semi

I plan on updating my current "package" scope i got with my M70. It's Simmons 8 point 3x9. I have narrowed it down to a Bushnell or Nikon scope in the $150 to $200 range. My question is... should i go with another 3x9 or should i go 4x12? This is my 30.06 and taking a shot at 50 yards is just as common as 250 yards where i hunt.

Is there a big difference in these? i am thinking 4x12 at the moment.

Bocajnala

the 4X12 is a good choice probably. in all honesty i've had shots ranging from 10 yards out to 380. fifteen deer killed and only once, on the 380 yard shot, did I ever take my scope off of 4 power. but it is nice to have that little extra magnification!
-Jake

RugerMike

With your 30:06 a 3x9 will serve you well if you purchase a brand that is around $200 Brand names that come to mind are burris, leupold, nikon, weaver, simmons aetec/whitetail expedition. Now that being said, you will also need to change the rings (most and importantly) and probably the base to get solid results! It is all about SOLID (not going to move, period) JMO

bugsNbows

Usually, when the high end of variable scope setting exceeds 10X (or so) some sort of Adjustable Objective (A.O.) is commonplace. This could either be a side mount or one on the front of the scope. I personally don't like A.O.'s on BG hunting scopes. For that reason I'd stick with a 3-9 myself. The Nikon Buckmasters is a pretty decent scope and will set you back around $210. Another decent one in that range is the Burris Fullfield II. Good luck.

hometheaterman

I have a Burris Fullfield II 3x9x40mm on my 30-06 and so far I love it. I've only used it this deer season but it's been great. Super clear and I love the ballistic plex crosshairs. I just really like this scope. The only thing I don't like is to adjust the magnification you turn the whole eye piece but that's not a big deal. I had a Leupold VX-I one there previously and just never liked it a whole lot. It's been sent into repair twice and I've only owned it for right under 2 years. It looks nice but I don't like how it's acted and after looking through this and then the Burris I'd take the Burris any day. My Leupold also had a problem where if your gun falls over or anything you minus well figure on it not still shooting in the same place. It seems like it got knocked off zero super easy. I just wasn't happy with it. I have a $30 Tasco that looks just as clear to me and I like just about as much and I've had it for over a year now and it still works great. I had another I used on the 30-06 the first time while the Leupold was in for repair but I've since sold it. A few buddies said it looked clearer to them but I can't tell a difference. Overall, I think I'd go with a Simmons or Tasco or something before I would go with the Leupold again. I also have a Simmons on a .22 I like a lot too. However, the Burris just might be my favorite. I've really been impressed with it.

nchawkeye

Unless you are planning on using your '06 on groundhogs, stick with the 3x9...

I've killed about 175 deer with my .243, it started with a Bushnell ScopeChief back in 1980 and not only did I use it for deer, but groundhogs in the mountains of Virginia as well...I updated to a Leupold in the late 90s and this year was pretty typical, killed 6 deer with it, the closest at 5 steps and the furtherest at 277 ranged yards...Nine power is plenty for deer out to 350 or so....

I would add another $100 and get a Leupold...

Mojotex

For the shot ranges you are talking, especially if the majority are 100 yards or under, and you often hunt in the woods look at even a lower range like 1.5-6x42 mm. The very low power setting, 1.5 to 3 or so, is great for hunting in woods where the shots will seldom exceed 50 - 75 yards. At 250 yards, which is extremely rare where I hunt, 6X is plenty. Having said that of your choices, my recommendation is the 3-9. I saw another post where the Bushnell Elite 4200 can be had for about $255. Do not recall where. I have one of these and have been surprisingly pleased with the quality of the optics. It is a bit long and therefore heavy, but took me right to sunset:30 with a good, clear view.

glob3006

My 2cents....I have or havehad3 of the major "affordable" $200 rangebrands on my high power rifles.Leupold,Nikon Bkmstr. and Burris ff 2. All GOOD! My Bkmstr has been on my 06 for a number of years and has seen alot of action....solid scope.. no problems. My Burris on my .270wsmis very clear and top quality LOVE it!! My Leupold VX- 2 on a 300 wsm and was actually my least favoriteand it's gone.

I'd go with a 3x9......less fuss. I think most 4-12s have yardage focus??? That could add time to a quik shot??

Dose Pesos
Bill

semi

I used my 30.06 this past season and i was sitting on the edge of a creek. the shot was about 300 yards. I am confortable making that shot if it's a clear shot into an emtpy field. I had the chance this year with 4 large Doe that where grazing. I never quite got a good eye on them thru my 3x9 before they started moving. This is why i am asking the question. I was looking for something that could give me a better look for antlers at that distance. I was thinking the 4x12 would be a good setup. I will continue to look at the scopes mentioned and go back to considering a 3x9.

SWThomas

I'd go with the 4-12. If you look through a scope set to 3 power and then look through a scope set to 4 power, they're identical. Andthe 4-12 you'll have that much more magnification over the 3-9. Yes, most of them have side focuses, but it's only to make the picture clearer. It's notrequired that you put the side focus on that yardage before taking the shot.

This is the scope that I have and I love it! Great price too... You may be able to find it on eBay a little cheaper.

http://theopticzone.com/detail.aspx?ID=3610