View Full Version : How important is..........

July 15, 2007, 09:03 AM
Time to start thinking about a new Rifle. Have decided on a .270 Win, undecided between Remington and Savage though.
Also, I note a wide range of prices for scopes. How much better quality do you get when spending big bucks on a scope?

Am in the bigging planning stages for a trip out west, Elk, Mule Deer, or if I can whip myself into shape, would like to try Big Horn Sheep.

All advice greatly appreciated.

July 15, 2007, 01:01 PM
Don't skimp. Go for a Leupold at least (though I still like the old Weavers). Elk and Western Mule deer (assuming CO/UT and not the rat-like mule deer in So CA) go for more than a 270. 30-06, 308, 7MMM ... the latter if you are serious about sheep as you can get into some long shots. Even a 300WM is a good choice. Any of these can live in country that can be hard on a human body but, yea, sheep country can be tougher. Deer/elk hunting can be slow and sneaky but maybe steep. Sheep almost guaranteed to be steep and distance covered significantly longer. This from the guy who won the club trophy (twice) for the guy who WENT THE FARTHEREST, SPENT THE MOST AND SHOT THE LEAST. In the Yukon .. but beautiful trips.:)

PS: Northern sheep can live in areas with big hairy things ... hence my 300WM or 350RM.

Zombie Steve
July 15, 2007, 01:16 PM
Don't skimp on the scope! Many shots will be taken at dawn or dusk / low light conditions.
The bitterness of low quality is remembered long after the sweetness of a low price is forgotten.
How many chances are you really going to get to do a hunt like that? Go all out and tell great stories until the day you die.

July 15, 2007, 01:21 PM
First off, Welcome! Your caliber choice is sound. Either rifle would be a good choice, I prefer the Savage Myself. Scope AND mounts should be of good quality. I suspect a lot of folks will hedge their bets and recomend a Leupold VX 2 or better. Go ahead and enjoy Yourself! Essex

July 15, 2007, 01:28 PM
Especially for an expensive hunting trip, but....

It depends on what "big bucks" means to you..... $200, $300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1250, 1500, 2000, what? So yes, if big bucks means the difference between a $100 scope and a $300 or $400 scope, then yes it's definitely worth it to take that step up without knowing more details. Now is it worth it to go from a $400 or $500 scope up the "big bucks" of a $1,000 or more scope? Answer: No, probably not, but it depends on you much you personally value additional but diminishing returns on quality. You've got to be much more specific on your actual realistic budget range to get helpful advice, in all likelihood. There's a universe of difference in the step up from a $50 to a $150 scope, a world of difference in the step up from a $100 to a $200 scope, about half a world of difference between a $200 scope and a $400 scope, but notsomuch on a $600 to an $800.

But Rem or Sav - either way, you can't go wrong there, IMO. Good luck on the hunt!

Art Eatman
July 15, 2007, 01:29 PM
The vast majority of my shots have been in full daylight, but I've done some late-evening decision making. I've never needed more than the quality of a Leupold Vari-X II, 3x9x40. I like the standard duplex cross-hairs.

FWIW, one of my longest-ever shots on a buck was at 350 yards; the scope was set at 3X. I hit right where I intended. And 9X has proven to be adequate for me on prairie dogs to 300 and 400 yards.


July 15, 2007, 03:15 PM
Thanks for the input so far.
Sorry I did not define "BIG BUCKS" better.
I would have no qualms about spending $500.00 +/- for a top quality scope, but wondered about the justification for the $1,000 + models.

July 15, 2007, 11:42 PM
Two words are enough- Leupold or Burris. They make the optics you make the decision. Either will give you years of worry free service and shooting enjoyment. Leupold makes some pricey glass, and short of European optics is just about as good as glass gets.

July 15, 2007, 11:50 PM
Leupold or Nikon would be my choice. I love my .270 Remington, but I fired my friends Savage 111 in .270 and thought it was a pretty good rifle. I'd still go with the Remington, though. Just my .02

July 16, 2007, 01:34 AM
There is a huge $/goodness slope up to about $250. You can get really good 3-9x40 scopes at the $200 price range. Beyond that, you get specialized scopes, neato features, and slightly better glass....

Don't pay for the huge obj lens, just get one in 40-44mm with good glass.


July 16, 2007, 10:01 AM
As far as glass goes buy the best you can afford. The recoil isn't that heavy on the .270 but quality glass isn't about just being able to handle recoil. Good glass will give you excellent light transfer and allow you to see better in low light conditions. Nikon, Burris, Bushnell, and Leupold to name a few all make very good rifle scopes if you buy the right models. I personally like the VXIII Leupolds the best for the sharpness of the image and the generous eye releif.

Elk and Western Mule deer (assuming CO/UT and not the rat-like mule deer in So CA) go for more than a 270. 30-06, 308, 7MMM ... the latter if you are serious about sheep as you can get into some long shots. Even a 300WM is a good choice.
The .270 Win was made for open country hunting and will hold its own against every caliber mentioned here. I'll agree that while hunting in Grizzly country you may want more rifle, but that is why you don't hunt alone. A hunter would be hard pressed to find a better deer and sheep cartridge.

With its mild recoil the .270 will work great in a lightweight rifle for humping in the high country. The .270 Win is plenty capable of taking elk as well but the proper bullet must be selected I like the 150 grain pills for elk. 130 grain bullets are more than capable of taking any sheep, goat or deer that lives in North America.

I know I'll get flamed for this one but there is very little difference in performance between a 7mm Rem Mag vs .270 Win loaded with 140 grain vs 130 grain respectively. I doubt you will find a deer or sheep that can tell you the difference as long as the hunter does there part. There is a good reason there are very few .277 caliber rifles out there, the .270 Win is just that good.

July 16, 2007, 04:09 PM
The savage rifles are nice and I shoot one, but in a hunting rifle I would much rather have the Remington exspecially if you were looking for a wood stock. I really like the CDL rifles some of them look very good. The stainless fluted rifles are absolutly fine. I havnt priced one in a while, but you may be able to find one close to your looking price.


As far as optics are concerned if you are willing to spend 500 dollars check out the Zeiss Conquest. I have seen 50mm conquests go on sale in the 450 range. Go to a store and ask to look through everything that intrests you. Maybee evern show up in the late afternoon, and if you're lucky you can take the scopes outside and compare.

And good choice with .270 win!