OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Rifle Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - New scope for a Weatherby Ultra Lightweight .280
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

New scope for a Weatherby Ultra Lightweight .280

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
richardca99 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: February/01/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote richardca99 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: New scope for a Weatherby Ultra Lightweight .280
    Posted: December/11/2008 at 15:38
Just ordered a Weatherby Ultra Lightweight in .280 Remington.  As it turns out, I've got two Zeiss Conquests to choose from for this rifle, a 3.5-10x44 and a 3-9x40.  They both came off of other guns, and I'm trying to decide which to put on this new rifle.
 
I'd lean toward the 3.5-10, but it's quite a bit heavier and bulkier than the 3-9, and I'm debating whether or not to stick with the lightweight theme and use the smaller scope.  Any thoughts between the two?  This will be primarily a deer rifle in the coastal plains of South Carolina (long shots), but I may occasionally use it for elk.
Back to Top
Palehorse View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: October/16/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 135
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Palehorse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 16:02
Weight wise, there is not enough difference to notice.  What reticle does each scope have?  You shooting bean field deer from a raised blind?
Back to Top
geezer View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: October/22/2008
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 133
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote geezer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 16:11

Weight is pretty much a wash between the two.  Unless I remember incorrectly, there is only around and ounce difference.  I'd go with the 3.5-10X44 - there really isn't a huge difference the two scopes for your application.  Am I missing something here?

Back to Top
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24225
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed Connelly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 16:12
I don't see the big difference....they're both excellent!! 
Be sure to visit,

THE ED SHOW

Ju Cucarachas!!!
Back to Top
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22034
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pyro6999 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 16:14
love the caliber! and you will also. if you use it for elk i would use the 3x9 if you use if for deer i would use the 3x9
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"
Back to Top
bricat View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: April/24/2007
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bricat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 17:14
Get Your Popcorn Ready
Back to Top
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Roy Finn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2008 at 17:42
The two scopes are very close power wise, but if it were me, I would throw the 3.5-10x44 on the 280. Make sure a gunsmith runs a reamer in that 280, you know Acklerize it.......
Back to Top
jetwrnch View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: July/03/2006
Location: Knoxville, TN
Status: Offline
Points: 294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jetwrnch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 08:56
JMHO, but I would opt for a lighter scope such as the Conquest 2.5-8x32 or one of the Leupold options. Such a light weight rifle begs for a light weight scope. You could sell one of the others to fund a new one. The 2.5 Conquest can be had for well under $400. Again, just my opinion.
Back to Top
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24225
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ed Connelly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 09:24
Oh for Pete's sake.............
Be sure to visit,

THE ED SHOW

Ju Cucarachas!!!
Back to Top
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 4155
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tip69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 10:09
I'm a 3-9X40 guy, especially with the Conquest, the plex in the 3-9 is awesome.  I'm not a fan of the 3.5-10X44.... really don't see the benefit!  I would do what jetwrnch suggested and trade the 44 in on a 32!
take em!
Back to Top
Big Squeeze View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
GOOGLE NINJA

Joined: August/30/2007
Location: Anaheim, Calif.
Status: Offline
Points: 3143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Big Squeeze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 10:59
Originally posted by richardca99 richardca99 wrote:

Just ordered a Weatherby Ultra Lightweight in .280 Remington.  As it turns out, I've got two Zeiss Conquests to choose from for this rifle, a 3.5-10x44 and a 3-9x40.  They both came off of other guns, and I'm trying to decide which to put on this new rifle.
 
I'd lean toward the 3.5-10, but it's quite a bit heavier and bulkier than the 3-9, and I'm debating whether or not to stick with the lightweight theme and use the smaller scope.  Any thoughts between the two?  This will be primarily a deer rifle in the coastal plains of South Carolina (long shots), but I may occasionally use it for elk.
................According to the specs, the 3-9x40`s listed weight is 15 oz, while the 3.5-10x44 is lists at 15.8 oz. Not much of a weight difference to even consider.
 
The difference in magnification is almost a wash there too. One would have no real advantage over the other................Flip a coin!
Back to Top
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 11814
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote supertool73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 11:35
The 44 will bring in more light and have a larger exit pupil.  Which means at equal powers it will have a larger eyebox which means it will be slightly faster because it will be less picky about absolute perfect eye placement.  There are always some advantages to a larger objective, but they just need to be weighted against the disadvantages.   In this case the 44 advantages probably out weight the bad, and if you don't mind the extra cost would probably be a better all around scope.
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."
Back to Top
Palehorse View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: October/16/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 135
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Palehorse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/12/2008 at 11:39
Quote
Not much of a weight difference to even consider.
In the interest of full disclosure, those numbers are from the SWFA website.  Zeiss's site (http://www.zeiss.com/sports) says the difference is ~2.25 ounces.
 
YMMV
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.215 seconds.