To me, glass quality is most important. Weight is an issue when hunting the mountains. Down South, where I hunt 95% of the time, 14 power becomes unusable on hot days as mirage clouds the picture. I don't shoot competition so I enjoy hunting scopes. I have no problem seeing/shooting a 150lb whitetail or 200lb hog at 250 yards with my 2-7s. That said, a 3.5-10 serves most all my purposes for hunting out to 500 yards. Once sighted in, my Zeiss, Leupold & Vortex hold their zero very well. Utilizing the ballistic-type reticles, which I've found very conducive to hunting, I never need to "dial in" range to make a shot. Takes too much time, IMHO. So, yes, too much magnification or weight can certainly be a problem. If you are target shooting and only carry your rifle from car to bench, giant scopes have their place. Hiking 10-20 miles, up & down hills in true wilderness will make you appreciate a lighter scope. My 35 year old German-made Zeiss Diavari 3-9x36 continues to be one of the finest hunting scopes I've ever owned.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Such a thing as too much glass (scope)?
- Thread starter jaestridge
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
I will take a top tier alpha glass 15x max mag scope over a mid tier 25x max mag scope all day long for hunting.
Also, give me tracking and reliability over more magnification. So figure out how.much you are going to be shooting it, and how the recoil is for durability. A good warranty is only good when you have to use it. Needing to use it is bad in my opinion. That leaves out a couple of the common brands for me.
For hunting in low light:
Tube size between 30, 34, 35, 36 doesn't make much difference in a high quality hunting scope.
50, 52, 56mm objectives don't either.
Glass coatings and light transmission per lens DO make a difference.
Depending on where/how you hunt, and rifle specs, weight can start to make a difference. Ounces=pounds. Pounds=pain. I won't own a Vortex Razor Gen 2 or 3 for that reason. Who wants a 48oz scope? But, if it is going on a 12lb bare rifle...it doesn't make as much of a difference if you are looking for a mountain rifle that scales out at 6lbs.
Also, give me tracking and reliability over more magnification. So figure out how.much you are going to be shooting it, and how the recoil is for durability. A good warranty is only good when you have to use it. Needing to use it is bad in my opinion. That leaves out a couple of the common brands for me.
For hunting in low light:
Tube size between 30, 34, 35, 36 doesn't make much difference in a high quality hunting scope.
50, 52, 56mm objectives don't either.
Glass coatings and light transmission per lens DO make a difference.
Depending on where/how you hunt, and rifle specs, weight can start to make a difference. Ounces=pounds. Pounds=pain. I won't own a Vortex Razor Gen 2 or 3 for that reason. Who wants a 48oz scope? But, if it is going on a 12lb bare rifle...it doesn't make as much of a difference if you are looking for a mountain rifle that scales out at 6lbs.
Scope choices often follow caliber choices—deep woods hunting vs open Plains or field shooting.
Another major issue is if an area you are hunting in has many bucks fighting, breaking tines off of antlers if your goal is to get a "better deer" than you already have.
When I lived in Az. I have never seen mule deer bucks with broken tines, although White Tail in Kansas with broken tines are not Uncommon.
Another major issue is if an area you are hunting in has many bucks fighting, breaking tines off of antlers if your goal is to get a "better deer" than you already have.
When I lived in Az. I have never seen mule deer bucks with broken tines, although White Tail in Kansas with broken tines are not Uncommon.
pavementends
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2017
- Messages
- 120
Is weight an issue for you? The larger the objective lens the higher the scope needs to be, and the heavier the scope is the more robust the mounts need to be. Again if weight doesn't matter and comb height is not an issue buy the most reliable scope.
8/40 screws help, or epoxy the scope base on the action on larger, heavier scopes as it has been proven that scope bases do move around.
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
I will take a little more weight if it means it is durable, no issues with dialing and has good glass. I run NF NX8 4-32 scopes on almost all my rifles including the ones I use for mountain hunting. With that said, I wish they would make an equivalent to an NX8 in a 3-18. All that extra magnification typically is not needed for the shot.
My experience has been depending on your eyes the larger tubes has worked better for me. I was doing a light weight hunting rig, bought 30mm tube and was a bit disappointed with not only the adjustment but the clarity of the 30 versus a 34mm tube when viewed side by side. It may be related to the light transmission. But as others suggested try them both side by side, that is what I have done. I have older eyes so I need as much clarity as possible.
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
I think the reason you don't see a lot of busted up mulies in AZ is due to time of year for hunts vs the rut. MOST deer ruts are after the hunting seasons are over for mulies in AZ. You get the late archery and January archery hunts in the southern units, which is usually right at the rut. And the occasional late season start of the rut high country hunts in the best units. So, not much of the fighting has started by the time hunting season opens.
Plus, deer densities are a lot lower in AZ vs Kansas.
I archery hunted WTs in Kansas ONCE. My hunt lasted about 20 minutes. Walking from where I got dropped off to a stand, I never even made it to the stand.
Last edited:
std7mag
Well-Known Member
I don't know that there is such a thing as too much power at the top end of magnification.
I do know that there is such a thing as too much power on the low end.
Example would be my 10-50X60 Sightron SIII.
Great for target shooting.
I wouldn't take it hunting though.
I do however hunt with my Sightron STAC 4-20X56.
I doubt that the jump up from 52mm to 56mm objective size will make much difference in how the scope is set up.
The issue is that going up in objective and tube diameter is going to require new rings of a different height than what the OP has.
So finding that perfect sight window may be problematic.
He at least has to start all over on setting up the scope.
I do know that there is such a thing as too much power on the low end.
Example would be my 10-50X60 Sightron SIII.
Great for target shooting.
I wouldn't take it hunting though.
I do however hunt with my Sightron STAC 4-20X56.
I doubt that the jump up from 52mm to 56mm objective size will make much difference in how the scope is set up.
The issue is that going up in objective and tube diameter is going to require new rings of a different height than what the OP has.
So finding that perfect sight window may be problematic.
He at least has to start all over on setting up the scope.
memtb
Well-Known Member
As a general statement……yes!
In my view the scope should somewhat be tailored to the expected hunting situations.
A scope that is ideal for hunting the thickets of the "Deep South"would be impractical for a shooter capable, when both shooter and rifle/cartridge for 1000 yard shots while hunting out west. The inverse is also true!
The scope size/weight should also be a consideration! There's a vast difference between "stand hunting" or driving to a ridge in open country……..and the mountain back pack hunter! memtb
In my view the scope should somewhat be tailored to the expected hunting situations.
A scope that is ideal for hunting the thickets of the "Deep South"would be impractical for a shooter capable, when both shooter and rifle/cartridge for 1000 yard shots while hunting out west. The inverse is also true!
The scope size/weight should also be a consideration! There's a vast difference between "stand hunting" or driving to a ridge in open country……..and the mountain back pack hunter! memtb
Crockett12
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2011
- Messages
- 185
More important than anything -- even glass quality -- is that the scope doesn't go belly up when you need it most! Take a look at these scope evaluations as there are a lot of failures in the drop tests! Scopes are made to take recoil along the line of the scope (back to front) but many are rather fragile when dropped on their side! When we hunt, we're always in danger of a fall and these tests separate the good from the not so good!
Rifle Scope Field Evaluations
rokslide.com
Mike Matteson
Well-Known Member
Most of my hunting rifles sit with either a 2x7 of 8 duplex scopes. I use the duplex to size my animal up for range and where to hold to shoot. Easy 500yds range. No range finder need, nor dialing up and increase for range.
What I did was set up targets with overall dimension of the animal with a 2" wide cross in the middle of the target. Measured each distance to the target @ 300, 400, and 500 yds. Set the scope on it's highest power. Learned just how much the target filled the scope. Adjusted the crosshairs for elevation and shoot. I do have a range finder now. The old stile that were elongated were a joke in my estimation.
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
memtb
Well-Known Member
Mike, I'm just the opposite!
I keep mine on the lowest setting. I grew up hunting in very thick terrain, where things can happen very quickly and sometimes shots could be measured in feet. A scope on a high power setting, could prevent target acquisition when things happen fast and close. I guess that I'm still of that mindset, and even here in Wyoming I still occasionally get into thick stuff.
Two or three power can easily get me to 200 plus yards on big game…..and generally speaking, longer shots in more open country affords me the time to adjust the power and determine the target range. My rifle/scope zero also plays into my use of the lower power setting. I use a 300 yard zero……which on big game, means "hold on hair" out to 400 yards.
The only time that my 300 yard zero can cause issues, is on small animals at around 150 - 170 yards….where shooting over the target is possible, if you don't maintain your composure and hold a bit low. However, the topic (at least my topic) is big game…..not small animals.
Keeping on lowest power assures me that I will never "mess-up" and have on a higher power setting when/if I transition into a heavy timber situation. While I may transition into heavy timber, my scope never has to make that transition……it's already suited for that close/quick shot! memtb
