I use to buy 40mm scopes when i scoped up a rifle but the last couple i purchased have been 50mm.This may sound crazy but i really don't know why i went to the 50mm except that they are suppose to draw in more light but honestly when it's dark it's dark and i haven't really been able to see any difference in the 40 & 50 when it comes to bringing in more light. I currently have two Leupolds 3.5x10x50 and don't get me wrong i like the 50mm but are they worth the extra money when compared to a 40mm?
The reason i say all this is i have a rifle in the safe (Rem 30.06) that hasn't seen any action lately that doesn't have a scope on it and i want to scope it up and use it some this year. I don't want to put a very expensive scope on it but i don't want to go cheap either. I have about $200 that i want to invest on ascope.Help me out here! What would you buy, amid range 50mm, a better quality 40mm, or maybe a 44mm? Also what scope would you guys suggest in the range of $200?Thank You!, and i appreciate any and all imput. Mike
For varmit hunting past 500 yards, I would indeed have a 50mm scope. Deer hunting up to 300yards, get a 40mm. Thats what works for me.
Is it worth it for a 50mm? Well you got to consider a 50mm lense is 36% larger than a 40mm. It has much less yeild after a grind, and 36% more grinding. Also do to its size, the objective bell, is tougher to make and machine to be perfectly round.
Thanks for the feedback!I think i'll go with a 40mm. I've been sitting here for the past hour looking all over the web at different scopes and reading reviews on different models. I've always bought Leupold but i think i'm going to go with a Burris this go round and try the Fullfield 2 3x9x40 which i've found for $186. Like i said, i have budgeted $200 for this scope and after s&h it will come pretty close to that. Again thanks foryour imput.
Thanks for the feedback!I think i'll go with a 40mm. I've been sitting here for the past hour looking all over the web at different scopes and reading reviews on different models. I've always bought Leupold but i think i'm going to go with a Burris this go round and try the Fullfield 2 3x9x40 which i've found for $186. Like i said, i have budgeted $200 for this scope and after s&h it will come pretty close to that. Again thanks foryour imput.
I highly encourage you to pass on the fullfield and go with the 3200. You won't regret it. Since I gave them a chance 2 years ago, I now have 4 elite scopes. Since I used burris black diamond and signature, I won't ever buy them again.
I use 40 or 42mm scopes for big game hunting,varmint hunting and target shooting.I find that my 3x10x42 swarovski scopes are every bit asbright as the leupoldvxIII 3.5x10x50 and I can mount them lower on my rifles.For a lower priced scope,I like the elite 3200.
That's one of the great things about this board, you can get help when you need it. I sure am glad i checked back before ordering the Burris. Done some checking on the 3200 like you guys suggested and seems it gets higher ratings than any of the others in it's price range soi'm going to go with the Elite 3200 3x9x40 . Again much Thanks! Mike
40mm or 50mm?
. Again much Thanks! Mike
