Minimum scope power

[Lefty G-gear]

I'm fairly new at long range shooting for hunting application . Im trying to figure out if I should upgrade my scope . I'm currently shooting a 7mm rem mag outfitted with a 4-16-44 leupold vx6. I guess my question would be is this scope have enough magnification/power to be accurate at longer ranges ?

What you have is enough, but I like the more versatile scopes, such as the 3-12x, 2-10x, even the 1-6x or 2-7x.
I had the Leupold VX-3 4.5-14x50mm side-focus with the Varminters reticle (fine crosshairs) and liked that.
I called Leupold and they told me their standard crosshairs cover 6/10ths of an inch at 100-yards, and their fine crosshairs cover 2/10ths. = 2-inches at 1,000-yards.
The crosshairs on the target I made are .25-inches. (Auto-CAD.) Fits on an 8.5x11-inch paper.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I don't find it super hard to make a mile shot at 7.5x. 4-16x is enough for anything you can see with the naked eye.

My buddy could see caribou and deer from at least a mile and a half. I verified with binoculars. Maybe he's like JOC was. Most of us are not.

Get more than you might need. You don't have to turn it up all the way.

 

[rammac]

Paper punching vs. hunting require different optics.

For hunting I like as much magnification as I can get, aim small, miss small. I balance the power against the weight.

For paper and steel I had no problem using a 24 power scope at 1000 yards, mirage can be an issue, depending on the environmental conditions, but just reduce the power (variable power scope) if that becomes a problem.

 

[Varmiter71]

I am a believer in using as much magnification as the environment allows.
I am running a Burris 8-40 f-class on my Lapua and a Burris 5-25 on my creedmoor.
As the light fades you can turn down the power, but if you don't have it you can not turn it up when you need it

 

[BEEMAN]

As others mentioned I also believe glass quality makes the biggest difference. I just bought a March 2.5-25x52 with the fine cross hair. Wasn't my first choice but it's the first used one I've seen in Canada recently. I can't believe the clarity. When on 2.5 it feels like 6x compared to my other scopes. Only got it yesterday so will compare to a Z5, NF MOAR, vx6hd TMOA. But tonight I could still see the fine cross hair on a oak tree at 200 yds at last light looking out my house window. Half hour after sunset. I think your Leupold should serve you very well.

 

[Bruce Treloar]

Best scope I have had for daylight field shooting was a 12X Leupold with extra fine cross hairs.
Bought a VX-31 6.5 to 20X Leupold and never use it in the field beyond 14X magnification.
Really all the VX31 did was add weight. Mirrarge is readable with 12X and left eye free to gauge wind on grass and tree leaf movement. I hear wonderful reports from March users but due to price I'll never own one.

 

[Rich Coyle]

As others mentioned I also believe glass quality makes the biggest difference. I just bought a March 2.5-25x52 with the fine cross hair. Wasn't my first choice but it's the first used one I've seen in Canada recently. I can't believe the clarity. When on 2.5 it feels like 6x compared to my other scopes. Only got it yesterday so will compare to a Z5, NF MOAR, vx6hd TMOA. But tonight I could still see the fine cross hair on a oak tree at 200 yds at last light looking out my house window. Half hour after sunset. I think your Leupold should serve you very well.

If your z5 is the 5-25X52 you will find in side by side the March has better glass. The one I was allowed to compare with my scopes it was better than my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50, Leupold VX-6 4-24X52 and the one I mentioned once the magnification was turned above 8X or 9X. The difference was stark. Let us know what you see.

I also discovered from comparing scopes as darkness sets in on deer antlers 131 yards away in the woods, one needs to turn up the magnification to determine if a buck is legal or not. I discovered it makes no difference how good the glass is.

 

[BEEMAN]

Yes the Z5 is a 5-25x52 BT. I will try to make some comparisons this week and report back.

 

[ButterBean]

Simple rule: Spend + - 2X on glass as rifle cost.

$1400 rifle, $2500 scope.

View attachment 226681

I don't believe this to be true anymore, lots of great glass well under the price of a rifle to be had these days,

 

[ButterBean]

I'm fairly new at long range shooting for hunting application . Im trying to figure out if I should upgrade my scope . I'm currently shooting a 7mm rem mag outfitted with a 4-16-44 leupold vx6. I guess my question would be is this scope have enough magnification/power to be accurate at longer ranges ?

It's a plenty

 

[bearcat2]

It should be good. I actually went down from VX3 6.5-20 to a Mark IV 4.5-14 on my rifle. MUCH better quality glass, better low light and I had shot two elk in the timber with the VX3, one of them on a dead run. I tend to shoot running game pretty much like wing shooting deer, without really looking at the sights at that sort of range. Only way I was able to shoot that elk, 6.5 is too much in the timber. I very rarely miss the 20x when looking at something a LONG ways away, when hiking I tend to carry binos and rifle, but no spotting scope, using the rifle scope to try and judge an animal at distances my 10x binos don't suffice. But the better quality glass makes up for quite a bit of the difference between 14x and 20x. And if you ever walk through the timber to where you are going to hunt open long range some day you will be presented with a close range snap shot at game, and that 4x low end setting may just put meat in the freezer.

 

[Deleted member 115654]

I don't believe this to be true anymore, lots of great glass well under the price of a rifle to be had these days,

All I can say is I don't see military snipers using scopes <$1500.

 

[ButterBean]

All I can say is I don't see military snipers using scopes <$1500.

You are correct, and the Operators are not paying for them either

 

[Deleted member 115654]

Just don't think any cheap scope equals a Schmit, Swaro or Zeiss. I own plenty of all brands and there is a difference.