Scope for 30-06?

I am forgetting about 500 yard shots in the field, but it would be fun to tinker with that at the range. I love long range shooting. That being said, I don't know if it is worth the money and extra weight and size of a more powerful scope. I generally want to use the range to prepare for hunting.

Seems like kind of the difference between (if you are looking at Zeisses) the 3-9 40mm (around 4 hundred) and the 4.5-15 50 mm ($8 or 9 hundred)
 
I'd stay with a 40mm at most and i tend to like 32 or 36mm better. It is'nt so high off the gun to where you have to reach to get a quick and instant sight picture. Like another member had discussed earlier a good trigger will shrink groups size in half or better.
I'd suggest you make a trip to your local gunshop hangout and tell them what your wanting and see what they have to offer. The zeiss conquest line is affordable and comparable to leupolds are very clear optics more so than leupold imho.
 
I see no reason at all to have more than a 3-9 power scope on a deer or big game rifle. Most times a fixed 4x scope is more than enough.

One of my all time favorite scopes is the Bushnell Elite 2-7x32. It's a fine piece of machinery. After using the Elite series with the Rainguard, I always look there first. It rode on a Remington 7400 in 30-06 for over 10 years and about 1500 rounds, and NEVER needed to be re-zeroed. In trucks, on quads, being dropped, hot, cold, wet, dry, it never failed me. I've had similar success with the 3-9 and 4-12 power models.

My 2nd choice in optics is usually a toss-up between Nikon and Burris. I really like the various Nikon lines, but they are a bit bulky in some models. Burris scopes are usually a bit more compact, but cost more.

Leupold sucks. Sorry to say it, but I've had more issues with Leupold scopes than I have any other brand, even the cheap stuff. I've had Vari-X I and II, Compact, VX1, VX2, and Rifleman. Leupold is the ONLY scope that I've ever had totally de-gas as well as having the cross hairs break on two different scopes. The optic clarity/resolutin in the Compact 3-9x32 was so terrible that I had to use my binoculars to make sure that a deer I was watching at 100 yds was actually a spike. I couldn't tell through the scope, at any power. Same problem with the Rifleman 2-7. The ONLY thing that Leupold has going for them is the fact that they are American made. They are totally overpriced for what you're getting, which really isn't much, IMO.I
 
Last edited:
d762nato said:
I'd stay with a 40mm at most and i tend to like 32 or 36mm better. It is'nt so high off the gun to where you have to reach to get a quick and instant sight picture. Like another member had discussed earlier a good trigger will shrink groups size in half or better.
I'd suggest you make a trip to your local gunshop hangout and tell them what your wanting and see what they have to offer. The zeiss conquest line is affordable and comparable to leupolds are very clear optics more so than leupold imho.
Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense ... but more light at dawn or dusk would be nice too... tough one. I will have to check them out.

I suppose one solution woudl be those leupods that are shaped like a lima bean and wrap around the barrel.

The reason that I got the savage was for the accutrigger.
 
I just posted on your other thread. Nikon, Burris, Redfield. It is crazy how clear the site picture is in the Redfield for the price... Also American Made!
 
Kirk_Ferentz said:
That makes a lot of sense ... but more light at dawn or dusk would be nice too... tough one. I will have to check them out.

I suppose one solution woudl be those leupods that are shaped like a lima bean and wrap around the barrel.

The reason that I got the savage was for the accutrigger.
Click to expand...

A higher quality scope with a smaller objective is going to have much better light transmission than a large objective on a lesser quality scope. I see people all the time buying cheap scopes with fat front ends "to have more light!" Then they look through one of my smaller but better quality scopes and are amazed.

I'll take a Zeiss Conquest over a comparable Leupold any time.
 
cramsey3006 said:
i see no reason at all too have more than a 3-9 power scope on a deer or big game rifle. Most times a fixed 4x scope is more than enough.

One of my all time favorite scopes is the Bushnell Elite 2-7x32. It's a fine piece of machinery. After using the Elite series with the Rainguard, I always look there first. It rode on a Remington 7400 in 30-06 for over 10 years and about 1500 rounds, and NEVER needed to be re-zeroed. In trucks, on quads, being dropped, hot, cold, wet, dry, it never failed me. I've had similar success with the 3-9 and 4-12 power models.

My 2nd choice in optics is usually a toss-up between Nikon and Burris. I really like the various Nikon lines, but they are a bit bulky in some models. Burris scopes are usually a bit more compact, but cost more.

Leupold sucks. Sorry to say it, but I've had more issues with Leupold scopes than I have any other brand, even the cheap stuff. I've had Vari-X I and II, Compact, VX1, VX2, and Rifleman. Leupold is the ONLY scope that I've ever had totally de-gas as well as having the cross hairs break on two different scopes. The optic clarity/resolutin in the Compact 3-9x32 was so terrible that I had to use my binoculars to make sure that a deer I was watching at 100 yds was actually a spike. I couldn't tell through the scope, at any power. Same problem with the Rifleman 2-7. The ONLY thing that Leupold has going for them is the fact that they are American made. They are totally overpriced for what you're getting, which really isn't much, IMO.
Click to expand...

I would say its safe to say you are in the minority. Leupold scopes have proven themselves all over the world...
But then again, I don't buy their low end stuff. All mine have been Vari-x 3'S and fixed power. I've probably owned 25 different Leupolds over the years, and have never had one fail. I've put thousands of rounds down range, and a lot of them were through 338 win mags and 375 H&H's.

To the OP, if you want a durable scope, fixed power scopes are the most durable. I've hunted elk, deer and bear in all kinds of terrain and weather, and have never felt underscoped with a 4 power.

I did have a B&L Elite 4000 1.5x6 that I foolishly sold with one of my 338's. The adjustments were extremely positive, the optics were nice, and the reticles were epoxied as well as screwed in place. Not many companies offer that.

Burris makes great optics, but their customer service is the absolute worst. Nikon Monarchs are a nice scope. Very good optics, and good service, but after sending one in 3 times because it wouldn't adjust windage, I gave up on them. There again, I'm sure I was in the minority.

You don't have to spend a 1,000 - 2,000 dollars for good optics. Most people would never be able to really critic the differences when compared to other high end scopes.
 
The only scope that I trust on my go-to deer rife is the Leupold VX-II 4x12 with an adjustable 40mm objective. I have had it mounted on my Ruger M77 MkII 30-06 all weather since I bought it.

We were hunting close to dusk once, glassing a herd of deer around 125 yards, we all took turns comparing what we could see from each other's scopes, and everyone agreed that the Leopold gathered the best light of all the 3 or 4 scopes everyone had. You could not tell if the deer had horns with the naked eye, but through the scope you could clearly make out every detail. No one elses scope could get that amount of detail.

The only other scope that performed like any of my Leupolds were the old gloss black Redfields before the new company took them over. That rifle was also on a Ruger MkII in 25-06 from my father.

Get a Leupold, you won't regret it.
 
I want to like Leupold. I really do. Being American made is great. They are some of the best looking scopes on the market, and they have the physical size just right on most of their models. I just have a sour taste my mouth from them.

I haven't looked through the new Redfield, but I've read some positive feedback on other sites. Might be one of the better buys for the money available right now.

I like the fact that Bushnell Elite scopes also are blackened with a non-reflective matte finish on the INSIDE of the scope itself, reducing flare and reflection.
 
cramsey3006 said:
I want to like Leupold. I really do. Being American made is great. They are some of the best looking scopes on the market, and they have the physical size just right on most of their models. I just have a sour taste my mouth from them.

I haven't looked through the new Redfield, but I've read some positive feedback on other sites. Might be one of the better buys for the money available right now.

I like the fact that Bushnell Elite scopes also are blackened with a non-reflective matte finish on the INSIDE of the scope itself, reducing flare and reflection.
Click to expand...

I know how it is when you have a bad run with something. Its hard to go back... As loyal as I am to Leupold, I have to admit that the Nikon Monarch and the Burris Signature Series have cleaner optics, through my eyes. I know thats everyone sees things differently though.
 
Sounds like fixed power vs. variable power is a lot like prime lens vs. zoom lens in the camera world. The primes are much simpler (and therefore lighter, more compact, and cheaper for what they offer) and have a lot fewer moving parts that can break and a lot fewer places where moisture or dust can get in.

That being said, there were a lot of situations where a prime lens won't cut it and the zoom gives you a lot more versatility.
 
d762nato said:
I'd go for a leupold 3.5x10 also check out nikon you want a clear scope because you can't hit what you can't see. Its better to spend more on the optics than the gun most of the time. You want crystal clear optics not some fuzzy out of focus optic imho.
Click to expand...
+1 on the Leupold 3.5x10
 
I had a Bushnell Elite (4200) on my 338wm. I really like it and for the price I can't find better
 
I have Remington 700 06 that I have hunted with for years here in Kansas. I use a Burris fixed 4X scope. I have made some incredible shots with this rifle. Great scope in lower light. It's all in how and where you hunt. I don't need super long capability. I am sighted at one inch high at 100 yards.
 
I have a Leupold VXIII 2.5X8. It is small for a variable, bright, and sufficient power for any big game hunting.
Don't go to 40mm objective lens or larger scopes. The Leupold will give all the light gathering power you can use in legal shooting light.
Jerry
 
jerm03 said:
I have a Leupold VXIII 2.5X8. It is small for a variable, bright, and sufficient power for any big game hunting.
Don't go to 40mm objective lens or larger scopes. The Leupold will give all the light gathering power you can use in legal shooting light.
Jerry
Click to expand...

Those are a great scope. I had one on a 338 for awhile. 36mm IIRC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top