Scope Game

manowar · April 26, 2015, 10:01 PM

The following are 3 of my Ruger Model 1's with their corresponding scopes.

Tell me what YOU think the ideal scope for each would be. Please do not think in terms of "well, what are you hunting" to determine the power, but rather think in terms of "this cartridge is good to ____ yds and a ____power scope would match it perfectly".

.25-06 Leupold VX3 2.5 - 8 x 36 mm

.7 x 57 mm Leupold VX3 1.75 - 6 x 32 mm

.375 H&H Leupold VX3 1.5 - 5 x 20 mm

taylorce1 · April 26, 2015, 11:46 PM

I'd leave it as is with your current scopes. If they were my rifles I'd sell the 1.5-5X20 and the 1.75-6X32, then buy another 2.5-8X36 and a 3.5-10X40 VX3 scopes. I'd put the 3.5-10 on the .25-06 and the 2.5-8 on the other two. The .375 H&H will have similar trajectories as the 7X57 or the .30-06 with certain bullets and can warrant a little more power than a top end of 5 or 6. I went with the 1.75-6X32 on my Whelen and .375 Ruger and wish I had went the 2.5-8X36 on both of them.

Scorch · April 26, 2015, 11:57 PM

Agreed. The 25-06 needs a more powerful scope, and the 7X57 is just begging for the 2.5-8 off of the 25-06. I would leave the 375 alone, personally, unless you realize that it has almost exactly the same trajectory as a 30-06.

Doyle · April 27, 2015, 07:33 AM

I'd remove take the 1.5-5 out of the rotation. Move the other scopes down to the next rifle in the list and pick up one with a little more power for the 25-06.

mapsjanhere · April 27, 2015, 07:49 AM

It's not a question of what but where you're hunting. If you spend a lot of time in Eastern US wood lands, all scopes are good. If you hunt antelope on the WY plain or elk in the Rockies you want more power on the 25-06 and the 375 H&H.

Nathan · April 27, 2015, 10:50 AM

Quote:

.25-06 Leupold VX3 2.5 - 8 x 36 mm

.7 x 57 mm Leupold VX3 1.75 - 6 x 32 mm

.375 H&H Leupold VX3 1.5 - 5 x 20 mm

25-06 4-16x

7x57 2-8x

375 H&H as is.

manowar · April 27, 2015, 01:40 PM

Thank you very much, gentlemen. Your opinions seem well thought out and very applicable.

I'll tell you the snag with the 7x57. It's the Boddington "leopard" and the rear sight does not flip down, but rather is fixed. So you've got to really watch it when you're juggling the bell size on one end and the eye relief on the other.

I had to get very high Ruger rings for the bell to clear that rigid sight. Right now you have to hold it up to the light to see that there's just enough room to slip a crisp dollar bill through. And on the other end I've got to creep very close to the eye reticle to get a full picture when using the higher powers.
I can't remember the "model #" of the rings, but they might very well be the highest. And to tell you the truth I would not want to go any higher because I'm climbing the comb with my cheek. Sure, that could be remedied with an add-on support, but I wouldn't want to be any higher than the barrel than it presently is.

The joke of it is that the Boddington iron sights are really quite good. But alas, they ain't a scope.

And yes, that 1.5 - 5x20mm is a bit of an odd duck here. But it does work well enough. I am rethinking it now, however, after reading some of your suggestions.

Again, Many Thanks for your contributions, they are very appreciated.

taylorce1 · April 28, 2015, 12:05 AM

The simple answer to your problem is remove the rear sight if you don't plan on ever using it for a back up. Or buy an $11 flip down replacement if you do want backup sights. That way you can mount the scope lower and get it set to where you don't have to creep up on the scope. Plus it won't permanently alter the rifle an you can always put the old rear sight back on.

The other option is to swap the scope on you H&H to your 7X57 to negate your scope clearance issue. However, with that low power of a scope you might be able to see the sights on the lowest power settings in your scope. Either options have their tradeoffs, but both should increase the shooting comfort of hour 7X57.

Then all you have to do is find a set of rings for your rifle in the correct height to make your shooting more comfortable.

Mobuck · April 28, 2015, 05:17 AM

I use a 2-6 x 40 on my 7x57 and a 3-9 x 40 on my 25/06 so I'd say you're about right. I don't have nor do I ever want a 375 H&H

Major Dave (retired) · May 18, 2015, 12:00 AM

the 1.75-6 X32 for two reasons:
1. The larger objective lense enhances the light gathering ability.

2. The lowest power setting (1.75X), keeps most of the wide field of view
afforded by the 1.5X scope.

To me, the 375 seems ideally suited for Cape Buffalo, which is a close range
situation, needing wide field of view (for rapid target acquisition) and good light gathering capability (for shooting in shadowy brush).

Jimro · May 18, 2015, 04:18 AM

It isn't what you plan on hunting, it is how far you plan on shooting.

All of the scopes you currently have are just fine for a point blank zero solution. None of the scopes you have seem to be meant for cranking the turrets or using reticle stadia for longer range shooting.

If you plan on staying with a pbz for those rifles and hunting, I wouldn't change anything. On the lowest settings for each scope there is very little to no advantage with a larger main lens housing.

Take the Front lens, divide it by the magnification power, you'll get an idea of the size of light hitting your eye. 20/1.5=13mm, 36/2.5=14.4mm, 36/1.75=18.2mm

Generally 8mm (4x32 scope) to 10mm (4x40 scope) is considered ideal for low light performance, considering that the human pupil generally maxes out in light gathering ability at 9mm, your optics are an excellent choice for low light work on their lowest settings.

Jimro

Art Eatman · May 18, 2015, 08:59 AM

Magnification? 3X is plenty good for Bambi at 350 yards.

7X is plenty good for prairie dogs at 300 yards.

More might be better, but I wouldn't get all eat up with worry about it.

reynolds357 · May 18, 2015, 03:03 PM

Dont ask me, I usually deer hunt with my bench rest scopes.

Coppershot · May 18, 2015, 03:12 PM

I have a Ruger # 1B standard in 25-06 with a Leupold Vari-III 2.5-8 x 36 sitting on it as well. I don't shoot this one much so I have made no changes but always thought it needed more magnification.

lefteye · May 18, 2015, 04:28 PM

I have a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5 x 8 on my Rem 700LH .270 with a Brown Precision stock, my Browning A-Bolt LH Stainless Stalker 7mm Rem Mag, and my Browing A-Bolt LH Stainless Stalker .300 Win Mag. These scopes have been excellent for western hunting for 20+ yards to well over 400 yards including a deceptively small black bear at more than 400 yards. This scope has been ideal for my hunting. I have never felt the need for a higher power scope for big game hunting. There are, of course, higher quality scopes available at higher prices, e.g., Swarovski, Kahles and Schmidt & Bender, but those prices seem to beg for custom rifles.

Unlicensed Dremel · May 21, 2015, 01:53 PM

If you're playing musical scopes and not buying new, then you've already got it right.

If you're buying new and that's the ideal you're asking, including make and model, then it would depend on budget, which you didn't say.

If you're buying new and asking ONLY about magnification level appropriateness, then I'd say:

Leave the one on the .375HH - it's perfect.

On the 7x57, I'd want a 3-9x40 or 3-10x40. Maybe a 3-9x50 even. Although the lower powered one on there is great if limited to large game.

On the .25-'06, I'd likely want a 4-12x40 or 4-14x40 or 4-14x50ish but it does in fact depend upon game size, so maybe larger if for coyotes and down.

Drm50 · May 31, 2015, 04:02 PM

Have had 3x on my Sako 375 H&H for moose and bear, where I hunted it was
all you needed. Fast on target, 100yd visibility, why more power. Had Sako peep
on it back when I could "see", getting long in the tooth.

April 26, 2015, 10:01 PM	#1
manowar Member Join Date: March 25, 2015 Posts: 48	Scope Game The following are 3 of my Ruger Model 1's with their corresponding scopes. Tell me what YOU think the ideal scope for each would be. Please do not think in terms of "well, what are you hunting" to determine the power, but rather think in terms of "this cartridge is good to ____ yds and a ____power scope would match it perfectly". .25-06 Leupold VX3 2.5 - 8 x 36 mm .7 x 57 mm Leupold VX3 1.75 - 6 x 32 mm .375 H&H Leupold VX3 1.5 - 5 x 20 mm

April 26, 2015, 11:46 PM	#2
taylorce1 Senior Member Join Date: November 18, 2005 Location: On the Santa Fe Trail Posts: 8,248	I'd leave it as is with your current scopes. If they were my rifles I'd sell the 1.5-5X20 and the 1.75-6X32, then buy another 2.5-8X36 and a 3.5-10X40 VX3 scopes. I'd put the 3.5-10 on the .25-06 and the 2.5-8 on the other two. The .375 H&H will have similar trajectories as the 7X57 or the .30-06 with certain bullets and can warrant a little more power than a top end of 5 or 6. I went with the 1.75-6X32 on my Whelen and .375 Ruger and wish I had went the 2.5-8X36 on both of them. __________________ NRA Life Member

April 26, 2015, 11:57 PM	#3
Scorch Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2006 Location: Washington state Posts: 15,248	Agreed. The 25-06 needs a more powerful scope, and the 7X57 is just begging for the 2.5-8 off of the 25-06. I would leave the 375 alone, personally, unless you realize that it has almost exactly the same trajectory as a 30-06. __________________ Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Summit Arms Services

April 27, 2015, 07:49 AM	#5
mapsjanhere Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 2,832	It's not a question of what but where you're hunting. If you spend a lot of time in Eastern US wood lands, all scopes are good. If you hunt antelope on the WY plain or elk in the Rockies you want more power on the 25-06 and the 375 H&H. __________________ I used to love being able to hit hard at 1000 yards. As I get older I find hitting a mini ram at 200 yards with the 22 oddly more satisfying.

April 28, 2015, 12:05 AM	#8
taylorce1 Senior Member Join Date: November 18, 2005 Location: On the Santa Fe Trail Posts: 8,248	The simple answer to your problem is remove the rear sight if you don't plan on ever using it for a back up. Or buy an $11 flip down replacement if you do want backup sights. That way you can mount the scope lower and get it set to where you don't have to creep up on the scope. Plus it won't permanently alter the rifle an you can always put the old rear sight back on. The other option is to swap the scope on you H&H to your 7X57 to negate your scope clearance issue. However, with that low power of a scope you might be able to see the sights on the lowest power settings in your scope. Either options have their tradeoffs, but both should increase the shooting comfort of hour 7X57. Then all you have to do is find a set of rings for your rifle in the correct height to make your shooting more comfortable. __________________ NRA Life Member

April 27, 2015, 07:33 AM	#4
Doyle Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2007 Location: Rainbow City, Alabama Posts: 7,167	I'd remove take the 1.5-5 out of the rotation. Move the other scopes down to the next rifle in the list and pick up one with a little more power for the 25-06.

April 27, 2015, 01:40 PM	#7
manowar Member Join Date: March 25, 2015 Posts: 48	Thank you very much, gentlemen. Your opinions seem well thought out and very applicable. I'll tell you the snag with the 7x57. It's the Boddington "leopard" and the rear sight does not flip down, but rather is fixed. So you've got to really watch it when you're juggling the bell size on one end and the eye relief on the other. I had to get very high Ruger rings for the bell to clear that rigid sight. Right now you have to hold it up to the light to see that there's just enough room to slip a crisp dollar bill through. And on the other end I've got to creep very close to the eye reticle to get a full picture when using the higher powers. I can't remember the "model #" of the rings, but they might very well be the highest. And to tell you the truth I would not want to go any higher because I'm climbing the comb with my cheek. Sure, that could be remedied with an add-on support, but I wouldn't want to be any higher than the barrel than it presently is. The joke of it is that the Boddington iron sights are really quite good. But alas, they ain't a scope. And yes, that 1.5 - 5x20mm is a bit of an odd duck here. But it does work well enough. I am rethinking it now, however, after reading some of your suggestions. Again, Many Thanks for your contributions, they are very appreciated.

April 28, 2015, 05:17 AM	#9
Mobuck Junior member Join Date: February 2, 2010 Posts: 6,846	I use a 2-6 x 40 on my 7x57 and a 3-9 x 40 on my 25/06 so I'd say you're about right. I don't have nor do I ever want a 375 H&H

May 18, 2015, 12:00 AM	#10
Major Dave (retired) Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2008 Location: Between Dallas and Shreveport, LA Posts: 569	The 375 needs the 1.75-6 X32 for two reasons: 1. The larger objective lense enhances the light gathering ability. 2. The lowest power setting (1.75X), keeps most of the wide field of view afforded by the 1.5X scope. To me, the 375 seems ideally suited for Cape Buffalo, which is a close range situation, needing wide field of view (for rapid target acquisition) and good light gathering capability (for shooting in shadowy brush). __________________ Artillery lends dignity to what would otherwise be but a vulgar brawl.

May 18, 2015, 04:18 AM	#11
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	It isn't what you plan on hunting, it is how far you plan on shooting. All of the scopes you currently have are just fine for a point blank zero solution. None of the scopes you have seem to be meant for cranking the turrets or using reticle stadia for longer range shooting. If you plan on staying with a pbz for those rifles and hunting, I wouldn't change anything. On the lowest settings for each scope there is very little to no advantage with a larger main lens housing. Take the Front lens, divide it by the magnification power, you'll get an idea of the size of light hitting your eye. 20/1.5=13mm, 36/2.5=14.4mm, 36/1.75=18.2mm Generally 8mm (4x32 scope) to 10mm (4x40 scope) is considered ideal for low light performance, considering that the human pupil generally maxes out in light gathering ability at 9mm, your optics are an excellent choice for low light work on their lowest settings. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

May 18, 2015, 08:59 AM	#12
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Magnification? 3X is plenty good for Bambi at 350 yards. 7X is plenty good for prairie dogs at 300 yards. More might be better, but I wouldn't get all eat up with worry about it.

May 18, 2015, 03:03 PM	#13
reynolds357 Senior Member Join Date: December 10, 2012 Posts: 6,165	Dont ask me, I usually deer hunt with my bench rest scopes.

May 18, 2015, 03:12 PM	#14
Coppershot Member Join Date: January 2, 2015 Location: Virginia Posts: 94	I have a Ruger # 1B standard in 25-06 with a Leupold Vari-III 2.5-8 x 36 sitting on it as well. I don't shoot this one much so I have made no changes but always thought it needed more magnification.

May 18, 2015, 04:28 PM	#15
lefteye Senior Member Join Date: January 30, 2006 Posts: 1,433	I have a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5 x 8 on my Rem 700LH .270 with a Brown Precision stock, my Browning A-Bolt LH Stainless Stalker 7mm Rem Mag, and my Browing A-Bolt LH Stainless Stalker .300 Win Mag. These scopes have been excellent for western hunting for 20+ yards to well over 400 yards including a deceptively small black bear at more than 400 yards. This scope has been ideal for my hunting. I have never felt the need for a higher power scope for big game hunting. There are, of course, higher quality scopes available at higher prices, e.g., Swarovski, Kahles and Schmidt & Bender, but those prices seem to beg for custom rifles. __________________ Vietnam Veteran ('69-'70) NRA Life Member RMEF Life Member

May 21, 2015, 01:53 PM	#16
Unlicensed Dremel Junior member Join Date: February 13, 2014 Location: Flathead Valley, MT Posts: 2,187	If you're playing musical scopes and not buying new, then you've already got it right. If you're buying new and that's the ideal you're asking, including make and model, then it would depend on budget, which you didn't say. If you're buying new and asking ONLY about magnification level appropriateness, then I'd say: Leave the one on the .375HH - it's perfect. On the 7x57, I'd want a 3-9x40 or 3-10x40. Maybe a 3-9x50 even. Although the lower powered one on there is great if limited to large game. On the .25-'06, I'd likely want a 4-12x40 or 4-14x40 or 4-14x50ish but it does in fact depend upon game size, so maybe larger if for coyotes and down.

May 31, 2015, 04:02 PM	#17
Drm50 Senior Member Join Date: November 10, 2014 Posts: 1,380	375 Have had 3x on my Sako 375 H&H for moose and bear, where I hunted it was all you needed. Fast on target, 100yd visibility, why more power. Had Sako peep on it back when I could "see", getting long in the tooth.