the scout arrangement gives you. This works well for close up work, but makes it more difficult to track moving targets at more extended ranges. If you're looking for something with precision 200+ yard capability, you might want to rethink the scout concept and perhaps evaluate something like a TriPower. Conversely, if you're looking for mostly <200 yard work, you will probably find that the 2.5x fixed power of the traditional scout scopes is 'just right' - not too much for CQB but enough to get accurate hits on pie plates at 200 yards. There's a reason that the true 'scout scopes' aren't variable power - it's simply not needed.

You can always try the Burris and see how it works; if it's not to your liking, sell it on eBay and try again. Goodness knows, that's what I've been doing the last couple of years with regard to scout/pistol scopes.

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

I decided to buy the Leupold scout model, and I'll be getting some quick-detach rings for it. I already have a red dot, so I'll experiment with both, detaching then re-attaching, and checking how much the zero changes. If it doesn't work out, I'll put one of them on my Mini-14 (and buy a replacement handguard with a rail) since its rather innacurate and so it isn't really worth it to put a hi-magnification scope on it anyway.

 

[Crosshair]

Get an Accu-Strut. (Use Google)

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

I actually just came across that on the 'net the other day, and I definitely want one, but they don't seem to be for sale yet.

 

[106rr]

I use a Leupie scout scope on an M1 Carbine with an UltiMak mount. The rings make it removable. When replaced the scope prints within a 1/2 inch of zero every time. Good for combat - maybe not for a high precision rifle. I wish I had a heavier German style reticle.

 

[AStone]

Awakening the dead (thread)

For my commercial scouts, I use the Burris 2.75x or Leupold 2.5x scout scopes
or the Weaver 2x pistol scope. (Of these three, the Leupold is by far the best choice.)

I picked up my new Marlin 336A today. Gave it a first cleaning earlier.
Now, I'm in the process now of loosening up the (stiff) action.

In the months of researching this purchase, I've been thinking ahead to optics.
Most likely to add a scout scope, perhaps with XS GR as backups.

While at the store, I took a look at a Leupold FX-II 2.5X Scout.
(For which I'd mount using the XS scout mount system.)

I've also been reading about that Burris 2.75X scout, but have yet to look through one.

Anyway, I thought I'd wake this thread from the realm of dead threads
to see what the current thinking is about scout scopes for hunting rifles.

Rbernie's assessment of them in an earlier post was informative (as always):
200 yds and less, they do well. That speaks to my situation.
Even with Hornady LE, I don't anticipate many shots over 200.

Any thoughts and updates?

Thanks.

Nem

 

[Jordan]

Leupold IER (scout) still the best thing going IMHO. Someone earlier got it right concerning Burris... they're very picky about getting your eye lined up just right.. makes them slower, and frustrating, to use.
I talked to Burris about this after buying one.. they were really jerky about it.. told me it was my imagination and to suck it up. I was turned off by their product AND customer relations.

One good idea is to send your Leupold Scout scope back to Leupold and have them install the heavy duplex reticle. It's bolder and faster especially against a brushy background or low light. Pretty cheap to have done.

 

[AStone]

Thanks for your opinion, Jordan.

(And welcome to senior member status.)

I hear you and others about the Leupold. I've heard that from other quarters as well, that they're a cut above. Hadn't heard about poor service from the other company, but I know it happens.

And, Leupolds are made right here in my own state. What's not to like?

I checked out the Leupold Scout scope at my gun shop yesterday,
and liked it pretty well. I think it'll take a bit of getting used to, so used to regular scopes am I. But I'm thinking it may fit this 336 nicely. Just seems to need something nontraditional.

(And, parenthetically, I'm considering a Leupold rimfire [VX-I] for my 39A.
Potentially just one big happy family.)

Good point about that heavy reticle as well. I was wondering how one acquired that heavy reticle. Sounds like you have to buy a regular and send it back for adjustment rather than buy one with heavy ret already installed.

OK, not too weird.