Understanding Scopes for Newbie

[thunderbird101]

I will admit, I am a complete Newbie when it comes to scopes! I have an SKS that I will be using for deer hunting and I want to put a scope on it.

-can someone explain what the numbers on the scope represent? For instance, I found 1 scope online labeled as
3-9x42 NcSTAR Compact Rifle Scope

-I was told that the amount of light that the scope allows in is VERY important, especially at dusk. How can I tell how much light the scope allows in? I'm guessing it has to do w/ those numbers above?

-Can anyone recommend a decent/relatively cheap scope for the SKS for deer hunting?

Thanks a LOT!!!!

[Art Eatman]

3X = magnification of 3:1 over the nekkid eyebone. 9X = nine times one's eyeball power.

42 is the diameter in millimeters of the objective lens. That's the one at the front of the scope.

Eatman family experience is that 3X and 4X is adequate magnification on out to 450 and 500 yards on Bambi, which is way beyond the practical use of the 7.62x39 cartridge.

I would suggest something like the Weaver K4 or equivalent for an SKS. I've yet to have a problem with a used scope from a gunshow or trade-in at a gunshop. If you look "wrongways" through the scope, you can see any chips or other breakage inside. And, it's common that it's merely a trade for a fancier scope, not because of problems.

I know from nothing about mounting kits for the SKS. However, I suggest sighting in for the bullet to hit about two inches high at 100 yards, and generally limit my shots to around 150 yards.

[Buzzcook]

The amount of light gathering ability the scope has is not "very" important. A 40mm objective would be enough for the vast majority of cases.
I get by with a 38mm objective and many do fine with smaller scopes.

As Art says a good low power scope will do you better than a cheap monster.

[jmr40]

All things being equal the larger the front objective, the more light that can get in. But all things are not always equal. The 42mm NcStar scope you are looking at is a low quality scope with poor glass. A good quality scope with better glass will always beat a scope with low quality glass.

As others have said that is way too much scope, and poor quality to boot. Nothing wrong with a small fixed 3X or 4X scope, but there are lots more options in the 2-7X32 range. I see Nikon Prostaff models for around $100- $130 and the new Redfield around $150. Both would work for you, but the Redfield in particular is a bargain. It compares well to scopes costing twice as much.

You'd probably see better in low light with either of these 32mm lenses than the NcStar with a 42mm lense.

[Saltydog235]

The amount of light gathering ability the scope has is not "very" important. A 40mm objective would be enough for the vast majority of cases.

Boy, that's a big broad brush and subjective statement to make. I take it you've never sat in a southern swamp or pine thicket waiting on the big ones to show up. Around here, the biggest objective and light gathering optics usually win. I've gone away from even 40mm in favor of 50, might even consider a 56 soon.

[L_Killkenny]

Saltydog, go out and read or actually do some research on your own and you will find that the added light gathering capability or larger objective lens is so minimal as to not be even worth talking about. Heck the quality of the lens makes more difference and even that's minimal when it comes to the real world shooting. If you're talkin about light at the begining or end of the day and compare a $100 Simmions, Bushnell, Tasco, Etc with a 32mm objective lens to your favorite scope of whatever size and make we'd be talking about a shooting time differnece measured in minutes if not seconds.

Thinderbird, keep in mind that many if not most shooters are vastly over scoped on their hunting rigs. Adjustable objectives, excessive magnification, overly large objective lens, cost, etc. On your SKS you won't need much because you are talking around 200 yards tops on a gun that won't win any range matches anyway. I'd seriously look at a 1.5-4x (1 1/2 times magnification adjustable up to 4 times magnification) shotgun scope, a 2-7x or any of the multitude of 3-9x scopes out there are the market. No way you could pay me to go with an objective lens (the last number) larger than 40 and I prefer 32mm.

In reality the list of scope brands to stay away from is a lot shorter than the list of acceptable scope brands.

LK

[rickyrick]

I would take clarity over magnification. I use 3x9's because you can find them in any store, but I never go past 4x. 3x is too strong in many of my situations but I can deal with it.

Learn a little about parallax, I think a lot of problems vs be attributed to that, especially on shorter than parallax setting ranges. If you are aware of that, you can overcome parallax issues.

I would explain better, but i am on my phone and my thumb is pooped.

[Saltydog235]

In our southern woods minutes count and so do seconds. I don't need to read about it when I have real world experience to refute it. Yes quality glass does make a difference and coupled with the larger objective 5 extra minutes might mean the difference between a long sit or heading to the processor or skinning shed.

I usually stay in the 2.5 to 4 range of magnification but dial it up if I need to see/count points.

[Art Eatman]

Yeah, location, vegetation and style of hunting control the type of gear, whether rifle or scope. I've been mostly a walking and stalking hunter, so my needs have been much different from somebody who might only get a shot at very first or very last light.

[SDShooter79]

Can anyone recommend a decent/relatively cheap scope for the SKS for deer hunting?

Depends on your definition of "relatively cheap"

All of my deer hunting rigs wear 3-9 x 40 scopes. One has a Burris Fullfield 2 and the other a Nikon pro staff. Either can be had for under $200 and have served me fine for the last few years. I do mostly prairie huntinf, so the extra magnification comes in handy. In a dense woods kind of enviroment, the scopes in the 3x to 4x range these guys are recomending would do just fine.

[sc outdoorsman]

Eye relief for me can become an issue. Eye relief is how far away from the scope you need to be to have a clear or full view through the scope. If you add a few layers of winter clothing eye relief can become a problem. You get too far away from scope and it can make it very difficult to get in a comfortable shooting position.

I have not shot an SKS so it may not be a factor, but the mounting position plays a big factor in how much relief you will need.

[Buzzcook]

Saltydog235: I never have hunted in Southern swamps or pine thickets. If you need a 50mm objective go ahead and use it.
imho that is an exception, not a rule.

[thunderbird101]

Thank you all for the great info and different views/opinions on the topic!

To clarify a few things, the "42" on the 3-9x42 NcSTAR scope that I listed as an example, denotes the size of the front lense, if I understood correctly. Therefore the larger the number, the more light that will be allowed in? Or did I totally miss that point?

On a side note, I visited the local pawn shop yesterday and found several rifles(savages, remington, etc.) that came as a combo w/ a scope. However, the scopes did not have namebrands on them, but "seemd" pretty nice. How can you tell the quality of a scope (quality of glass, etc.) if no name or dimensions are given? (note: as for dimensions I saw it was 3x9 but I did not see anything else such as obj. lense, etc.)

Thank you VERY much!!!

[L_Killkenny]

Theoretically the larger the objective lens the more light transmitted. But the bigger lens on an NCStar scope will let in less light than a smaller lens from a quality scope. For the record: NCStar is about tops on my list of scopes not to buy.

And yes, a person can tell the quality of a scope buy looking at it. But you won't be able to due to lack of experience. Being a pawn shop and unnamed scopes I'm betting those scopes are bottom of the barrel crap. Look for the "Made in China" label and avoid at all cost.

A scope of unknown quality or from the cheaper, albeit decent brands like Tasco, Simmions, Etc generally ADD NOTHING to the resale value of a gun. They may work and be fine but it adds nothing. Don't let a salesman tell you different. Scopes from the mid to upper end of the price spectrum are a different story but you have to know what to look for.

Basically, unless you know for sure a scopes brand and model are top of the line a used scope has about zero value. Like I said above, avoid China made especially in used scopes. Germany, Japan, USA, and Philippines scopes (in that order) are your best bet.

LK

[Wild Bill Bucks]

tbird,

Don't want to go off on this to much, because I don't know your finances, but
remember a rifle, no matter how much it costs, is only as good as the sights.

I try to spend at least as much for the scope as I do for the rifle. I just bought a new Ruger mark 77 in .308 for around $450.00 and bought a new Nikon 3X9
drop compensating scope for about 429.00.
Now that's not the highest price scope I could have bought, but it gives me a good quality scope, and a good quality rifle to match, for the money I could afford.
I will hunt the first light in the morning, with the scope turned to 3 and turn it up to 6 as the day progresses. I will rarely ever use a scope on more than a 6 setting, as it is all I need to shoot the ranges that I am offered.

Generally speaking over the last 50 years of hunting I have found that when a rifle is offered as a COMBO, I can generally buy the rifle for $80.00 to $100.00 cheaper by itself. This means that the scope is only worth $100.00.
Since I am a firm believer in that you get what you pay for, that doesn't seem to be a very good deal to me, and I generally wind up buying another scope on down the line anyway.

Moral to the story is buy the best you can afford to start with or save up a little at a time until you can afford to do so.

[L_Killkenny]

I try to spend at least as much for the scope as I do for the rifle.

I'm from a different school that says that's absolutely nuts! Lot's of folks used to think that way but gun prices have gone up while competition and manufacturing techniques have kept scopes much lower. It may of taken that formula to get a decent scope in the 70's when a gun was $150 and so was a scope but today it's completely over kill and bad advice for novice shooters. All my scopes are in the $100-$150 range and I've never had a problem. I can garentee you that 90% of shooters with an $800 budget for a rig is far better off with a $600 gun wearing $200 glass than a $400/400 split.

And we're talking about putting it on a SKS.

LK

[American Made]

I recently purchased a Redfield 3-9 for my .358 Winchester. For the money ( 159.00 ) I couldn't be more pleased. And I was thinking about buying either another burris, the nikon buck or Leupold vx-2. Compare for yourself.

I've hunted with two scopes this year - My high dollar burris and my new Redfield ( made by leupold ) both are on different rifles. All I can say - In low light I prefer the redfield by a large amount. BTW, The scope is always on the 4x setting.

[Art Eatman]

I've found that field of view is more important than magnification, in my deer hunting. I'm usually down on 2X or 3X, particularly when walking/stalking.

I felt really stupid, one time, when I jumped a buck sorta close, and through the scope I saw an ear, then some brown, then a tine and then nothing but brush--and Bambi was gone, long gone. Call it a learning experience: 7X bad, 2X good, if you're not sitting in a stand.

[American Made]

You're absolutely right - field of view is most important.

I just remembered that cabelas was holding a sale on scopes. The OP could buy him/herself a good scope for the firearm... This is for the Leupold vx-1 > 149-159.00

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoot...3Bcat104535180

The Redfield is not on sale..but still is bargain priced, IMO

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoot...3Bcat104535180

The Nikon Prostaff is on sale for 129

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoot...3Bcat104535180

[doofus47]

My advice would be to buy a scope that works well for the rifle, cartridge.
An SKS is a solid, accurate rifle, but a 200 yard shot is probably exceeding the capabilities of the cartridge (unless you're shooting downhill with a gale tailwind..).

At less than 200 yards, a scope with moderate magnification (1-4x, for example) will be sufficient and give you a wide enough field of view, that you won't be trying to find your target when you peer through the scope.

As a rough way to do light-gathering math: the objective lens size (42 for your NCStar) is a measure of the diameter of the forward facing lens. Divide this number by the magnification to determine how wide the beam of light will be coming out of the rear lens: at 8x, you will have 42/8=5mm band of light coming into your eye. From what I read 5 mm is about the widest that the average eye can gather b/c of the size of the pupil in the human eye. So, if you don't think that you will be using 8x, a 4x with an objective lens that is 42 will have a band of light twice as wide toward you, but half of that will be lost, so the 4x won't be much of a help toward nightfall with the larger lens up front. A 4x with a 30 objective would get more light to your retina in case you have to sight up on something early or late. That might be another reason for moderate magnification with this particular rifle/cartridge. Not trying to do a math lesson, just saying...

Please don't mount your scope to the SKS bolt cover; the zero will shift every time you pull the trigger, pick it up, put it down, breath on it, etc.

Good luck this year!

[603Country]

I'm 100% with Saltydog on light gathering. In those dim and dark places I've hunted over the last 50 years (you can call that research or you can call it lab work) I've come to really appreciate a good scope that'll let you hunt as long as you can. Many times I've seen the really big bucks come slipping silently out of a thicket when it's so dim that you need the binocs (good binocs) to see him. You grab the rifle and that good scope lets you make the shot. Many times, prior to good scope ownership, I could see the big guy in the binocs but couldn't find him in the scope. That got old real fast, so I stepped up my scope quality as soon as I could afford it. Most of my scopes now are VX-3 or Vari X-3 Leupolds, and one of them has a 30mm tube, and I can see deer in the scope as long as I can see them in the binocs. As for other scopes doing as well, I recently bought a Burris Fullfield II in 4.5X14 and have been using it on my 260 for pig hunting, and I've been very impressed with it in low light situations. I hunted over some dead pig bait for coyotes last evening, and with the full moon I guess I could've hunted till midnight. So you fellows that verbally beat up on Saltydog and think that low light capability doesn't amount to much in a scope can go to the house at dusk but Salty and I will still be in the woods. You ought to see that 11 point in my workshop, and I can still see him silently sneaking through the shallow water, with his head down low and fog hugging the ground and light just about gone, and I put those Leupold 4.5X14 crosshairs right on his shoulder and squeezed.....so can ya smell the gunpowder? Get a good scope.

[jmr40]

I've gone away from even 40mm in favor of 50, might even consider a 56 soon.

You don't say which model 50mm scope you are using. But the vast majority offer nothing over a 40mm or even smaller. Most companies who make 50mm scopes and sell them in the same price range as their 40mm scopes are using cheaper glass to offset the price. The end result is about the same. It is more about quality than size. If you are buying a 50mm scope of equal quality it will be costing you much more money.

You are much better off buying a QUALITY 40mm scope than a mid grade 50mm. And I agree that you don't have to spend a fortune. I've found the Leupold VX-2, Better Nikons, new Redfields and Burris scopes with 40mm or even smaller lenses to be just fine. I have Zeiss, and VX-3's, and yes they are better, but not that much.

I hunt in some pretty dark southern swamps too, and I've never had any of the above 40mm scopes become unuseable until long after legal shooting time has past in the PM.

A really good quality scope with a 50mm lense will be a tiny bit better, but that is kinda like argueing that a car that will run 150 mph is so much better than one that will only run 130.......While driving on a road with a 70 mph speed limit. In much of Europe 50mm-and 56 mm scopes are popular because much of their hunting is done legally at night. Not so here.

[Saltydog235]

You don't say which model 50mm scope you are using. But the vast majority offer nothing over a 40mm or even smaller. Most companies who make 50mm scopes and sell them in the same price range as their 40mm scopes are using cheaper glass to offset the price. The end result is about the same. It is more about quality than size. If you are buying a 50mm scope of equal quality it will be costing you much more money.

You are much better off buying a QUALITY 40mm scope than a mid grade 50mm. And I agree that you don't have to spend a fortune. I've found the Leupold VX-2, Better Nikons, new Redfields and Burris scopes with 40mm or even smaller lenses to be just fine. I have Zeiss, and VX-3's, and yes they are better, but not that much.

I hunt in some pretty dark southern swamps too, and I've never had any of the above 40mm scopes become unuseable until long after legal shooting time has past in the PM.

A really good quality scope with a 50mm lense will be a tiny bit better, but that is kinda like argueing that a car that will run 150 mph is so much better than one that will only run 130.......While driving on a road with a 70 mph speed limit. In much of Europe 50mm-and 56 mm scopes are popular because much of their hunting is done legally at night. Not so here.

I currently have a Leupold VXIII and two Bushnell 4200 50mm scopes mounted in the 50mm objective. The Bushnells are identical and have 30mm tubes. They are mounted on the two Savage 10's I have been hunting with so far this season. I also have a Ziess 3.5X10X44 mounted on my Sako 7mm08, the Bushnells allow more light and are brighter than any of the others though the Ziess edges the Leupold. Dollar for dollar that 4200 at $399.00 is the best value in mid range glass for a hunting application, its not a benchrest or target scope by any means though.

I have various Leupolds, Bausch & Lombs, Weavers and Burris's on other rifles with the 40mm objective, they simply are not as clear or bright as the larger objective scopes in twilight conditions.

[SSA]

Natchez Shooters Supplies flyer shows last year's Nikon Pro Staff 2-7X32 new for $100 and a camo 4X32 for $80. One of those is my nominee for a decent cheap scope.

If you want to study up on scopes, Optics Planet has good information in their 'how to' section. The 'Riflescope Fundamentals' article on the 'Optics Thoughts' site has even more.

[603Country]

Earlier in this discussion, I spoke up for Leupold scopes (and I still feel that way) and I mentioned how happy I was with my new Burris Fullfield II scope in 4.5X14. Well, my brother was here to visit today, and I pulled out a few rifles to shoot, one of them being the 260 with the Burris scope on it. I had just checked and adjusted the scope on that rifle less than 2 weeks ago and it hasn't been through any hard knocks at all. But, the scope was off by 1 1/2 inches to the right at 100 yards (very nice tight 3 shot group). I adjusted it, let the barrel cool, and shot it and it's dead on again. This is the second time recently that I've had to readjust that scope, and it's giving me an uneasy feeling. I'll check it again in a week. If it's significantly off again, I'll have to take it back to Mr Cabela and upgrade to a Leupold 4.5X14.