95% of hunter would not be able to shoot long range with such a light rifle. Might want to rethink the weight your looking at unless you have the skill to shoot that type of rifle. An expensive build that is not usable by the shooter is just another light weight rifle. You can build one a little heavier with better results. I run a Fierce Carbon Titanium 300 PRC with a Mark5 5-25x56 that only weighs 8Lbs 9oz. The heavier scope adds a nice balance to the rifles as well as doubles as a spotting scope. I only point this out because I did what you are wanting to do only to find out I was part of the 95% group.
Scope for light weight rifle
- Thread starter wyoalfafarm
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Emuckfwa
Active Member
Leupold 4x14.5 x40 on a Montana works for my <400 yards lightweight hunting Gun.
westexhunt
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2013
- Messages
- 304
Current generation Razor LHT is going to be hard to beat.
I'm a swaro glass fan....but not of the Z3 or Z5 for tracking. Unless you are understand and are using a reticle for hold overs, in my experience, you will be disappointed. That mirrors 35 years of Leopold experience. They are great set and forget scopes...and that's it (this has been with the vari-x-III and VX3 variants).
I've been impressed with SWFA dialing and return to zero but the FFP reticle don't work for me in low light, particularly at low power unless illuminated. IMO, you do need to pony up to the HD glass.
For tracking and Return to zero, the LRHS and Zeiss ((DL or better) bring together the combination of good glass and reliable tracking. Unfortunately, those blow through your weight perimeters.
Right now, if I were to buy new or replace my existing glass, I'd be focused on LRHSi models....which presently are not available. While the G3 reticle in low light at low powers has issues, being able to turn on the illumination is a quick fix.
I'm told LOW which makes the LRHS/LRTS scopes also makes high end Athalon scopes. They may offer other alternatives....but I have no experience with them.
I've been impressed with SWFA dialing and return to zero but the FFP reticle don't work for me in low light, particularly at low power unless illuminated. IMO, you do need to pony up to the HD glass.
For tracking and Return to zero, the LRHS and Zeiss ((DL or better) bring together the combination of good glass and reliable tracking. Unfortunately, those blow through your weight perimeters.
Right now, if I were to buy new or replace my existing glass, I'd be focused on LRHSi models....which presently are not available. While the G3 reticle in low light at low powers has issues, being able to turn on the illumination is a quick fix.
I'm told LOW which makes the LRHS/LRTS scopes also makes high end Athalon scopes. They may offer other alternatives....but I have no experience with them.
Velvet
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2017
- Messages
- 216
Agree
Here's a crazy range of options, swaro first option. Cheap but works is a sig whiskey 3! Swear to God, glass is good enough, it actually has dialed perfectly for me, and 1-200 bucks.
I just put a vx freedom 13oz on a tikka to total 7.6 pounds to try. I have a ton of rifles that weigh 8 lb up, but the difference between a lightweight scope rig 7.5 or under is a huge difference in feel for me. My new vortex 3 to 15 is incredible but at 20 oz it makes rifles feel heavy. The swaro z5s are amazing, I've been selling off all my Uber glass because frankly The sig whiskey threes are really fun and my Zeiss vx4s from red hawk rifles on sale are the best deals going for a lighter weight. Somehow the jump from 15oz to 20 ounces is huge to me, by feel. So it's leupold and sig for lightweight, and vx4 4-16 and 6-24 for heavy. If I didn't have 20 rifles to scope, it would be swaro z5s without a second thought.
Hand Skills
Well-Known Member
It would appear many have either missed the fact that OP is scoping a 5.5lb rifle, or have never themselves scoped an ultralight...
A heavy scope can affect the balance greatly, making the package seem heavier than it actually is. These wispy rifles are hard enough to shoot well as it is - going overly top heavy kind of defeats the purpose in my experience.
My choice would be the old discontinued Vortex Razor LH 3-15x42. Swaro Z5 is a close second, but the reticle is MIL and the turrets are MOA, which isn't ideal.
The VX3's are lighter (I used to have several), but they have all been replaced with Razor LH's
A heavy scope can affect the balance greatly, making the package seem heavier than it actually is. These wispy rifles are hard enough to shoot well as it is - going overly top heavy kind of defeats the purpose in my experience.
My choice would be the old discontinued Vortex Razor LH 3-15x42. Swaro Z5 is a close second, but the reticle is MIL and the turrets are MOA, which isn't ideal.
The VX3's are lighter (I used to have several), but they have all been replaced with Razor LH's
Btw I was a 60 gunner for all you heavy tactical scope guys calling me a weenie. I humped enough heavy stuff in my lifetime.
A guy named Bob
Well-Known Member
Great thread, im in the process of putting together a mountain carbon for LR shooting and hunting. Here is what im putting together.
Im in the process of building a light 6.5 PRC. The rifle weighs in under 6lbs. Im considering the VX5HD [email protected] W/Talley rings@4oz. OR VX5HD 3-15x44mm@ 19.7 oz w/Leupold back country [email protected]. Im of the opinion that quality glass is a must. I see people spend 1k-3k on a rifle then buy a cheap scope. I will add and carry half to three quarters a pound more for the better glass, adjustment, and reticle options.
If light weight is the only goal, then you will need to sacrifice some quality options. My rifle will be under 8lbs with either option. Personally, I would consider a rifle under eight pounds to be light weight.
Im in the process of building a light 6.5 PRC. The rifle weighs in under 6lbs. Im considering the VX5HD [email protected] W/Talley rings@4oz. OR VX5HD 3-15x44mm@ 19.7 oz w/Leupold back country [email protected]. Im of the opinion that quality glass is a must. I see people spend 1k-3k on a rifle then buy a cheap scope. I will add and carry half to three quarters a pound more for the better glass, adjustment, and reticle options.
If light weight is the only goal, then you will need to sacrifice some quality options. My rifle will be under 8lbs with either option. Personally, I would consider a rifle under eight pounds to be light weight.
Hand Skills
Well-Known Member
It takes a high level of fitness to shoot an ultralight rifle well. I always get a kick out of guys who suggest losing weight at the gym instead of on the rifle.
It's not an either or thing...
It's not an either or thing...
I have 3 of them! Was very disappointed finding out they no longer make them!
I have used a Leupold 2.5-8 X 36 Vx3 on a Kimber Montana 7mm WSM for about 15 years or however long ago they introduced the 7mm WSM. It has the Boone & Crocket reticle. I am very comfortable shooting to 600 yards with this setup and harvested a cow elk at 527 yards. Best guess all in weight (rifle, scope, mounts, ammo, and sling is 7.5 pounds. Awesome scope for a lightweight hunting rig.
