scopes
 

most shotgun/blackpowder scopes only go up to 4 or 5 power, what would you say the effective range of these powers is?

RE: scopes
 

That would depend on your abilities. I know a person that all he ever hunted with was a straight 4X scope. He took 200 yard shots with it and never seemed to bother him.

I personally like a more powerful scope but I did only put a 1.5 X 4.5 Bushnell Banner Dusk to Dawn on mine. There are times I wish it had more power, like at the range, but for hunting it seems to work just fine.

A real important thing is the eye relief. I like a 4" eye releif. Your eye and eye brow will thank you for that.

RE: scopes
 

I agree that four power is usually enough. I have a 1.5-5 power scope on my Omega and since I usually shoot less than 100 yards for hunting it is plenty. It sort of depends on what you hunt and where you hunt. My area for elk is usually less than 100 yards for a shot. If I was shooting small deer at 150 yards I might want more but I doubt it.

RE: scopes
 

I prefer a traditional 3-9x riflescope with a 40mm objective lens for light gathering purposes. Granted, the higher power is seldom needed in hunting situations, but it's there if you need it and it's real handy at the range.

RE: scopes
 

I have a cheap Cabelas Pine Ridge 2-7 X 32 on my Omega but I'm looking at the 3-9 Nikon Prostaff and Bushnell Elite 3200 lines because I have trouble seeing the target consistently at 100 yards. The ability to dial up 9 power will be a real asset to these eyes. Most hunting situations will only require 3 or 4 power.

RE: scopes
 

i like a 3x9 ,but usually only use it on4 or 5 for hunting.I have several different ones,on 3x9x50 on my 243 and really love it.on my 45 B/P a 3x9x32 and it seems to work fine.

I guess it all depends on what you like.I will turn mine up to 9 to take a look at something but shoot at 5 power.?????????????????[&:]

RE: scopes
 

Tree, I'm like you. I have a Leupold 3x9x40 Vari-X II on my Remington 700 MLS, but I consistently leave it on 4X (woods hunting) or maybe 5X-6X if I'm hunting a field. 9X is for the range. Better to leave it on 4X than 9X. A buck at 35 yards is a gimme at 4X, but all you'll see is a scope full of brown at 9X!

Brian

RE: scopes
 

I also like the 3x9 for my Ml. I like the ability to power up or down as the situation requires. No doubt higher power is really handy when on the range, especially when wanting to see how you bullet behaves at distances longer than 100 yards. It also has proved useful in my case when hunting for shots that were a bit further than the norm. Using a rifle scope on ML hasn't caused me any problems with regards to eye relief or to much power.

Good Luck

RE: scopes
 

I would not get the prostaff - not fully multicoated = poor light transimission
I would not get the Elite 3200 - only 3 inches of eye releif ( I like that scope actually but the eye releif is too small for a muzzleloading scope.

In the same price range I would go with a Simmons Aetec 2.8x10-44...
It is fully multicoated and has 5 inches of eye relief, not to mention the widest field of view at 100 yards of the three.

For significantly more you might want to look at the Leupold VX-II, avoid the VX-1's and rifleman's, they are WAY overpriced for an inferior scope!

RE: scopes
 

I had 4000 B&L Elite mounted on a 300 wby with no eye relief problems and it certainly has a lot more recoil than any ML! Up until this fall I was using the 4200 Elite on my 700MLS with no ill effects. I am not sure if I am the exception here but I don't see an ML being a concern with regards to eye relief/recoil unless your shooting max 150 gr loads all the time, which few do.

RE: scopes
 

I agree with you, Skeeter. The recoil from a muzzleloader is more like a shove, rather than a quick rap from a centerfire. I need more eye relief on my Ruger M-77R .338 Win Mag than my Remington MLS, but the B&L Elite 3000 (now Bushnell) that I have on my .338 has more than enough eye relief.

However, folks, I must say this. Save yourself the money (in the long run) and aggravation (in the short term) and stop buying these $49.99 scopes! They are going to let you down sooner or later; most likely sooner. If you do not have a lot of cash, buy a Leupold VX-1 for between $170.00-$190.00. Yeah, it's more than $49.99, but you'll be buying another scope soon anyway.

Remember the old axiom: you buy junk, you get junk.

Brian

RE: scopes
 

=============================================

3.3" is not enough for that rifle. Are you reloading lighter than normal loads for it? Personally, I won't even consider a scope unless it has at least 4" ER.... rainguard or not. I'll buy a spray bottle of anti-fog for my scopes. One bottle lasts upteen years.

RE: scopes
 

The VX-I is crap... Sorry... No positive click adjustments, no fully multicoating, 3-piece tube. It is more similar to a Bushnell Banner than a Bushnell Elite. I am sick of people raving about the Leupold VX-I the facts are the facts....

Leupold VX-I
3x9-40
fully coated lenses (not multicoated)
"friction" windage/elevation adjustment
eye releif = 4.2-3.7 inches (not constant)
max field of view @ 100 yards = 32.9 feet
price = $199.95

Simmons AETEC
2.8x10-44
fully multicoated lenses
1/4 positive click moa adjustment
eye releif = 5 inches (constant)
max field of view @ 100 yards = 44 feet
price = $129.95

RE: scopes
 

Triple 7, isn't that the key? Some don't find that eye relief is really as much a problem as others when considering a scope! As mentioned I had a similar eye relief on a 300 wby. and it never caused me any concern. Now my 7mm rem mag has 3.5 fixed eye relief topping it (Zeiss Conquest) and nor has it even come close( the loads are pretty much max). I think most will agree or find these 2 CF recoil more than most ML loads. Unless you find ER to be a problem I think personally much more is made out of the value published than needed in many cases. Of course if you are one who finds ER important than it may play more into your decision but please do not assume we are all the same. Simply said if you have noticed problems in the past with close to or eyebrow touching(that isn't the result of poor shooting technique), then make it a priority. For those who have not then it is less of a concern. Especially a ML! Just MO.:eek:

Newguy, I agree 100% on the VX I. I would take many other prior to it, but in the end it is really up to the person who is using the equipment. Mental aspect is a big part of the sport so if you feel better with X brand than more power to yeah! AGAIN PERSONAL!!

RE: scopes
 

Skeeter...

I just don't see how an informed consumer could make that decision, that is why I beleive most people whom buy the Leupold VX-I are not informed (or mis-informed by salesman). The profit margin on Leupolds far exceeds all the other major brands out there. This does not include Swarovski, Kahles, etc.

There is no reason to pay signficantly more for inferior equipment. This is not an opinion... It is FACT... The numbers don't lie. They aren't even close!

Some people will say my VX-I is brighter than let's say an AETEC... Physically is not true. Their peception has been skewed by branding. But I guess that is the American way.

By the way I like the Bushnell 3200... I LOVE the Bushnell 4200! I PERSONALLY (IMHO) think the 4200 is the best scope in that price range.

RE: scopes
 

Triple 7, my loads for my .338 are not reduced. They are maximum charges of IMR-4350 and 250 grain Hawk softpoints. Recoil is noticeable, but the eye relief is not a problem. At least not for me.

Brian

RE: scopes
 

I have a Bushnell 3200 1.5x4.5 on an Omega. I don't have any issues with the ER. I did get bit on the bridge of the nose last year first time I was out hunting with the new gun. Had a deer run in front of me at 20 yards, I had about a second before she went into some thick stuff. I threw the gun to my shoulder looked through the scope and jerked the trigger. Lesson learned.

I've since put a slip on Sims recoil pad and, for me, that really helps with how the gun fits my length of pull.

RE: scopes
 

I think most people don't worry about eye relief unless they've had a very bad experience, then it's a top priority from then on. I don't know, but my guess would be that cayugad has gotten a pretty kiss from a scope.

RE: scopes
 

I just bought a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40 and mounted it on a 270 WSM, which recoils quite a bit more than my T/C Omega. The eye relief on the Bushnell is not as good as a Leupold but so far it has not presented a problem.

I'm a Leupold fan but IMO the Elite 3200 is atleast equal to a VXII in terms of brightness and clarity. It is definately brighter and clearer than the VXI and the older VariX-II's. If eye relief is a concern to you then you might ought to look at something else. I have a Leupold on a lighter recoiling rifle that I can swap out if the eye relief becomes a problem.

RE: scopes
 

etothepii, agreed we don't know each others experience or technique used since it is the internet. Many reasons for scope touching that are not directly tied to the ER a scope affords, poor shooting technique, improper mounting, etc. I will not say that this holds true to those who require max ER on a scope but on the same token it appears ER is the new buz word (if you will) when considering optics and personally think many are influenced by this published number when they themselves haven't found it to be as much of a concern in the past as certain users. I merely mentioned it as I personally haven't found recoil or ER to be a concern on a number of ML's or for that manner CF's I have shot in a variety of configurations and I am sure others will be in the same boat. So again if ER is a concern then make it a priority when selecting a scope but if not you shouldn't be as caught up in the ER published, let your previous experiences dictate what you need PERSONALLY.

RE: scopes
 

skeeter 7MM,

I know that ER is a big deal to T7 and others, and in a way to me also. I have two 3200's with that 3.3" relief and I find them no problem at all. The 3.3" ER comes about at 9 power, when I use 9 power everything is much more stable anyway. I think I have been bumped by a scope once or twice in my life, many, many, years ago, but eye relief was not the problem - the problem was the guy behind the stock and pulling the trigger.

I do think that a person just starting out shooting, might-should, be concerned about ER but if the person teaching him to shoot makes sure that the rifle is shouldered correctly, he really shouldn't have a problem.

In most instances ER is overated...

RE: scopes
 

I noticed the same thing sabotloader.....the 3200 does seem to have more than 3.3" of eye relief at the lower settings. I actually think it is a little more when it is at the highest setting too.

RE: scopes
 

My exact feeling and really point.

RE: scopes
 

I found the Elite 3200 at Durham's Outdoors for 169.99. Bass Pro Shop says they will match that price. With my 100.00 gift card from Christmas, I feel like I'm stealing this scope.

RE: scopes
 

Would definately be a good deal on the 3200.