Opinions: Lever action rifle for hunting. - Page 2

Roman Knoll · November 14, 2004, 08:52 PM

I would like to add my two cents regarding use of low magnification scopes in low light.

In my experience, the main problem is thin duplex reticule found in prevailing number of scopes manufactured these days. Thin cross hair works perfect in daylight but is practically useless in low light conditions – whatever the magnification.

I once managed to shoot red stag 3 o’clock in the night using rifle equipped with 2.5x scope, only because it had a thick central post in the reticule. The snow helped me to see this stag, but without visible cross hair, 100 yard shot wouldn’t be possible.

At one other occasion, I hunted wild board in Germany, also in the night. This particular hunt was unexpected – we were supposed to shoot only during the day, so I brought a rifle with variable 3-9x40 scope. I could see approaching boar with naked eye but since I couldn’t see reticule at all, I had to pass this shot. Cranking up till full power didn’t help at all.

Roman

gordo b. · November 14, 2004, 10:42 PM

"After hunting them exclusively for 3 years (other than iron sights) I've completely dismissed the Scout scope for all but daylight hunts due to my experience in low light.

I've come full circle to the 1.75X6 Leupold for scoped hunting. Not quite as "carry-able" as the Scout setup, but that's why I go with iron sights for all 100-150 yd guns."
I thought I'd bring this truth out once again. I do have scout rifles-since 1979, but they do blow for hunting IMHO- after having sunlight from behind me block out my shot at more than one trophy. Rich being entirely correct about they suck for lowlight gathering, of course an Aimpoint is WONDERFUL mounted in the same place! However, like Rich, I BUY Leupold 1.75-6 VariX 3's(the best bar none IMHO) and the same in Burris signiture Safari model (with lighted reticule) for serious game guns! I have some Old German low power variables (can't aford $$$$ for new ones!) and some old Fixed Power K-3 and K2.5 Weaver steel Microtracks that would be excellent on that 30-30 ! A good clean 70's Weaver steel Micro Track with post is an EXCELLENT, near bullet proof optic for a 'brush gun'

mmwb · November 18, 2004, 12:31 PM

Any of those calibers will do the trick for you. My grandfather killed alot of moose and caribou w/ a lever action .30-.30. I killed an elk in his bed with one a few years ago. It was a 65 yard shot. Buy what you'll feel confident hunting with and then shoot it ALOT. Best of luck to ya!

cleve land · November 18, 2004, 01:01 PM

I have used a Browning Lever Rifle in 308 since the '80's. It is as handy as the 30-30's and has the advantage of the 308 round. A BLR is worth the cost IMHO

mikescotters · November 24, 2004, 02:46 AM

I have a guide gun in 45/70 and I agree with Rich about not scoping a lever gun. The guide gun carries so well that it would be foolish to ruin it with a scope. If you want a long rage gun, go buy a bolt action and mount a scope on it.(better yet, get both, like me)
My dad has the same problem that you mentioned, meek.
So far he has refused to get bifocals. He has to take his glasses off to read anything and there is no way he can use iron sights. It's funny now, but I have his genetics.

Mannlicher · December 4, 2004, 08:41 PM

Rich,
I have scopes on most of my lever guns these days. I like old Weavers, K2.5 or V4.5 20mm tubes, with low Weaver rings. Old eyes need the help. The V4.5 scopes are particularly good for low light, with the thick tapered post and thin cross reticle.

PATH · December 5, 2004, 01:40 AM

I need the scope when in the Catskills. The eyes ain't what they used to be. I use it pretty much as Mete suggested.

Jseime · January 8, 2005, 09:15 PM

the old thutty thutty will do the trick in the bush. id recommend a low power varaible as in between 1.5-4.5 or so not that iron sights wont do it but i trust scopes more

John Y Cannuck · January 10, 2005, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Come back and ask that same question when you get your first set of trifocals.

TRIFOCALS! ARRRG, Bi focals are bad enough. Thankfully, I can still use a peep sight for hunting, without the dang things. I love my '94 Winchesters, and the 30-30 is fine for deer and black bear up here.

357MagFan · January 10, 2005, 07:29 AM

Speaking of Lever actions I bought a Marlin 1894C the other day and was bothered by the loose trigger. Even when cocked the trigger is very, shall I say "wiggly" Is this to be of concern or is it normal.

Rojoe67 · January 10, 2005, 09:48 PM

Hard to beat something that has likely taken more deer over history than anything else.... I am always happy to see ammo for 30-30 just about every place I have been. It seems to be a nice price when I get it too.... good luck and the choice is yours......lots of good guns out there....

MeekAndMild · January 11, 2005, 07:39 PM

I know 45-70 wasn't one of the choices, but last weekend I sighted in my Marlin in 45-70. It shoots better than my 35 year old .35. (This might have something to do with the fact my .35 has had a cracked forend for the entire time I've owned it?) I shot better with it and new Remington factory loads than I was doing with my bolt action .270, though I admit I was shooting up some 3 and 4 year old Winchester ammo of mixed batches on the .270.

At 100 yards, kneeling from behind the bench I was shooting consecutive pairs of shots within 1 1/4 between centers. This was with five minutes cooldown time between pairs. Pairs were drifting about 3 inches apart because I haven't found a fully settled stance with it yet, but with the .35 earlier this year I was shooting more like 2 1/2 inch pairs with drift up to 5-6 inches.

It wasn't the ammo. I seldom shoot well with Remington core lokt ammo. It wasn't the scope either. I have a Leupold on the .270 and was using a 32 mm Bushnell Sportview on the 45-70, set at 3 power. It wasn't me, because I'm generally a crappy shot and I have a noticable tremor, so it had to be the gun.

Young_Buck · January 30, 2005, 07:24 PM

I just got myself an old 30/30 great condition for a great price and most people have sung praises about my rifle but were always quick to quote the limitations. As for the scope issue I personally will never put a scope on a rifle like my Model 94 as I am goin to be doin most of my hunting in fairly dense bush and I am hoping to break it in hunting black bear when the season opens in April but also I am big on how the rifle looks and the model 94 just wasn't ment to look good with a scope it destroyes the lines of a beatiful rifle.

December 4, 2004, 08:41 PM	#31
Mannlicher Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2001 Location: North Central Florida & Miami Posts: 3,209	Rich, I have scopes on most of my lever guns these days. I like old Weavers, K2.5 or V4.5 20mm tubes, with low Weaver rings. Old eyes need the help. The V4.5 scopes are particularly good for low light, with the thick tapered post and thin cross reticle. __________________ Nemo Me Impune Lacesset "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.".........Ronald Reagan

December 5, 2004, 01:40 AM	#32
PATH Senior Member Join Date: September 10, 1999 Location: Rockland, NY Posts: 1,489	I need the scope when in the Catskills. The eyes ain't what they used to be. I use it pretty much as Mete suggested. __________________ For sure it is an evil spite, and breaking to the heart, For Irishmen to watch a fight and not be taking part. -Robert Service 'How MacPherson Held The Floor'

January 8, 2005, 09:15 PM	#33
Jseime Senior Member Join Date: December 31, 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 1,775	thutty thutty the old thutty thutty will do the trick in the bush. id recommend a low power varaible as in between 1.5-4.5 or so not that iron sights wont do it but i trust scopes more

January 10, 2005, 09:48 PM	#36
Rojoe67 Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2005 Location: Wolverine State Posts: 767	I love the ole 30-30....... Hard to beat something that has likely taken more deer over history than anything else.... I am always happy to see ammo for 30-30 just about every place I have been. It seems to be a nice price when I get it too.... good luck and the choice is yours......lots of good guns out there....

January 11, 2005, 07:39 PM	#37
MeekAndMild Senior Member Join Date: August 2, 2001 Posts: 4,988	I know 45-70 wasn't one of the choices, but last weekend I sighted in my Marlin in 45-70. It shoots better than my 35 year old .35. (This might have something to do with the fact my .35 has had a cracked forend for the entire time I've owned it?) I shot better with it and new Remington factory loads than I was doing with my bolt action .270, though I admit I was shooting up some 3 and 4 year old Winchester ammo of mixed batches on the .270. At 100 yards, kneeling from behind the bench I was shooting consecutive pairs of shots within 1 1/4 between centers. This was with five minutes cooldown time between pairs. Pairs were drifting about 3 inches apart because I haven't found a fully settled stance with it yet, but with the .35 earlier this year I was shooting more like 2 1/2 inch pairs with drift up to 5-6 inches. It wasn't the ammo. I seldom shoot well with Remington core lokt ammo. It wasn't the scope either. I have a Leupold on the .270 and was using a 32 mm Bushnell Sportview on the 45-70, set at 3 power. It wasn't me, because I'm generally a crappy shot and I have a noticable tremor, so it had to be the gun. __________________ In a few years when the dust finally clears and people start counting their change there is a pretty good chance that President Obama may become known as The Great Absquatulator. You heard it first here on TFL.

November 14, 2004, 08:52 PM	#26
Roman Knoll Member Join Date: December 28, 2001 Location: Lidingö, Sweden Posts: 95	I would like to add my two cents regarding use of low magnification scopes in low light. In my experience, the main problem is thin duplex reticule found in prevailing number of scopes manufactured these days. Thin cross hair works perfect in daylight but is practically useless in low light conditions – whatever the magnification. I once managed to shoot red stag 3 o’clock in the night using rifle equipped with 2.5x scope, only because it had a thick central post in the reticule. The snow helped me to see this stag, but without visible cross hair, 100 yard shot wouldn’t be possible. At one other occasion, I hunted wild board in Germany, also in the night. This particular hunt was unexpected – we were supposed to shoot only during the day, so I brought a rifle with variable 3-9x40 scope. I could see approaching boar with naked eye but since I couldn’t see reticule at all, I had to pass this shot. Cranking up till full power didn’t help at all. Roman

November 14, 2004, 10:42 PM	#27
gordo b. Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 2002 Location: Peoples republik of Calif. Posts: 961	"After hunting them exclusively for 3 years (other than iron sights) I've completely dismissed the Scout scope for all but daylight hunts due to my experience in low light. I've come full circle to the 1.75X6 Leupold for scoped hunting. Not quite as "carry-able" as the Scout setup, but that's why I go with iron sights for all 100-150 yd guns." I thought I'd bring this truth out once again. I do have scout rifles-since 1979, but they do blow for hunting IMHO- after having sunlight from behind me block out my shot at more than one trophy. Rich being entirely correct about they suck for lowlight gathering, of course an Aimpoint is WONDERFUL mounted in the same place! However, like Rich, I BUY Leupold 1.75-6 VariX 3's(the best bar none IMHO) and the same in Burris signiture Safari model (with lighted reticule) for serious game guns! I have some Old German low power variables (can't aford $$$$ for new ones!) and some old Fixed Power K-3 and K2.5 Weaver steel Microtracks that would be excellent on that 30-30 ! A good clean 70's Weaver steel Micro Track with post is an EXCELLENT, near bullet proof optic for a 'brush gun'

November 18, 2004, 12:31 PM	#28
mmwb Junior Member Join Date: November 12, 2004 Posts: 7	Any of those calibers will do the trick for you. My grandfather killed alot of moose and caribou w/ a lever action .30-.30. I killed an elk in his bed with one a few years ago. It was a 65 yard shot. Buy what you'll feel confident hunting with and then shoot it ALOT. Best of luck to ya!

November 18, 2004, 01:01 PM	#29
cleve land Member Join Date: May 17, 2004 Posts: 17	I have used a Browning Lever Rifle in 308 since the '80's. It is as handy as the 30-30's and has the advantage of the 308 round. A BLR is worth the cost IMHO

November 24, 2004, 02:46 AM	#30
mikescotters Junior Member Join Date: November 23, 2004 Posts: 6	I have a guide gun in 45/70 and I agree with Rich about not scoping a lever gun. The guide gun carries so well that it would be foolish to ruin it with a scope. If you want a long rage gun, go buy a bolt action and mount a scope on it.(better yet, get both, like me) My dad has the same problem that you mentioned, meek. So far he has refused to get bifocals. He has to take his glasses off to read anything and there is no way he can use iron sights. It's funny now, but I have his genetics.

January 10, 2005, 07:29 AM	#35
357MagFan Junior member Join Date: December 28, 2004 Posts: 205	Speaking of Lever actions I bought a Marlin 1894C the other day and was bothered by the loose trigger. Even when cocked the trigger is very, shall I say "wiggly" Is this to be of concern or is it normal.

January 30, 2005, 07:24 PM	#38
Young_Buck Member Join Date: January 27, 2005 Location: Nanaimo B.C. Canada Posts: 53	30/30 I just got myself an old 30/30 great condition for a great price and most people have sung praises about my rifle but were always quick to quote the limitations. As for the scope issue I personally will never put a scope on a rifle like my Model 94 as I am goin to be doin most of my hunting in fairly dense bush and I am hoping to break it in hunting black bear when the season opens in April but also I am big on how the rifle looks and the model 94 just wasn't ment to look good with a scope it destroyes the lines of a beatiful rifle.