woods/brush rifle scope suggestions, please.

[SimilkameenSlayer]

for a rem 7600 carbine, i'm looking for a scope in the $400 range, which has quick target acquisition capabilities.

thanks for any suggestions.

[wildcatter]

Weaver K 4X38 very good scope and it's light.
Price around $200
I just installed one on my Marlin 336

[todbartell]

Leupold VXI 1-4x20mm heavy duplex

[Barracuda]

I have a 1.5 x 6 on mine but a 2x7 would work very well.

The carbine is also not a short range only rifle and they are plenty accurate so a 2x7 would be ideal. redfield make a 2x7x33 which would probably a very good choice.

Unless your built like a girl and are slight of build make sure you get proper height rings so you are not squishing your face or canting your head into the stock to fire as the stock holds your head pretty high on that rifle.

http://www.redfield.com/riflescopes/


stay aways form the 20 mm tube as it is a sucks in our light and is vastly overrated.

[SimilkameenSlayer]

Weaver K 4X38 very good scope and it's light.
Price around $200
I just installed one on my Marlin 336

thanks!

sounds good.

[MooseWhacker]

If you hunting in heavy brush you should get the lowest power available.

[swampthing]

I am with bartell on the 1x4 leupold. I have one on my 444. I can see the end of the barrell on 1x. Excellent for both eyes open snap shootin.

[SimilkameenSlayer]

thanks to everyone for your replies :-D

i already have a 22" barrel 7600 for longer distances, the 18 1/2" barrel 7600 will be a dedicated forest gun.

i like the sound of the 1x4, but could not find it on the Leupold website, will look again.

thanks

SS

edit, found it http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shooting/products/scopes/vx-ii-riflescopes/vx-ii-1-4x20mm/

[Spy]

Here is another link check out the Leupold VX-R click on the (specs) in the link!:-D
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-and-shooting/products/scopes/vx-r-riflescopes/vx-r-1-25-4x20mm/

[todbartell]

VxR is awesome but a bit over his price range

[Spy]

VxR is awesome but a bit over his price range

Hey Tod I think, correct me if Im wrong the 1.25-4X20 is $400 & change!

[todbartell]

about $550+tax in Canada

[wildcatter]

For a bush gun I like fix power scopes, cheaper, lighter and less to go wrong with.
The 4X is good up close and out to 200M.
I have Leupold on some of my guns, they used to be well priced but not anymore.

[SimilkameenSlayer]

For a bush gun I like fix power scopes, cheaper, lighter and less to go wrong with.
The 4X is good up close and out to 200M.
I have Leupold on some of my guns, they used to be well priced but not anymore.

sounds logical

how about a good set of sights / ghost ring, instead of the scope?

[brian]

stay aways form the 20 mm tube as it is a sucks in our light and is vastly overrated.

The need for larger apertures for light gathering (better light transmission) is only required on higher magnifications. Smaller tubes with good glass will transmit more light than your eye is capable of perceiving with low power scopes. That is with good glass, poor glass won't transmit light as well regardless of your tube diameter.

[Barracuda]

sorry but take one out . i am talking from first hand experiance.
Wrong scope for here or anywhere that isnt bright and sunny. much better off with a 32 mm

[wildcatter]

If open sights are your thing that's OK, as it's the fastest, but for my eyes in low light I need a scope.


sounds logical

how about a good set of sights / ghost ring, instead of the scope?

[brian]

I don't have first hand experience with low power scopes in the field at dawn and dusk because I don't use them to hunt with. But I do know the math involved. Exit pupil is aperture that light finally transmits through in your optics system. Its the same thing as your eyes dilating to respond to low light. A healthy human eye has an exit pupil that averages 7mm at full dilation, this diameter shrinks as you grow older and have poorer night vision. If your optics system could theoretically transmit 100% of the light, then it would not need an exit pupil any larger than your eyes (ie the extra light transmission is wasted because your eye is incapable of using anything above its fully dilated 7mm). Of course scopes don't transmit 100%, the best glass is around 97%, 95% is considered excellent and most scopes are around 90%. The general equation is, Objective Lens Diameter (mm) / Magnification = Exit Pupil (mm)

So a variable 1-4 x 20 mm objective will have an exit pupil of 20-5 depending on power. The low end has more than enough exit pupil and only suffers if you crank up the magnification, and even then its not bad if you consider the benefits of being able to mount the scope low and use it for the quick close range shots the scope was designed for. Used on 2 power it would still have the equal light transmission capability of a 3-9 X 30mm scope given that the two had equal quality of glass. As for your first hand field experience, I don't know how effectively the scope you used transmitted light. If you always had your scope cranked to 4 power and it only has 90% light transmission, then it would suffer in low light. But I would argue that if this were the case then you would probably be using the wrong scope for your situation and better suited to a 2-7 or a fixed 4. If it had lower than 90% transmission it would suffer under any light save the brightest given that it had such crappy glass.

[SimilkameenSlayer]

I don't have first hand experience with low power scopes in the field at dawn and dusk because I don't use them to hunt with. But I do know the math involved. Exit pupil is aperture that light finally transmits through in your optics system. Its the same thing as your eyes dilating to respond to low light. A healthy human eye has an exit pupil that averages 7mm at full dilation, this diameter shrinks as you grow older and have poorer night vision. If your optics system could theoretically transmit 100% of the light, then it would not need an exit pupil any larger than your eyes (ie the extra light transmission is wasted because your eye is incapable of using anything above its fully dilated 7mm). Of course scopes don't transmit 100%, the best glass is around 97%, 95% is considered excellent and most scopes are around 90%. The general equation is, Objective Lens Diameter (mm) / Magnification = Exit Pupil (mm)

So a variable 1-4 x 20 mm objective will have an exit pupil of 20-5 depending on power. The low end has more than enough exit pupil and only suffers if you crank up the magnification, and even then its not bad if you consider the benefits of being able to mount the scope low and use it for the quick close range shots the scope was designed for. Used on 2 power it would still have the equal light transmission capability of a 3-9 X 30mm scope given that the two had equal quality of glass. As for your first hand field experience, I don't know how effectively the scope you used transmitted light. If you always had your scope cranked to 4 power and it only has 90% light transmission, then it would suffer in low light. But I would argue that if this were the case then you would probably be using the wrong scope for your situation and better suited to a 2-7 or a fixed 4. If it had lower than 90% transmission it would suffer under any light save the brightest given that it had such crappy glass.




thanks brian!

for the education ... i needed that.

:)

[brian]

I just wanted to clarify in a more simple way, If you take 4 theoretical scopes that all had the exact same quality of glass, a 2x20mm 3x30mm 4x40mm and a 5x50mm. All four would have the exact same exit pupil (10mm) and therefor transmit the exact same amount of light to the eye. The benefit of larger objectives is plain to see with higher magnifications. The draw backs to larger objectives is you cannot mount them as low, they are heavier, and they cost more to produce.

[Barracuda]

the only flaw is is that you want an excess of light to constrict the pupal to about 3mm for the best accuity. (it is best at bright light)
look on a bright day at an object then wait later in the day till its dark enough for your pupal to dialate to say 7 and you will see the dif it is also the light saturation of the exit pupal .

as for mounting low far to many scopes are mounted far to low with the stocks on modern rifles. the 7600 is a prime example unless you have a 760o patrol with no comb.

scope should be mounted where your eye sits not the lowest thing possible same reason one would get a stock fitted to the individual on an open sighted arm.

on today scopes the cost on a low count item is more then mass produced so a 32 or a 40mm lens of the same quality as a 20-22 lens is a moot point.

go to wholesale , or your favourite store and compare them side by side. I did the exact same thing as you did brian till i got one and it lost its luster real fast in wet coast dark conditions.

[uraarchr]

I have a Leupold 2-7X33 on my Marlin guide gun.Pretty quick target aquisition.I keep it on 2X mostly.I wanted a 1-4X or close to that but was on a budget so I got the 2-7X.So far it's handled all of the stout handloads I've put thru it.