Help a new .444 P Marlin Owner with a choice of a Bushy Scope
#1
New Marilin .444 P Outfitter shooter needs your help! [/align][hr]
Hello folks,
I find myself in a dilemma that I need your advice on.
I just purchased a new Marlin .444 P (A great find since they are discontinued) for a Moose tag I drew here in Utah. I generally hunt in the timber, so it can get a bit dark in there. However, there are also lots of open spaces that could require a near 300 year shot (Yes, this levergun with the Hornady ammo can do it!)
I know that the .444 is generally a 175-200 yard max gun. However, I have read several good reports that the Leverevolution ammo out of a .444 P is very good with adequate penetration and expansion out to 300 yards on both elk/bear and Moose.
So...I plan on using the new Leverevolution Ammo or the Hornady light mag most of the time. The light mag will also reach out to 300 yeards, but not as easy.
I looking to purchase a Bushnell Elite Scope (3200) to match up with my Elite Binos and Elite 1500 Arc Rangefinder. I tried these all out a Cabela's last Saturday. Should I buy:
1) a 1.5-4.5 for keeping it short, in the timber, and low light even though I risk needing more magnication for a longer shot or
2) a 2x7 for bit longer shots, but not very good eye relief (3.0) (I checked lots of 2x7 in Bushnell, Leupold and Burris and they were all awful in eye relief)or
3) A consider a real nice 3-9/3-10 with great eye relief (almost 4.0) and keep the scope on 3 if i I'm in the dark, timbery stuff? Is that low enough magnification to take a good, accurate close shot
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
God Bless,
Porter[/align]
Hello folks,
I find myself in a dilemma that I need your advice on.
I just purchased a new Marlin .444 P (A great find since they are discontinued) for a Moose tag I drew here in Utah. I generally hunt in the timber, so it can get a bit dark in there. However, there are also lots of open spaces that could require a near 300 year shot (Yes, this levergun with the Hornady ammo can do it!)
I know that the .444 is generally a 175-200 yard max gun. However, I have read several good reports that the Leverevolution ammo out of a .444 P is very good with adequate penetration and expansion out to 300 yards on both elk/bear and Moose.
So...I plan on using the new Leverevolution Ammo or the Hornady light mag most of the time. The light mag will also reach out to 300 yeards, but not as easy.
I looking to purchase a Bushnell Elite Scope (3200) to match up with my Elite Binos and Elite 1500 Arc Rangefinder. I tried these all out a Cabela's last Saturday. Should I buy:
1) a 1.5-4.5 for keeping it short, in the timber, and low light even though I risk needing more magnication for a longer shot or
2) a 2x7 for bit longer shots, but not very good eye relief (3.0) (I checked lots of 2x7 in Bushnell, Leupold and Burris and they were all awful in eye relief)or
3) A consider a real nice 3-9/3-10 with great eye relief (almost 4.0) and keep the scope on 3 if i I'm in the dark, timbery stuff? Is that low enough magnification to take a good, accurate close shot
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
God Bless,
Porter[/align]
#2
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,553
Likes: 0
From:
Personally I would be inclined to go with the 2x7, as 7 power is plenty out to 175-200 yards yet lets you use 2 x closer in. Would this scope stay with this rifle?
#5
Thanks for the replies.
Red Lion---This scope probably would remain with this gun permanently. Got any good ideas for a mount or rings that can withstand the blow of a .444 lever?
Timber---Any good experiences matching your monicker ie. Using a Elite 3x9 4200 in the timber? I hear there is a 50 mm in the elite at that size at well. Think this is too much?
Andrew and Redlion---I really thought the 2x7 was the best for the chore as well, but I have to admit, two hours at Cabelas and trying several 2x7 (which are hard to find nowdays even in a large store like that one) were just not good on the eye. The best eye relief was 3.4 on a Leupold and 3.3 on the Elite 3200. The Bushnell Legend was an awful 3.0.
I'm afraid that even with the porting on this .444 P I'd get too close with the poor eye relief and get blood on my forehead from scope eye! Do you know of some really good 2x7 that might work. I prefer to stay with Bushnell or Leupold since that is what I have always owned, but I can keep looking.
Thanks in advance and God Bless,
Porter
Red Lion---This scope probably would remain with this gun permanently. Got any good ideas for a mount or rings that can withstand the blow of a .444 lever?
Timber---Any good experiences matching your monicker ie. Using a Elite 3x9 4200 in the timber? I hear there is a 50 mm in the elite at that size at well. Think this is too much?
Andrew and Redlion---I really thought the 2x7 was the best for the chore as well, but I have to admit, two hours at Cabelas and trying several 2x7 (which are hard to find nowdays even in a large store like that one) were just not good on the eye. The best eye relief was 3.4 on a Leupold and 3.3 on the Elite 3200. The Bushnell Legend was an awful 3.0.
I'm afraid that even with the porting on this .444 P I'd get too close with the poor eye relief and get blood on my forehead from scope eye! Do you know of some really good 2x7 that might work. I prefer to stay with Bushnell or Leupold since that is what I have always owned, but I can keep looking.
Thanks in advance and God Bless,
Porter
#6
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,553
Likes: 0
From:
I always use and have had great success with Leupold bases and rings. I can see that you would want to have adequate eye relief. With that said, I have a Bushnell 3200 on the .300 win mag and have enough eye relief there.
#7
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,079
Likes: 0
From: Ponce de Leon Florida USA
I just bought the 4200 last year, for my grandsons, but sitting in stands with them I will occasionally get a chance to look through it. It is very bright (some of the optics professionals on the SWFA site rate it very close to the quality of the Conquest). There probably isn't any appreciable brightness in the 50 mm over the 40 mm. Plus you get the RainGuard feature. As far as the 50 being too much, I use a 56mm Diavari and have had another 56 mm scope and I can't see the problem that other people have talked about. It isn't but 16 mm larger than a 40 mm which when split would be 8 mm which is just over 1/4 inch in additionaleye height.
#8
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,970
Likes: 0
From: Clermont Florida U.S.
Here's another option. How about a 4 or 6X fixed power. A Leuppy FXII (or Sightron for that matter) with 6X by 42 ought to be about perfect. Eye relief should be over 4, and exit pipil @ 7.




