New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Scope for Tikka T3 Lite 270 WSM
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Scope for Tikka T3 Lite 270 WSM

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 09:39
newbee View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/23/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Hello all!  I've been lurking for awhile, researching, trying to figure out what to put on my new rifle.  My budget is sub $500.  It will be used primarily for hunting deer, antelope and coyotes, maybe some groundhogs too.  Mostly 300 yards or less, possibly an occasional 400 yarder.

I'm strongly looking at the Bushnell 4200's.  My big question is this, is it worth my money to get the 4-16AO vs. the 3-9?  I've never had an AO before so I'm not sure if it's worth it.

I should also add that I haven't completely ruled out the Nikon Monarch with BDC.  Then I could get the 3-12SF.  The rainguard really has me leaning towards the Bushnell though.

Any and all thoughts/suggestions are appreciated, thanks!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 10:35
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
Originally posted by newbee newbee wrote:

Hello all!  I've been lurking for awhile, researching, trying to figure out what to put on my new rifle.  My budget is sub $500.  It will be used primarily for hunting deer, antelope and coyotes, maybe some groundhogs too.  Mostly 300 yards or less, possibly an occasional 400 yarder.

I'm strongly looking at the Bushnell 4200's.  My big question is this, is it worth my money to get the 4-16AO vs. the 3-9?  I've never had an AO before so I'm not sure if it's worth it.

I should also add that I haven't completely ruled out the Nikon Monarch with BDC.  Then I could get the 3-12SF.  The rainguard really has me leaning towards the Bushnell though.

Any and all thoughts/suggestions are appreciated, thanks!
..........It all depends. For overall usage a 4x16, which can be used on your 270, is a bit much, unless you`re going to be hunting groundhogs. or smaller varmits most of the time.
 
For deer and antelope out to 300-400 yards, nothing wrong with a 3x9, especially in a 4200. I nailed a 302 lb. hog @ 342 yards (1 shot) with my 300 WSM. My former 3x9 4200 was mounted on it at the time, which was sighted in @ a 300 yard zero. If I remember correctly, that scope was set on 8x for that shot!.....(You gotta love those ARC rangefinders!!)
 
For a longer range, flat shooting 270 WSM, some would prefer a higher variable than a 3x9. But then on the downside, you`ll get into more expense and more scope/rifle weight. With advantages gained, there are always dis-advantages as well to consider.
 
For the money though, the 3x9 4200 w/ Rainguard (great for any weather) @ only $249,, cannot be beat! Great scope for the bucs, with a great overall 3x9 hunting variable! Wink     
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 10:51
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 9510
+1 on the 3-9x 4200, outstanding scopes.  Plus with all the money you save you can buy ammo or spend it on a hunting trip. 

I have been hunting big game with 3-9x scopes for 15 years and have never felt under scoped for any shot I have taken.  I think it is a very good power range for most types of hunting.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 11:02
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7692
I have the same rifle (Tikka T3 lite in .270) and love it, very accurate, very fast-handling.

For the shooting you specify, I would go with the 3-9; it'll be smaller and lighter than the 4-16.  And adjustable objectives will only slow things down on a short- to mid-range rifle such as yours.

I have taken a hog or 2 with my Tikka .270 and they sometimes run, but not far.  It is a great gun.

Also, take the rings that came on the rifle and throw them away, don't keep them (you might be tempted to one day use them.)  they are pure garbage.  I recommend Talleys for Tikkas, the base is integral to the lower ring section and they are strong and well-made.

Enjoy!

(By the way, I mounted my Tikka with a Swaro 3.5-10 with their ballistic reticule - best hunting scope I own, no question - fits perfectly, and clear and bright as can be.)
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 16:04
newbee View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/23/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Thank you all for the responses.  I was really leaning towards that 3-9 so hearing some more experts recommend it eases my mind!

As far the rings, I will trash the Tikka's.  I was leaning toward the Leupold's, but I will check out the Tally's.  Got any links for some good ones for a Tikka? 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 17:37
martin3175 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Points: 3773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/23/2008 at 17:44
sholling View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: May/24/2008
Location: Hemet CA
Status: Offline
Points: 890
The Tikka rings work ok but I replaced mine with a DNZ (formerly DedNutz) combination rings and base. I like the look better and they don't need to be lapped.

This this the DNZ on one of my 10/22s...


This is a DNZ in my T3 Lite...


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/24/2008 at 08:17
newbee View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/23/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18
sholling, those look great and I think that's the style I want, thanks for the pics!

martin, I was hoping for something a little more specific. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/24/2008 at 08:44
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7176
Originally posted by sholling sholling wrote:

The Tikka rings work ok but I replaced mine with a DNZ (formerly DedNutz) combination rings and base. I like the look better and they don't need to be lapped.

This this the DNZ on one of my 10/22s...


This is a DNZ in my T3 Lite...


Those are both good looking setups Thanks for the pics. I have never seen these rings before but they look very strong. The stainless is a better than most color match with your combination.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/24/2008 at 20:48
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
Just picked up my Tikka T3 Lite yesterday, in .308.  Had it on lay-away after a Kahles scope buying binge.  Looked at Warne Steel Permanent Mounts, but they were too heavy and not needed for the caliber I have.  They were nice looking though.
 
I would go with the advice on the 3-9 Buschnell 4200.  The 4-16 is going to look too big on that rifle.  I am on the outer edge with my 3.5-10X50 Kahles KX, and some will think that is too big.
 
I will be using Talley Lightweight  Scope Mounts that are combination rings that sit right on top of the integral mount of the Tikka.  They are roughly 3.5 oz., and half the weight of the Warne steel mounts.
 
Good luck on your choice!
 
Mojo  
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 08:32
newbee View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/23/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18


Mojo, is that the mount you're talking about?  It looks good, but is it strong?  Anyone else using this type?

Also, I was under the impression that the Tikka's were dove-tail mounted.  Are they also drilled?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 08:40
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
Originally posted by newbee newbee wrote:



Mojo, is that the mount you're talking about?  It looks good, but is it strong?  Anyone else using this type?

Also, I was under the impression that the Tikka's were dove-tail mounted.  Are they also drilled?

 
Well, THAT sure looks strong to me!!  Bucky
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 09:30
sholling View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: May/24/2008
Location: Hemet CA
Status: Offline
Points: 890
Tikka T3s are both dove tailed and drilled and tapped. Another option is a Picatinny rail - EGW makes one for the Tikka. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 10:37
newbee View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/23/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Ah, I assume that the drill & tapped mounting is stronger then the dove-tail?  Or is that a Ford/Chevy debate?  Whacko
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 10:39
Ed Connelly View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
God of no Chihuahua

Joined: December/16/2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 24220
No.....that factory dovetails are plenty secure, too...............
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 10:46
sholling View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: May/24/2008
Location: Hemet CA
Status: Offline
Points: 890
Either works fine. I just think that bulky rings clamped to the receiver look tacky. My Stainless T3 Super Varmint came with a Picatinny rail, and I put a matte black DedNutz on my stainless T3 Lite and I think both look a lot better.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 15:51
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
[QUOTE=newbee]

Mojo, is that the mount you're talking about?  It looks good, but is it strong?  Anyone else using this type?

Also, I was under the impression that the Tikka's were dove-tail mounted.  Are they also drilled?
 


Negative on the above mount there newbee.  See Model # 940714  for the Talley.  These are two separate combination bases/rings.  The above model should be the medium height.  The heights are as follows:
 
Low = .5 inches, Medium = .6 inches, and High = .7   The base/ring is flat on the botton, not contoured like the one shown above.  The integral dovetail is NOT used.  The ring /base just sits on the top.  The screw holes match up with the existing predrilled holes in the integral mount on the rifle.  Weight of the two is about 4 oz.
 
As far as what is stronger?  What IS stronger?  Is it stronger to have bases with screws Plus rings with screws?  Or is it stronger with two, one piece combination base/rings?
 
Steel is stronger than aluminum, so it is likely that the Warne Steel Permanent Base/Rings that use the integral dovetail is the strongest unit.  But they are difficult to mount, and they weigh about 7 oz. 
 
The DNZ model is made of aluminum.  I am not aware of the weight. May or may not be as strong considering it has a common base.  Stronger than the Warne's?  I think that the response to that from those that have heavy magnum rifles along with the Warne's will be that those Warne's can take anything that the rifle cand dish out.  Tough as nails.
 
Do you need the steel mounts for your .270?  Probably not.  You would probably need to have a .300WSM or beyond to worry about that. 
 
There are trade-offs here. In my mind, you bought a rifle that weights 6 pounds 3 ounces.  Why go heavy when you can go light?   Just mho. 
 
BTW, my 50mm scope did not need the high rings.  Mediums will work, with room to spare for scope covers.
 
Mojo
 
Mojo        
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 16:27
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 12709


The two piece version.

Mojo's right, medium rings for 50mm objective. Just went through this with Talley fixed rings
for my 50mm scope.



Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 16:54
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
Originally posted by mike650 mike650 wrote:



The two piece version.

Mojo's right, medium rings for 50mm objective. Just went through this with Talley fixed rings
for my 50mm scope.



Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 16:59
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
[QUOTE=Mojo][QUOTE=mike650]

The two piece version.

Mojo's right, medium rings for 50mm objective. Just went through this with Talley fixed rings
for my 50mm scope.



[Com'on Mike.  Where's the mental telepathy between us?  How about osmosis?  Just a little mojo? 
 
Just sent my highs back and the mediums are on backorder!!  Oh well............
My measurements indicated that I could have gotten away with low rings, but then no room for scope caps, and only 1/64th clearance.
 
Mojo
 
 
 
  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/25/2008 at 20:33
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 12709
Originally posted by Mojo Mojo wrote:

[QUOTE=Mojo][QUOTE=mike650]

The two piece version.

Mojo's right, medium rings for 50mm objective. Just went through this with Talley fixed rings
for my 50mm scope.



[Com'on Mike.  Where's the mental telepathy between us?  How about osmosis?  Just a little mojo? 
 
Just sent my highs back and the mediums are on backorder!!  Oh well............
My measurements indicated that I could have gotten away with low rings, but then no room for scope caps, and only 1/64th clearance.
 
Mojo
 
 
 
  


Big%20Grin

After installing the medium rings I figured I could have maaaybe gotten away with lows as well!! Too close now to opening day deer season for me to test with a set of lows so I'm thinking I'll wait until after the season to revisit this. I will say that I love the Talleys and the the new 4a reticle!! Wink


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/26/2008 at 10:04
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
I am wondering if that 50 is your Z6 that you were referring to, Mike?  Yes I agree that the 4a is sure nice, and my 4a will be on the Tikka. Thanks for your posting of the pix of the Talley.
 
Each to his own, but I do not understand how these Talley scopemounts could be construed as "bulky".  There is sure a lot more mass to the DNZ scopemount than the Talley.  Coming in at less than 4 oz., I do not see that the DNZ could possibly weigh less either.
 
Mojo    
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/26/2008 at 10:10
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 12709
Originally posted by Mojo Mojo wrote:

I am wondering if that 50 is your Z6 that you were referring to, Mike?  Yes I agree that the 4a is sure nice, and my 4a will be on the Tikka. Thanks for your posting of the pix of the Talley.
 
Each to his own, but I do not understand how these Talley scopemounts could be construed as "bulky".  There is sure a lot more mass to the DNZ scopemount than the Talley.  Coming in at less than 4 oz., I do not see that the DNZ could possibly weigh less either.
 
Mojo    


10-4 on the scope.

I agree, get the Talleys and don't look back!! Great customer service as well!!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/26/2008 at 10:13
sholling View Drop Down
Optics Professional
Optics Professional
Avatar

Joined: May/24/2008
Location: Hemet CA
Status: Offline
Points: 890
Originally posted by Mojo Mojo wrote:

Each to his own, but I do not understand how these Talley scopemounts could be construed as "bulky".  There is sure a lot more mass to the DNZ scopemount than the Talley.  Coming in at less than 4 oz., I do not see that the DNZ could possibly weigh less either.
I just happen to have a DNZ sitting here and it comes in at just under 3oz. That's because it's machined from Aluminum not steel.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/26/2008 at 10:18
Mojo View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar
All Mojo

Joined: December/26/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 482
Thanks for the weight measurement for the DNZ.  I weighed the Talley's in the packaging.  BTW, the Talley's are not machined from steel either.  They are lightweight aluminum scopemounts. 
 
Now then, what makes them "bulky" compared to the Talley's?
 
Mojo 
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Scope for Tikka T3 Lite 270 WSM"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Scope mounts for Tikka T3 Lite cropslx Rifle Scopes 16
Tikka T3 Lite Stainless 6.5x55, Zeiss Scope greywolf Firearms For Sale 1
Scopes for Browning BAR 7mm-08 and Tikka T3 Lite 2 cmdc Rifle Scopes 11
Scope for a Tikka T3 lite 223 westside bengal Rifle Scopes 5
Suitable scope for a tikka t3 lite stainless .243 Alex12 Rifle Scopes 2
270 wsm vs 270 bee mtank Firearms 7
Scope help please - Tikka T3 Lite .308 dpm Rifle Scopes 12
Scope for Tikka T3 Lite .243 River Hill Rifle Scopes 25
Scope for a Tikka 300WSM T3 Lite tarboroheel1 Rifle Scopes 6 2/26/2007 12:42:41 PM
Scope Mounts for Tikka T3 Battue/Lite tturner6 Rifle Scopes 4


This page was generated in 0.562 seconds.