New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - My Wish List: 1.5-9x34x30mm
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

My Wish List: 1.5-9x34x30mm

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 14:50
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
With all the new "6X" and "6.5X" magnification scopes coming out, I have wondered why no manufacturer has thought to produce a 1.5-9x variable. I mean a 1.5-5x is sort of a classic scope for a brush gun, and the 3-9x is the classic for an all-around rig. A 1.5-9 would combine the two, a very versatile proposition.
 
I've seen the 1.25-8x 6500 and the 2-12x "Six X" and a few others. I'd love to have that Bushnell on my .338 Federal and the Burris on my new .270 Win  ...but I'd like to have a 1.5-9x on both even more.
 
So, why don't the manufacturers combine these two classic magnification ranges with their newfangled, high magnification range scopes? One of these with a 30mm tube and a 32-36mm objective would make a nice, compact, ultra-versatile scope that would suit a wide range of hunting applications.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 15:02
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Is there a whole lot of difference between 1.25-8x32 and 1.5-9x32?

Can you immediately tell the difference (without looking at the actual setting) between 8x and 9x?  Especially with a smallish objective lens, like the 32mm.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 16:15
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Is there a whole lot of difference between 1.25-8x32 and 1.5-9x32?

Can you immediately tell the difference (without looking at the actual setting) between 8x and 9x?  Especially with a smallish objective lens, like the 32mm.

ILya
Not much difference at all. Certainly none my untrained eye can discern.
 
I'm just thinking with my marketing mind, which is trained. It would seem 1.5x, which is a very common low setting for low-power variables and 9x, which is a very common setting for all-around variables would seem to be a good match. Hunters have historically shown with their dollars they are very comfortable with these power settings...and it just makes sense to me to combine the two.
 
I'm so comfortable with both settings, I'd buy a 1.5-9x over a 1.25-8x or a 2-10x...all things being equal. Like a guy who loves owning and shooting a.270 (or .30-06 or 7mm-08, etc), there's something to be said for familiarity and comfort.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 16:21
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
Seattle................For any real practical hunting purpose, with maybe the exception of a little more FOV on the low power for some brush hunting, there wouldn`t be too much of a difference between a 1.5x9, a 1.25x8 6500 vs a 2.5x8.
 
For your 338 Federal, a 1.25x or a 1.5x on the low end is great for the shorter brush hunting, but an 8x or 9x (although CAN be used) on the high end for hunting purposes, is a `lil overscopin imo for the 338 Federal, which is a short, moderate to medium range big game hunting cartridge.
 
For a 338 Fed, the best all-around magnifications imo, would be along the lines of a 1.75-6x32 max or the 1.5-5x20, both of which have enough magnification to comfortably view and kill deer sized game or larger within any feasible hunting distances for any 338 Federal rifle. If you need the extra magnification for some longer ranged paper punching and scoring, that may be a little different story
 
For your 270 on the other hand, an 8x to 9 or 10x on the high end, are better matches for that cartridge`s longer ranged flatter shooting capabilities.  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 16:26
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Originally posted by seattlesetters seattlesetters wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Is there a whole lot of difference between 1.25-8x32 and 1.5-9x32?

Can you immediately tell the difference (without looking at the actual setting) between 8x and 9x?  Especially with a smallish objective lens, like the 32mm.

ILya
Not much difference at all. Certainly none my untrained eye can discern.
 
I'm just thinking with my marketing mind, which is trained. It would seem 1.5x, which is a very common low setting for low-power variables and 9x, which is a very common setting for all-around variables would seem to be a good match. Hunters have historically shown with their dollars they are very comfortable with these power settings...and it just makes sense to me to combine the two.
 
I'm so comfortable with both settings, I'd buy a 1.5-9x over a 1.25-8x or a 2-10x...all things being equal. Like a guy who loves owning and shooting a.270 (or .30-06 or 7mm-08, etc), there's something to be said for familiarity and comfort.


Marketing rationale certainly depends on how you look at it.

For example, the mainstay of Bushnell Elite 4200 line was always the 2.5-10x40.  WIth the Elite 6500, Bushnell went ahead and made a 2.5-16x42 and said: here is an upgrade for you; it is about the same size and weight, except you have more magnification and more eye relief.  Had they chosen to make a 1.6-10x42 they would have to say: you pay a little more for a little less magnification and more field of view at the low end.  However, when dealing with an average hunter, it is much easier to sell "16x vs 10x" than "1.6x vs 2.5x".  "More" always sounds better than "less".

With the 1.25-8x32, it is even more challenging.  Tweener scopes (I did a writeup on these a little while back) are notoriously hard to market.  Spiritually, it is a replacement for the now defunct Elite 4200 1.5-6x36, but Bushnell would not dare to offer it as an alternative to their bread and butter scopes with 42mm objectives.

Personally, I am surprised that they did not make a straight tubes 1-6.5x insted (that is what they originally promised).  Perhaps that is still coming, and that would make for a nice Swaro Z6 on a budget.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 16:29
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
I'm actually looking very closely at the 1.25-8x32 6500. In fact, if the darn thing was available with a 4a reticle, I'd probably plunk down the cash.
 
I get the offering "more" being the thought, but I would be SO comfortable with a 1.5-9x34, or so.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 16:47
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

Seattle................For any real practical hunting purpose, with maybe the exception of a little more FOV on the low power for some brush hunting, there wouldn`t be too much of a difference between a 1.5x9, a 1.25x8 6500 vs a 2.5x8.
 
For your 338 Federal, a 1.25x or a 1.5x on the low end is great for the shorter brush hunting, but an 8x or 9x (although CAN be used) on the high end for hunting purposes, is a `lil overscopin imo for the 338 Federal, which is a short, moderate to medium range big game hunting cartridge.
 
For a 338 Fed, the best all-around magnifications imo, would be along the lines of a 1.75-6x32 max or the 1.5-5x20, both of which have enough magnification to comfortably view and kill deer sized game or larger within any feasible hunting distances for any 338 Federal rifle. If you need the extra magnification for some longer ranged paper punching and scoring, that may be a little different story
 
For your 270 on the other hand, an 8x to 9 or 10x on the high end, are better matches for that cartridge`s longer ranged flatter shooting capabilities.  
Interesting stats on the .338 Federal:
With a 200gr bullet, it brings more energy to the party than a 180gr factory .30-06 at all ranges out to and a little past 400 yards, all the while being only 1.8" lower at 400 yards than the .30-06 165gr load
The Fed launches a 210gr, .338cal bullet at exactly the same MV as the .338 Win Mag launches a 250gr, .338cal bullet.
 
I think 7 or 8x will be fine with the Fed, as I will be using it to punch some targets out to 500 yards.
 
Hopefully I'll get to take a few game animals, as well (much closer than that, hopefully). However, I may take a crack out to 400 if the set up was right and I get in enough paractice. the ballistics certainly indicate it will do the job.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 17:17
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4613
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

  Had they chosen to make a 1.6-10x42 they would have to say: you pay a little more for a little less magnification and more field of view at the low end.  However, when dealing with an average hunter, it is much easier to sell "16x vs 10x" than "1.6x vs 2.5x".


That 16X is to help make a more accurate gut shot as the animal's rump fills the entire FOV @ 50 yards.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 17:28
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
Yep! They are close enough in down range comparisons as you say. And if you`re paper punching at longer ranges, the higher mags such as 7x to 8x is fine.
 
Aside from paper punching though, 5x to 6x on the high end, will still get your game comfortably at 400-500 yards from deer sized animals and larger assuming one`s eyes are normal or close to normal.
 
However. Although capable at longer distances, if I were hunting anything with a 338 Federal, I`d get closer if possible to within 400 yards and I`d certainly know my bullet`s velocity, BC and trajectory based on my scope`s zero. For larger game like elk and moose, 300 yards or less is better.  
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 17:35
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
BTW!.................FWIW! In case you have not seen this, here is what Boddington had to say about the 338 Federal in this video while bangin at some steel plates.
 
"shootingtimes.com"..........click "view all" in the video section........then click on "cartridges" (upper right)........scroll to find "338 Federal Rifle Cartridge" 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 17:39
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

Yep! They are close enough in down range comparisons as you say. And if you`re paper punching at longer ranges, the higher mags such as 7x to 8x is fine.
 
Aside from paper punching though, 5x to 6x on the high end, will still get your game comfortably at 400-500 yards from deer sized animals and larger assuming one`s eyes are normal or close to normal.
 
However. Although capable at longer distances, if I were hunting anything with a 338 Federal, I`d get closer if possible to within 400 yards and I`d certainly know my bullet`s velocity, BC and trajectory based on my scope`s zero. For larger game like elk and moose, 300 yards or less is better.
 
Totally agree. I like to get as close as I can. I've only shot at animals at the 400 yard range with my trusty .270 Wby Mag....and I was very familiar with that rifle and shooting it at long range. It would take me years to get anywhere near that comfortable with a new rifle, and if it didn't shoot as flat as that Weatherby, I may never get that comfortable.
 
I think lots of folks have the .338 Federal pegged as a "brush cartridge" like the 30-30. In reality, it's trajectory is essentially the same as a .30-06 or .308 Win shooting factory 165-180gr bullets, while the Fed is pushing 180-210gr bullets.
 
It's closest competitor in terms of energy and velocity is probably another wildcat-based cartridge, the .338-06. The Fed just kicks a lot less. :-)
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 17:56
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
That happens to be the great versatility and beauty of the 338 Federal. It is a shorter ranged brush cartridge and can be a longer ranged open plains cartridge too.
 
And if someone wanted a little more punch, the 20" 338 RCM does the same thing with more speed potential.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 18:15
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

That happens to be the great versatility and beauty of the 338 Federal. It is a shorter ranged brush cartridge and can be a longer ranged open plains cartridge too.
 
And if someone wanted a little more punch, the 20" 338 RCM does the same thing with more speed potential.
But it hurts! I've got two bolts and a screw in my right shoulder (it has been reconstructed twice), and the screw is positioned right on the point of the head of the humerus, facing forward...right where the butt of a rifle snugs up.
 
The maximum kick I can take is the .30-06 class cartridges (7mm Rem Mag, .270 WSM, .270 and 7mm Wby Mag, .308 Win, .338 Fed) that generate around 20 ft lbs of recoil. Anything more, and I pay for a session at the range for a couple of weeks.
 
That's why I am excited about the Fed. It gives a recoil-sensitive bloke like me a real slugger to play with.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 18:31
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
Uh oh! Sorry to read about your shoulder!......... Have you tried wearing a well padded shooting vest on the range or when hunting?? Is there a good 1" thick spongy and softer recoil pad on your rifle`s butt? Will those two together just maybe cut down the felt recoil enough for your shoulder if over 20-25 lbs in recoil? Got a lead sled for the bench?
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 18:48
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
I'd like to get all that stuff, but a guy's gotta shoot (and hunt) in the meantime.
 
In all honesty, having a bad shoulder has made me rethink things. I used to have a .338 Win Mag, .300 Wby Mag, etc. and found they didn't kill any better than my .270 Wby Mag. They just made a bunch more noise and kicked a lot harder and required a lot of "aftermarket" items to make them tolerable.
 
I'd just as soon spend the extra cash from not purchasing such items on things like better scopes, out-of-state licenses and tags, practice ammo and good Scotch.
 
I have recently gotten back into hunting since the last shoulder reconstruction has left me well enough to give it a try. I've selected the .270 Win and .338 Federal to do all my hunting. Both are great all-around cartridges (the .270 proven, the Fed on paper, at least) that should allow me to hunt all non-dagnerous game anywhere in the  world.
 
I think I'm done with big recoiling cartridges. I've found them only marginally more effective than cartridges that are much more pleasant to shoot, and more than effective enough.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 19:06
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
Oh! So I take it then, you wouldn`t like to try my `lil 375 Ruger??........Just kiddin!Clown
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 19:07
seattlesetters View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/20/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 136
Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

Oh! So I take it then, you wouldn`t like to try my `lil 375 Ruger??........Just kiddin!Clown
Ouch! I'd take it to Africa, though!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/28/2009 at 23:30
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
Originally posted by seattlesetters seattlesetters wrote:

Originally posted by Big Squeeze Big Squeeze wrote:

Oh! So I take it then, you wouldn`t like to try my `lil 375 Ruger??........Just kiddin!Clown
Ouch! I'd take it to Africa, though!
..............Hey! But we do have some big bears, bison and moose over here. I plan on later introducing them to a 375.  
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "My Wish List: 1.5-9x34x30mm"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Leupold VX6 1-6 wish list? ccoker Tactical Scopes 4
Wish to buy a New Scope, help??? boxstereye Tactical Scopes 5
Samplelist.com - Over 500+ Newly Listed Demo Items Skylar McMahon Check Here Often 0
Concerns about sample list scopes Whale Rifle Scopes 16
New eBay auctions listed and Live! Skylar McMahon SWFA's Auctions 1
Several new auctions listed. Skylar McMahon SWFA's Auctions 2
SWFA 5-20x50 HD Sample List Demo B in the wild castlebravo Tactical Scopes 1
SWFA and the sample list JimFromTN Rifle Scopes 4
Definitive list of low powered tactical scopes RWBlue Tactical Scopes 25
Scope Short List, Help!! Gaijin2011 Rifle Scopes 3


This page was generated in 0.234 seconds.