I notice a trend and maybe some of you out there do as well. It is to mismatch rifles and riflescopes. A good example is a guy I know that has a model 7(6mm) and a 700 mountain rifle(7-08) and he has Leupold 3.5-10x50's on them. I can't argue with his success since he has killed massive bucks on his property with this combo. Too me the scope is ok but it should have been put on a fullsize rifle.t I am not sure he could not have been better served with a better balanced scope combination. If your going to build or buy a lightweight rifle why would you want a scope that weighs say more then 13 ounces on it and conversely put a ultralight scope on a fullsize rifle? Any opinions?

Agreed. I've seen the same thing all too often. I recall a Marlin 30/30 one time on one of the gun auction websites that was topped off with a 4-12x scope. Looked absolutely ridiculous. If you're going to go with a carbine style of rifle or a lightweight (ex: Rem. Model 7 or Ruger Ultra-Lite) then it seems to sort of defeat the purpose to top it off with
a scope that's half the size of the gun, and weighs near 3/4 to a full pound or more.
Better to get a smaller, lower powered fixed or variable power scope, or at least one of
the compact models.
Too many go for too much magnification. Seldom ever a NEED for more than 6x for big game hunting. More often much less is needed, and at the lower power there's less chance on a close encounter of just seeing hide/hair.
My personal preference is for the 1-4x or 1.5-5x variables, and at most a 2-7x for big game hunting. I like the better fields of view with these, and generally better eye relief too.

Yeah, proper balance is critical. I once had a guy come into the gun store I used to work at. He mounted a Springfield Armory scope with a 56 mil objective, with some cheap rings, on very high-powered rifle. I forget what caliber is was but it was bigger than a .338, an overkill for most big-game in N.A. And he wondered why his rings were all bent? haha

I think one of the reasons are that they want every bit of light gathering ability available to them and don't want to compromise. If you want a lightweight rifle and hunt whitetail very early or late you probably need at least a 40mm objective and as good glass as you can find and yet have a lightweight scope. Not many scopes qualify in this regard except certain Leupold fixed powers with 42mm objectives, Swaroski a Series which may be one of the greater compromises out there..42mm objective...great glass and light and compact. Certain Kahles would also qualify in this regard. The new simmons Aetec scopes also have great dimensions.

I have 3.5x10 40 mm Leupold VariX-III scopes on my .25-06 and .243 which I use to deer hunt. My legal shooting hours in Oklahoma are 30 minutes before sun-up and 30 minutes after sun-down. I find that my naked eye loses the ability to discern targets due to low light at a point where the scope is still able to resolve the target and the cross hairs remain distinctly visible. Thus, in my particular situation, a scope with greater ability to gather light would not gain anything for me.

There is a relationship between objective lens size and magnification. Thus, if your scope magnification is lower, you don't need as large an objective lens.

Personally, I don't have any use for the big 56 mm objective lenses. The scope has to be mounted higher above the boreline. I wonder if the rifles mount as well or if you have to hold your head off the comb to line up with the scope? I suppose if you are moonlight hunting in the Bavarian woods for wild boar they might be needed, but not in my hunting experience.

I too, like Alsatian, topped my .243 with a Leupold 3.5-10. The 40mm obj allows me to mount the scope low enough to shoot comfortable. I normally keep the power set on the low end but I like the option of 'up to' 10 power, if and when I need to 'thread the needle'.

Most people would consider mine mismatched I have a 3 x 9 x 50 Ziess on my Marlin .450. I put it on there because I hunt hogs at night w/ it and w/ any moon at all I can gather enough light to shoot w/o having to turn on the spotlight. I can see things through the scope I can't see w/ my naked eyes at night. Which is a big help because we hunt the hogs year round and the first sign of any light they are gone. We shot a 200 lb boar this last weekend and are planning on going again this weekend. The .450 will flatten them where they stand which is also good because we got tired of tracking hogs through the brush at night on our hands and knees not knowing if they were dead or just wounded.

What the other guy puts on his rifle is his business only...his money and he has to carry it.....I'm a tad oldfashioned in that I still like some very old and simple 4X scopes....cheap and they work fine. However since my first Leupold compact 3 X 9 (8 ounces) it's my favorite scope. Don't look like much but it's all I ever wanted...good optics, light weight, plenty of power to count points if needed. More just isn't wanted in the field.....varminting is another matter however.

My first choice rifle is a .260, that's a kind of moderate rifle, and it wears a moderate 2x7x32 scope. Unless you plan on shooting at night there is no reason to use something with a 50 mm objective. I just bought a Marlin 336 in .35 Remington and am looking for one of the 1x4/5s with a 30 mm tube and no objective bell. That ought to be bright enough or this ol' man.

Any 3-9x40mm scope that is 15-16" is the perfect match for any rifle in the 42-45" range.