New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Scope Questions for a .270
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Scope Questions for a .270

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2 3>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/05/2007 at 14:45
tjsshl View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: October/05/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 9

Hello:

 

      I am a new poster and I am confused about what scope I should mount on a really beautiful custom .270 with 1" rings.  I have done some research and have read many posts, including the Scope Scale by Chris Farris and have narrowed it down, I think, to a few good choices.  Let me provide a few parameters that might help. 

 

     This will be primarily a deer and sheep rifle, maybe elk, but that would be an exception.  It should cover the widest range of uses possible.  The range is a little hard to guage, but I doubt there would be many extremely long shots (say 300+).  I am sure that the rifle can do it, but I'm not sure about myself.  I can see sticking with 130gr bullets, so there might not be a huge need to re-sight because of bullet changes.  I'd like to stay under $1000, and I don't have a problem with using Samplelist or Ebay.  In addition, I don't hunt every day or even every month.  I'm actually a terrible hunter and have only borrowed rifles in the past, but I would like to get better.  I am a highly experienced fly fisherman and would like to combine the two activities more often.  I have narrowed it down to a few that should work, I would also prefer to keep the scope objective at 42 or less.  I'd like to hear some thoughts about which of these might work out better for me. 

 

Kahles CL 2-7 X 36

Kahles CL 3-9 X 42

Swarovski AV 3-9 X 36

Schmidt & Bender 4x36 Fixed

 

I'm not quite sure what the multi-zero function is on the Kahles.  Is this something that would be important to have?  Also is the choice in reticle just a personal preference or is there some benefit to one over the other?  Will there like be any problems with the above scopes fitting properly with the long action?

 

Thanks for the help,

Tom

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/05/2007 at 14:59
ND2000 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/29/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 308

Tjsshl -

 

Welcome.  I think you can narrow this down to scopes fairly quickly.  You mention you want the scope to cover the widest range of uses possible.  If that is the case, you can take the S&B 4x36 fixed off your list.  Optics are wonderful but the fixed power would be limiting for you beyond 125-150 yards or so.

 

Kahles is owned by Swarovski, so the remaining [3] all benefit from excellent customer services.  Kahles, IMO, makes better scopes (with the exception of the Swarovski Z6).  The CL is better than the AV.  As a result, I think this gets down to the Kahles scopes.  If you are not going to shoot beyond 300 yards, I would probably recommend the 2-7x36, particularly if you want a smaller objective lens.  An additional advantage of the smaller objective is you can mount the rifle lower to the gun, which is more comfortable and generally results in more accurate shots, all else equal.

 

To answer your question, the Multi-Zero is pretty cool.  It allows you to set rifle to hit dead-on (your Zero) at up to [5] different distances.  I think this is great for target shooting and practice, but I think for deer/sheep hunting it may not be best because all the shots are closer range so you can hold in the center of the back and make the shot regardless of distance.  Further, it could be a little too much screwing around when the moment of truth arrives.

 

You cannot make a bad decision with either Kahles, based on your needs.  In the interest of full disclosure, I own a 3-9x42 CL and love it.  It sits on my primary hunting rifle.

 

ND2000

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/05/2007 at 14:59
silver View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: November/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2291

 

I'd skip the multi-zero.  I like the 4a reticle as there is not as much of the post blocking my view. If it were my money, the Kahles 3x9 with a 4a.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/05/2007 at 18:54
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
kahles good stuff enough said
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/05/2007 at 19:22
RONK View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3199

  It is readily apparent that you have already done your homework. All of your choices would be excellent  for your needs as long as you choose a good hunting reticle. As  mentioned, the 4A would be great. A simple crosshair would often be too hard to pick up against brush in the deer woods, although it may be okay for open country sheep.( Rocky Mountain bighorns, Stone/ Dall's ?)

  I sometimes seem to be the lone voice in the wilderness advocating lower-end magnification on hunting rifles . A 3-9 power is okay if you think you may occasionally shoot at coyotes 500 yards away or use it for prairie dogs, but the fact is that you can kill any big game in the world with a 4x or even a 2.5x fixed power out to 300-400 plus yards easily if you have good quality optics on a suitable rifle. I have to admit though, that the 2-7 and 3-9 variables are nice for quickly judging trophy quality if you happen to forget your binoculars and spotting scope.

 If you aren't planning on shooting at big game beyond 300 yards, ( wise and prudent, BTW), just zero it in to strike about 3 inches high at 100 yards and you will be able to punch through the ribs of anything you're considering hunting with your .270 out to 300 yards or so, with a center-chest hold, and without holding over or dialing elevation. You probably don't need the Multi-Zero feature for what you are doing.

  Also, for elk,as well as big rams, you really need to be using one of the tough, super premium bullets to ensure a clean kill, especially with 130s.

 Regardless of what scope you get, just make sure you budget for plenty of ammo, and plan to practice your shooting a LOT. You will soon cease to be a "terrible hunter" and will eventually sell your flyfishing equipment...

 



Edited by RONK
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/06/2007 at 11:33
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7694
Having not owned a Kahles, I cannot say from experience what it is better than or not as good as; however, I own a Tikka .270, I shoot 130-grain rounds at hogs and deer, And I COULD NOT be happier with my Swarovski American 3-10x42 with ballistic plex.



If you want to save a few $$, they have the 4a or plex versions on the sample list.

Again, having not owned a Kahles, I cannot say.  I do own the Swaro, I will buy more Swaro Americans, I am extremely pleased with the scope.  And the Swao with ballistic reticule will include a decent drop scale for your reticule and your projectile.

Others really like the Kahles, I really like the Swaro, you won't go wrong with either.




Edited by Rancid Coolaid
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/06/2007 at 12:46
Duce View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: September/19/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1231

I have a swaro that I have had a  long time still an excellent scope, if the money is not a consideration my first choice would be a swaro Z6

http://www.swfa.com/pc-8658-1412-swarovski-2-12x50-z6i-30mm- riflescope.aspx

or

http://www.swfa.com/pc-8642-1413-swarovski-17-10x42-z6-swaro vski-rail-30mm-riflescope.aspx

 

or  http://www.swfa.com/pc-8642-1413-swarovski-17-10x42-z6-swaro vski-rail-30mm-riflescope.aspx

 

or  http://www.swfa.com/pc-8638-978-swarovski-17-10x42-z6-30mm-r iflescope.aspx

 

some very nice light crisp clear hunting scopes

 

Duce

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 09:52
Dale Clifford View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight


Joined: July/04/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5087
sssh dont use the 270 word around here, if it comes up use 6.8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 11:51
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
6.8 wont fool me either
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 13:19
RONK View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: April/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3199

Originally posted by Dale Clifford Dale Clifford wrote:

sssh dont use the 270 word around here, if it comes up use 6.8
 
 Oh really???      Hold my beer and watch this....

 

 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 .................

                           

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 15:39
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
ah thanks i needed one
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 15:54
Optimus Prime View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar
RMS Jr.

Joined: October/07/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 108

So let me get this straight.....this forum hates .270's and Leupolds???  

I've got a LOT of work to do around here it would seem......... 

 

This will only hurt for a little while......

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 16:16
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7694
Can't speak for the forum: I really like my .270.  I really don't like Leupold.  Both are based on extensive experience, and your words can't change my experiences.

But that never stopped anyone before.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 16:34
Optimus Prime View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar
RMS Jr.

Joined: October/07/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 108

Resistance is futile, Rancid Coolaid!! 

You WILL assimilate into the Leupold Collective!!   

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 17:14
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
Originally posted by Optimus Prime Optimus Prime wrote:

So let me get this straight.....this forum hates .270's and Leupolds???  

I've got a LOT of work to do around here it would seem......... 

 

This will only hurt for a little while......

 

 

no just some of us feel that way, leupold makes a fine product just like the .270 if your into over-rated products!

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 17:18
Optimus Prime View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar
RMS Jr.

Joined: October/07/2007
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 108

Hey pyro, you ever hear of a guy named Jack O'Connor??

He killed LOTS of critters with his trusty .270....Or is that just a nasty rumor??   

 

Boys, this lesson will hurt a lot less if you'll just let it happen......

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 17:23
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
yeah i know who he is, if it werent for him nobody else on this planet would have used that over rated pos caliber.  if he would have used the 250-300 savage imagine how popular it would be today, the 25-06 wouldnt even exsist. there is a reason why people in here are some of the best on the net, they are subjective and unbiased for the most part, and also willing to go against the grain to prove a point the .270 isnt all that and never will be, anything the .270 will do the .280 and the 30-06 will do better and have a lot more versitilty to boot, leupold floods the market with so much product its almost as bad as computer software, most stuff is microsoft oriented and leupold has by far the biggest selection of options, does that make them better, no way i would take a zeiss zwaro kahles s&b ior  over a leupold any day of  the week.

Edited by pyro6999
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 18:50
silver View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: November/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2291

 

Yo, leupold man, you have to see us before we see you and that ain't a problem on our end.

 

What's you got that we ain't seen before

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 19:03
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
O'Connor stated on more than one occasion that the 30/06 was a more "versatile" round. That said, for all practical purposes, the 270, 280 and 06 are all but interchangeable for pratical field purposes.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 19:16
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 14312
Originally posted by RONK RONK wrote:

   I sometimes seem to be the lone voice in the wilderness advocating lower-end magnification on hunting rifles . A 3-9 power is okay if you think you may occasionally shoot at coyotes 500 yards away or use it for prairie dogs, but the fact is that you can kill any big game in the world with a 4x or even a 2.5x fixed power out to 300-400 plus yards easily if you have good quality optics on a suitable rifle. I have to admit though, that the 2-7 and 3-9 variables are nice for quickly judging trophy quality if you happen to forget your binoculars and spotting scope.

 

+1 on the lower magnification scopes.  My favorite big game hunting scopes happen to be 1.5-6X, 2-7X, and 2.5-10X.  OK, the 2.5-10X isn't low power on the high end, but certainly on the low end, and I think the 2.5-10X power range is perhaps the most versatile hunting variable for use in a wide variety of terrain and conditions if you hunt both thick woods and wide open terrain with the same rifle.  Truthfully, a good 1.5-6X or 2-7X will work very well for at least 75% of all big game hunting in most places and combines excellent FOV for close quarters shooting, good light transmission, generally compact size, and decent magnification on the high end for longer shots.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 20:45
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024

Originally posted by Roy Finn Roy Finn wrote:

O'Connor stated on more than one occasion that the 30/06 was a more "versatile" round. That said, for all practical purposes, the 270, 280 and 06 are all but interchangeable for pratical field purposes.

i would agree with that under certain circumstances.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 21:14
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
I am not trying to imply that they are equal, only that given they share realatively the same powder capacity there would be ltitle difference on deer sized game. If Elk/Moose were my main targets I would to go up a notch to the 300 mags even though the 06 would do fine with good bullets. On the other hand, if deer and pronghorn were on the menu, I would probably go with something along the lines of a 25/06 with the 270 being a better choice than a 06 shooting some what flatter. I just don't think the 06 hits significantly harder than a 270 or 280 could nor do I feel the 270 shoots significantly flatter than a 06.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 21:21
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
true but where the .280 and 30-06 have an advantage is in the versatility area, way more choices of bullet weights in 7mm and .308 than in 6.8mm, elk and moose die every year to the 25-06 and every other member of that family all the way up to the .338-06 while nobody on earth would be able to really tell the difference when they squeeze the trigger on paper the differences are there even if they are very small one still has to acknowledge they exsist. hell between me and my dad there have been many elk taken with a 150 sierra pro hunter with the 30-06 at various ranges.not that any of this has to do with the original question,
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 21:39
Roy Finn View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Steiner Junkie

Joined: April/05/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4856
Which is the reason why I own 3, 06's and a 280 Ackley. The differences are academic and not really worth arguing over. More importantly, I don't like to hijack threads.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: October/07/2007 at 21:41
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
agreed
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2 3>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Scope Questions for a .270"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Scope for Ruger .270 rockhound Rifle Scopes 6
.270 scope Hill Country shooter Rifle Scopes 7
Need scope suggestions for .270 rifle sbhall Rifle Scopes 14
Custom .270 with Kahles Scope little cleo Firearms For Sale 36
Scope for Remington 700 .270 cdj588 Rifle Scopes 27
Scope for new .270 WSM trigger29 Rifle Scopes 5 10/1/2007 6:39:59 AM
.270 scope Erich10931 Rifle Scopes 5
Youth Scope .270 Erich10931 Rifle Scopes 19
Scope on A-bolt .270 cottonpicker Rifle Scopes 5 1/7/2007 10:25:02 AM
.270 WSM Scope Erich10931 Varmint Scopes 7 8/6/2007 6:29:08 PM


This page was generated in 0.265 seconds.