scope to compliment a NULA 300 Win Mag

[klejeski]

I have a New Ultra Light Arms 300 win mag due that should be ready for a scope in a little more than a month and am racking my brain for a scope to compliment the rifle
looking and Leupold Vx6 3-18, zeiss conquiest 3-15, Swarovski z5 3-18, have never used any of the three but ounces count or should I be looking at the huskemaw 4-16
anyone with an input would be greatly appreciated the Swarovski is a bit out of my budget. also looking at a turret for the scope the intended purpose is hunting elk and mule deer

thanks in advance

 

[scf]

Perfect compliment to your light rifle would be the Z5. Only 15.9 ounces, put it in Talley one piece mounts and you will have a nice rig. Ballistic turret is also a good feature.

 

[Kenny0709]

I use a Leupold VX6 3-18 and love it. Works great for my elk hunts! +1 on the Talley one piece rings

 

[Timber338]

Right now my first choice would be the VX6 3-18x50 side focus CDS. Scope is right at 20 oz, which is not as light as a Swarovski, but still on the lighter side compared to other high-end optics. And fully agree that the lightweight Talley rings/bases are the most sturdy way to mount a lightweight hunting rig.

The problem I have with the Swarovski (along with the huge $$$), is that the turrets are not in MOA. I have not spent much time with them, but I simply like MOA. I'm sure a guy could adjust to anything though, and the quality and light-weight of the Swarovski might very well be worth it if you can part with the $$$.

I did contact Leupold a few weeks ago and asked them if they had any plans to include their new TS-32X1 MOA reticle in their VX6 line. They said right now the VX6 is too new, and it would take them about a year to get that reticle into the VX6 glass.

For a dedicated hunting rifle, I like the idea of zeroing your rifle and then never touching the turrets... Just holding your shot to the appropriate MOA within the reticle. Then you don't need turrets, zero stop, or worrying where your turrets might have gotten moved to. Everything stays at zero and you still figure out longer shots through MOA, and then hold accordingly. Here's a pic of the new leupold reticle in case you're interested. This is an approach I am strongly considering for future hunts.

And another option to consider, is going with a 4.5-14 x 50mm VX3, and having the custom shop put in this reticle up front. You can do that right now, and that scope only weighs 17 oz. I think that would work great on a dedicated elk/deer rifle for long range shots. Also less $$ than the VX6, and in my opinion, still very good glass.

 

[The Oregonian]

I am going thru the same process...I have it mostly narrowed down to the VX6 3x18x44 or x50 and the Z6 3x18x50.

Pros and cons to each.

 

[Brewer]

what about that new Nightforce that's about $1000!

 

[Timber338]

what about that new Nightforce that's about $1000!

the new NF SHV could be an option, but I think a little heavy at 28 oz when comparing to the options already discussed in this thread. So many factors to consider when building a light-weight specific rifle.

I am hoping that nightforce continues to develop more scopes within the SHV line, such as a 50mm objective, and a higher magnification offering, like maybe reaching up to 18 to 20x. Something like a 5-18x50mm that weighed 25 oz's or less would start to get my attention.

 

[Brewer]

the new NF SHV could be an option, but I think a little heavy at 28 oz when comparing to the options already discussed in this thread. So many factors to consider when building a light-weight specific rifle.

I am hoping that nightforce continues to develop more scopes within the SHV line, such as a 50mm objective, and a higher magnification offering, like maybe reaching up to 18 to 20x. Something like a 5-18x50mm that weighed 25 oz's or less would start to get my attention.

1 pound difference doesn't strike me as much of a problem, though I know some guys like really light units.

I suppose he is talking about a model 28 weighing in at less than 6 pounds. in 300WM, I think I would be adding a few pounds to that one. As a mater of fact, I might just workout another month and take a 10# gun... but kudos to the guy who shoots a 7# 300WM setup and shoots it well.

To me, it doesn't do me any good to pack a rifle in that I cant soot at dusk because I don't have enough glass. or if my scope gets banged around, it knocks it off its zero just enough to miss at 800 yards. that's why I would chose the nightforce. Just sayin...

 

[klejeski]

Thanks for all the input and replies and yes it
Does have a lot to do with weight and packing
In the mountains a couple ounces here and there turns
Into pounds before you know it was trying to stay under
The 20oz. Mark to stay around the 7 lb mark
This is not a rifle you go out and plink with on the
Weekend it is a tool for a specific purpose
And hopefully only 1 round is all that needs to
Be fired
Thanks again

 

[Timber338]

1 pound difference doesn't strike me as much of a problem, though I know some guys like really light units.

I suppose he is talking about a model 28 weighing in at less than 6 pounds. in 300WM, I think I would be adding a few pounds to that one. As a mater of fact, I might just workout another month and take a 10# gun... but kudos to the guy who shoots a 7# 300WM setup and shoots it well.

To me, it doesn't do me any good to pack a rifle in that I cant soot at dusk because I don't have enough glass. or if my scope gets banged around, it knocks it off its zero just enough to miss at 800 yards. that's why I would chose the nightforce. Just sayin...

I totally agree with you here. I'm in the middle of building a "backpack/carry" weight 338 RUM. I'm planning on the fully outfitted rifle weighing around 11 pounds. Will go with an NXS, the SHV not even a consideration. I think the flip side is having a rifle so heavy that you just don't want to hike to the next ridge because you're out of gas, and you miss out on a herd of elk. But then that goes along with your comment about taking the time to get in shape!

To the OP, there's tons of choices which make the decision tough... no right or wrong answer. But my own philosophy is that I'll take a bit extra weight in optics, and try and save weight in other places.

 

[klejeski]

So I think I have narrowed down to the leupold vx6 3-18 or
The huskemaw 4-16 I like the reticle in the huskemaw
For those that may have experience with either or both would
Greatly appreciate the input I have not been able to look through
Either scope

 

[Mess33]

I own 3 ULA's and the reason I do is to avoid the weight. On my .300wm I had a Zeiss and had troubles with the scope. I called Melvin and had a good conversation with him. He essentially said the zeiss was not designed for the recoil. He was trying to explain the physics of a heavy scope on a light rifle but i am not that technical. He highly recommended the leupold vx3. 3.5-14 x 40. I bought it from the custom shop and had the reticle designed around the bullet I hunt with. I could not be happier. I have shot 6 elk and 2 caribou with that combination at a wide range of distances and it has never let me down. My advice would be to call Nula and talk to Melvin. He will not steer you wrong.

 

[klejeski]

Mess33 thank you for your input I have talked with
Melvin. And he has explained the recoil affect in his rifles In what
Caliber are the rifles you have. Just wondering

 

[Mess33]

I have 2 .300 win mags and a .270. The second .300 I bought for my son. It has a muzzle brake. I bought it used and have not had a chance to shoot it much. My other ULA is a .270 and I use it for everything smaller than Elk. I am hoping to go on a Moose hunt or Brown bear hunt in the next year or 2 and hoping to find a nice used ULA in the .338 class. Love these rifles. You can hike all day and not know they are there. They are not bench guns they are hunting guns.