Such a thing as too much glass (scope)?

I have found through the years trying to remember what power you are on, and the animal is there is a problem. Most of my shots are in open country or light timber.
 
jaestridge said:
So, I've been looking thru a Kahles 4x12x52mm 1" tube for these last 10-12 years on my Remington 7mm saum. The bigger tube diameter is what I'm wanting. Already made up my mind that the gold ring scope brand is what I'm going while. In all honest your weapon is only as good as the glass you're looking thru. Kinda narrowed it down to either a 3x15x56 30mm tube or 4x20x52 34mm tube. What's y'all's thoughts??
Click to expand...
I think so. Higher magnification will magnify EVERYTHING. Your breath in cold weather. Movement in your hold. Thermals in hot weather or if you shoot yourself into a hot barrel condition. I had a 4-15x that I shot for years and never noticed my heart beating at the bench. When I went to a 25x I saw movement from my heart beating. So from that perspective is the reason I say yes.
 
Greyfox said:
Over the past couple of decades I have run the full range of scope magnification capability for both hunting and competition….IME, depending on the circumstances both games have thresholds where the level of magnification level can reach a diminishing return, or even be a detriment to results. This is particularly true for LRH where it's hard to avoid having to "balance" magnification, size/bulk, weight, mechanical quality, glass quality, ergonomics, and cost. For my particular hunting methods that approximates 25% carry/75% stationary, 1000y max range, medium game/predators, and frequent low light conditions, my particular "sweet spot" is the mid-sized, tier 1 level scopes that fall in the 5x20x50mm range…give or take a couple of mm of each component. Magnification range has rarely, if ever been the detriment to success.
Click to expand...
100 percent what he said IMHO
 
With a Browing 7 Mag using a Leupold Vari X-II, 4x-12x, I put over 1000 miles on the rifle & scope while it was riding in a scabbard on the side of a horse or mule. Never had any problems. A Leupold Vari X-III in 3.5x-10x A.O. got rougher treatment than the 4-12. I am still using both scopes.
 
I'm in the MORE MAGFICATION school of thought. My scopes have all become what some people might consider ridiculous but 22x to 25x on the top end simply isn't enough for me any more and 35X and 42X have taken their place.

Even my Florida brush and deer hound hunting scope is now a Leupy 3-15x56 scope on my ultra lightweight Model Seven AWR2 in 308 Winny.

I'm 73 now and since my cataract surgery I test at 20/20 but the clarity a longer ranges even through a scope ain't what it used to be. I'm in superb physical condition due to heavy weight training and cardio so humping a heavy rifle and scope is still not a problem and I don't carry my big rifles all that far anyway.

I'm going to Virginia for a ground hog hunting trip soon and next spring I'll be out west for prairie dogs and marmots.
 
My goldy locks optic has become the S&B PMII Ultrashort 3-20x50 with the DT II+ turrets.

Excellent field of view, alpha glass quality, one of the most forgiving eyeboxes I've gotten behind, and a genuinely usable top to bottom magnification range. 20x is about as much as I could ever need for ~700 yards and in big game hunting.


1000014238.jpg



For an already heavy gun that's meant for something like shooting rock chucks at long range, sure I'd take more magnification.
 
ObiWanKannoli said:
My goldy locks optic has become the S&B PMII Ultrashort 3-20x50 with the DT II+ turrets.

Excellent field of view, alpha glass quality, one of the most forgiving eyeboxes I've gotten behind, and a genuinely usable top to bottom magnification range. 20x is about as much as I could ever need for ~700 yards and in big game hunting.


View attachment 604823


For an already heavy gun that's meant for something like shooting rock chucks at long range, sure I'd take more magnification.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of scope and other miscellaneous stuff.

Does it come with a full time tutor…..I'd never be able to operate it without adult supervision! 😉 memtb
 
My opinion seems to be much different than younger hunters. I don't shoot long range because I've seen the group size on several of my rifles at 400 yards. That would be my absolute maximum range if it was the last day and the last hours of my dream hunt! As ethical hunters, we owe it to the game animal to make a quick kill and a gut shot animal is shameful in my opinion. That being said - the light gathering ability isn't all it's cracked up to be because a good 40 or 42mm glass has always been plenty for me - as long as it's good glass! Also - there is this- a low mounted scope is far better for accurate shooting because of a better cheek weld! No 50mm or 56mm scope can give you the same cheek weld a low mounted 40mm can give you!
 
Crockett12 said:
Also - there is this- a low mounted scope is far better for accurate shooting because of a better cheek weld! No 50mm or 56mm scope can give you the same cheek weld a low mounted 40mm can give you!
Click to expand...


How about us shooters who hold the rifle like they would a BB gun? No need for a "cheek weld". Therefore, there is no big deal using a 56mm scope.
 

Similar threads

T
Such thing as a scope too closer to a barrel?
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
johnnyk
johnnyk
Dirt_Nap
Is this too much to ask for in a scope?…
Replies
13
Views
1K
Huntnful
Huntnful
A
Scope too much for gun?
Replies
9
Views
3K
Outlaw6.0
Outlaw6.0
B
Too much
2
Replies
15
Views
3K
emp1953
E
Tikkamike
Too much taper?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Kiwi Greg
Kiwi Greg

Recent Posts

Top