Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Scope for Tikka T3 Lite 270 WSM |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
newbee
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/23/2008 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: July/23/2008 at 09:39 |
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! |
|
Big Squeeze
Optics Master Extraordinaire GOOGLE NINJA Joined: August/30/2007 Location: Anaheim, Calif. Status: Offline Points: 3143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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!
|
|
supertool73
Optics God Superstool Joined: January/03/2008 Status: Offline Points: 11814 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
+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. |
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.) |
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
newbee
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/23/2008 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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? |
|
martin3175
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: January/19/2005 Location: Maryland Status: Offline Points: 3773 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
sholling
Optics Professional Joined: May/24/2008 Location: Hemet CA Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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... |
|
NRA, SAF, & CRPA life member
Member Madison Society & Revolutionary War Veteran Association (Project Appleseed) Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill. ;) |
|
newbee
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/23/2008 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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. |
|
3_tens
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/08/2007 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.
|
|
Folks ain't got a sense of humor no more. They don't laugh they just get sore.
Need to follow the rules. Just hard to determine which set of rules to follow Now the rules have changed again. |
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 482 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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
|
|
MOJO
|
|
newbee
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/23/2008 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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? |
|
Ed Connelly
Optics Retard God of no Chihuahua Joined: December/16/2007 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 24225 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well, THAT sure looks strong to me!!
|
|
sholling
Optics Professional Joined: May/24/2008 Location: Hemet CA Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Tikka T3s are both dove tailed and drilled and tapped. Another option is a Picatinny rail - EGW makes one for the Tikka.
|
|
NRA, SAF, & CRPA life member
Member Madison Society & Revolutionary War Veteran Association (Project Appleseed) Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill. ;) |
|
newbee
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/23/2008 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ah, I assume that the drill & tapped mounting is stronger then the dove-tail? Or is that a Ford/Chevy debate?
|
|
Ed Connelly
Optics Retard God of no Chihuahua Joined: December/16/2007 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 24225 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
No.....that factory dovetails are plenty secure, too...............
|
|
sholling
Optics Professional Joined: May/24/2008 Location: Hemet CA Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
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.
|
|
NRA, SAF, & CRPA life member
Member Madison Society & Revolutionary War Veteran Association (Project Appleseed) Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill. ;) |
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 482 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
[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
|
|
MOJO
|
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14560 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The two piece version. Mojo's right, medium rings for 50mm objective. Just went through this with Talley fixed rings for my 50mm scope. |
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 482 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
MOJO
|
|
Mojo
Optics Journeyman All Mojo Joined: December/26/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 482 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
[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
|
|
MOJO
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
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 |