Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Scope for a T/C Pro Hunter, 300 Win. Mag. |
Post Reply |
Author | |||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
Optics GrassHopper Joined: October/14/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: October/15/2007 at 00:20 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Hello, I hope to get some advice. My T/C will be used primaraly as my elk rifle. I hunt in utah,& wyo. There's lots of differnt terrain so I would like something versitle enough for both long and short range. My budget is around $600.00. I have an intrest in the Leupold VX-II 4-12x40 A/O but after reading some of the forums I'm not sure of my choice. I'm not looking for a lot of gagets to get confused with, just a good dependable scope thats worth the the money spent. I'm not very familier with most of the scopes on the market and don't want to just pay for a name. Thanks for any help. ddg50
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Welcome to The OT!!
What do you consider "long range"?? |
|||||||||||||||||||||
TheDrakeTaker
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/21/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 201 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Give some thought to a Kahles KX.
http://www.swfa.com/pc-8607-1219-kahles-3-9x42-helia-kx-rifl escope.aspx for $658 Or get a Kahles AH off the sample list for $450. The KX is the new name for the AH, as far as I know the two scopes are pretty much the same. The AMV coating is used on all of Kahles scopes. You will not be disappointed with a Kahles. I have a C 3-12X56 and a CL 4-12X52 and they are absolutely awesome. You cannot tell a difference in a Kahles and a Zeiss or Swaro. These are the big three of scopes in my opinion. Forget about Leupold, go for a Kahles. The KX and AH are better scopes than the American made Zeiss and Swaros. Edited by TheDrakeTaker |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
Optics GrassHopper Joined: October/14/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
To me long range would be about 400 yds.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
TheDrakeTaker
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/21/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 201 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
You might want to consider going for a Kahles CL off the sample list then. You can get one for around $700 I think in a 4-12X52. You may like having the higher magnification. I know I do. My Helia C 3-12X56 is on my 300 WM, it's perfect for it. Good luck.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ND2000
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/29/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50 -
+1 on DrakeTaker regarding Kahles. There is not a better deal on the market for high-end scopes than what can be found on the SampleList right now. If you don't plan on shooting beyond 400 yards, I would go with something (CL, KX or AH) in 3-9x40. 9x is plenty of power out to 400 and it will sit lower on your gun, thereby not throwing off the balance of the gun as much, they are lighter, and also more comfortable to look through.
Other good options in the $600 price range include a Zeiss Conquest, also a great value new or used.
ND2000 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
You either get what you pay for or what you deserve.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Urimaginaryfrnd
MODERATOR Resident Redneck Joined: June/20/2005 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 14964 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
I wont argue that Kahles is better glass we know it is but that becomes worthless without a reticle that allows for known hold over or tactical knobs to dial in correction for trajectory. I say step up to a Leupold VXIII with a Boone and Crocket Reticle just remember that range compensating reticles work only at the highest power as far as hold over marks being accurate representations of where the bullet will strike at the given distances.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do". Bobby Paul Doherty Texas Ranger |
|||||||||||||||||||||
ND2000
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/29/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50 -
Urimaginaryfriend brings up some good points, but based on your initial comments I don't think they apply to you. For instance, you mention that you don't want a lot of gadgets to confused with and a scope that is worth the $$$ spent. To me, this would mean you don't want to be fooling around with side focus and range compensating recticles that work only at the highest power.
Also, for shooting Elk, with a properly zeroed rifle (say, 3-4 inches high at 100 yards), you can shoot out to 350 yards without even worrying about holdover because the vitals are so large.
ND2000 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
You either get what you pay for or what you deserve.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
TheDrakeTaker
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/21/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 201 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
A holdover reticle is useless if you can't see what you're shooting at because your glass is inferior. If you want to be able to have multiple zeros get a Kahles CL multizer0. It will allow you to set 5 different zeros and switch between them quickly and easily. ND2000 brings up a good point about the vitals being so large on an elk, with a 300 WM you will be able to shoot from 100-300 easily without any holdovers, 400 you will need to practice some to know how high to aim. My point is, at least to me, glass is much more important on a hunting rifle than a reticle with holdovers. That's why I got a Kahles with multizer0 so that I can have zeros set up wherever I want.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
pyro6999
Optics Retard OT TITAN Joined: December/22/2006 Location: North Dakota Status: Offline Points: 22034 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
elk at 400 yds is very do-able @ 9x i have always hunted elk with a 3x9 when i lived in wyoming most people did. an elk is a big critter, not like trying to hit a pdog @ 400yds, with the 300, 2inches high @ 100yds should be almost dead on at 300yds.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
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" |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
I agree with pyro here in that you should be able to accomplish your goal with a 9x or 10x power scope at the top end of a variable. Once you get over 10x in a scope you will need an AO or side parallax adjustment which has more negatives than positives for big game hunting. Afterall, your hunting an animal that's the size of a small Jeep.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
Optics GrassHopper Joined: October/14/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Thanks for all the good advice. After reading your opinions and looking on the sample list I believe the Kahles is the one I prefer. Now the question is the KX or the CL? Which ever one I get it will be the 3-9x40 or 42. Is the differance between them the side focus only? Or is the CL an all around better scope(optics,etc.)?
Thanks again, ddg50 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
TheDrakeTaker
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/21/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 201 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
The scopes are pretty much the same, all I have heard is that the CL has slightly better resolution. You will not be disappointed with either, but I believe the CL is slightly better. Consider a #4 reticle, it is very easy to see in low light. I agree with the above statements about parallax adjustment on a hunting rifle. It is not needed, chances are it will always be on the wrong setting when you shoot at game since we all know how fast things happen. Good luck.
Edited by TheDrakeTaker |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
Optics GrassHopper Joined: October/14/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Thanks again for all the advice. This is a great forum!
ddg50 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
ddg50
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
DEAD_BEAT
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/10/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 27 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
both my elk rifles have a 3.5 x 10 on them both are VX 3 one has the fine duplex one has the boone and crockette reticle for elk 10 would be enough if you want moore look at the 4.5 x 14 but to me its a bit much
JIM |
|||||||||||||||||||||
JIM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
cajunhunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/08/2007 Status: Offline Points: 133 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
From what I know the KX is the same as the cl but without multizero. It has the oversized ocular. I just got the kx 3.5-10x50 with ballistic reticle for my 300wsm. It is very light and fits the gun perfect.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |