Match my Tikka to a scope

Waterengineer · October 13, 2008, 08:24 AM

OK, I just got a really nice Tikka T3 in .270. My expected uses are Mulies/Elk in open country upto about 225 yards (about my responsible distance limit) I with do some experimenting with cartriges but with my old .270 I was liking boattails in 150 and 180.

Please make recomendations for a scope. I'm will to go mid-range but not crazy money.

Thanks ahead of time - Craig

taylorce1 · October 13, 2008, 08:47 AM

Are you talking about 130 and 150 grain bullets? I know Barnes used to make some 180 grain Orginals, but they have since dropped that grain of bullet. I know Hawk makes some custom 170's but I don't know of any 180's out there for the .270 Win any more. I'd stick to 130 grain for deer, but since you added elk to the mix then I'd use the 150 for both.

Leupold VX-II 4-12X40 if you want a little more top end power, a 2-7X33 or 3-9X33 Ultralight if you want to keep weight down. I don't know if that is your idea of a mid range scope or not but I'd consider those mine. I use an old Bushnell Sportview 3-12X40AO on my .270 Win. I keep saying I'm going to replace it when it quits working, but hasn't yet nor are there any signs of it ever failing on me.

The Terminator · October 13, 2008, 08:53 AM

I think that Leupold is a very good mid-range scope. Around $300, you get a good scope. I believe that I'd opt for a 4x12 over a 3x9 if I were taking long shots.

Best -

Art Eatman · October 13, 2008, 09:18 AM

I'm gonna stay with my notion that field of view is a lot more important than magnification when deer hunting. And I know from experience that 3X worked just fine for me on a 350-yard buck, once upon a time.

Most any decent fixed 4X will meet NEED. You don't need a bunch of magnification to look that buck over to see if you want him. You've been making that judgement with your binoculars, right?

Don't misunderstand: I think folks oughta get whatever they think they want. No problem. But there's a ton of difference between "need" and "want". It's just that from my experience in messing with Bambi, these high-end, high-power scopes are like cocaine: God's way of telling you that you have too much money.

However, gotta give credit to Leupold, Nikon, et al, for making decent 3x9s in the $200 price range...

cbm1948 · October 13, 2008, 09:36 AM

Zeiss CONQUEST 3-9x40 MC

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...2/ai_n15978703

Can usually find sub $500.00, they are clear, bright and keep zero. Cannot ask for much more.

Waterengineer · October 13, 2008, 11:01 AM

Taylor:

Yes you are right: 130/150 grain. Who knows what I was thinking about. I was spacing out, I guess!

Also, thanks to everyone for the ideas.

- Craig

sholling · October 13, 2008, 11:18 AM

Get a 3-9x40 Nikon "Team Primos" while they last. Nikon Monarch quality for a bargain price.

kraigwy · October 13, 2008, 11:30 AM

I just got one of those new Winchester Featherweight M-70s in 270. I'm gonna put the luppy fixed 6 X on it. I like fixed powers for hunting guns.

But thats just me.

elkman06 · October 13, 2008, 02:08 PM

I have a 6X Burris on one T3 and a 3x9 Redfield on the other T3. I'm kinda partial to the 6X. Seriously for 200yd shots about anything in the 4X and up will work just great.
elkman06

blketer66 · October 13, 2008, 02:15 PM

Bushnell elite 4200 with rainguard $300 @ SWFA #423944M. It's a 3-9x40

wyobohunter · October 13, 2008, 03:00 PM

I'm putting a Leupold VXII 3-9x33 ultralight on my T3 lite (30-06) to keep the weight down (it will be here any day), I don't have experience with this particular scope yet, but I will soon. I have a Leupold VXII 4-12x40 on my long range rifle and love it; my buddy has a Leupold VXII 3-9x40 on his T3 lite (300 wm) and really likes it. Sorry, I don't have experience with other brands of scope, bought a Leupold Rifleman once and have stuck to the brand since.

Evan Thomas · October 13, 2008, 04:37 PM

Art Eatman wrote:

Quote:

I'm gonna stay with my notion that field of view is a lot more important than magnification when deer hunting.... (snip)
Most any decent fixed 4X will meet NEED.

Exactly. And overall, optical quality (brightness, quality of lens coatings, how much of the field of view is actually sharp...) is more important than magnification. For a given amount of money, the optical quality of a fixed-magnification scope will likely be better than that of a variable-mag one -- the fixed-mag scope is mechanically simpler, so more of the value of the scope is in the quality of the lenses.

That said, I put a Leupold VX-I on my T3, and I'm very happy with it. It could be brighter in low-light conditions, but it more than does the job.

dmozer · October 15, 2008, 12:37 AM

I put a Scheel's 3.5-10x42 on my Tikka T3 Hunter Stainless, and I love the scope. That being said, If I had been able to spend more than $200 on glass I would have opted for the Zeiss Conquest that was previously mentioned. Absolutely wonderful rifle scope. Very clear, and the light gathering ability of the scope is phenomenal.

phil mcwilliam · October 15, 2008, 03:01 AM

Both my Sako hunting rifles have Leupold 3x9 x40 scopes. I have to admit the majority of game taken with either rifle has seen the scopes set on 4x. Occassionally when culling feral goats, I have to take cross canyon shots of up to 400 yards. This is where I like the option of dialling up 9x. I find any more power than 9x on a scope magnifys my inability to hold a rifle perfectly still. Scopes with higher power than 9x are also more prone to heat mirrage,& critical eye relief in my experience.

stevelyn · October 15, 2008, 06:23 AM

I slapped a Leupold FX-II fixed 4x 33mm on mine.

jmr40 · October 15, 2008, 07:11 PM

I vote for the Leupold 2.5-8X scope with 36mm objective. Perfect size and weight for this rifle. Not too big or too small. The perfect all around scope.

whiskey · October 16, 2008, 09:01 PM

I don't like BIG scopes. I picked up a Busnell Elite 3200 Short Action with Rainguard. The standard length would work nice for you. I got the 3-10x40mm, but you could go with the 4-12 if needed.

The Nikon Pro Staffs are hard to beat too.

HuntAndFish · October 16, 2008, 09:22 PM

I prefer the lighter scopes and find that out to 225 yards a very high power isn't needed. I would choose one of these.

http://www.swfa.com/pc-3342-307-leup...iflescope.aspx

http://www.swfa.com/pc-3348-307-leup...iflescope.aspx

ETA: I like Art, Vanya and stevelyn's idea about a fixed 4x. It's cheaper and still lightweight.

http://www.swfa.com/pc-3613-94-leupo...iflescope.aspx

Inspector3711 · October 17, 2008, 01:08 AM

I've got a Bushnell elite 3200 3X9X40 and it's good. I have a Burris Fullfield 2 3X9X40 and I like the view through it better. I think the optics are a little better. I have a Leupold 4.5X14X40 VXIII but really can't compare it since it's a higher end scope. I will say it's excellent but so is the Fullfield. You can't beat the Leupold warranty but for the money I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Burris. It all comes down to how you like looking through it and how much money you have. I would definitely look through a Burris and see what you can get for a reasonable price. Nikon is great too and so is Pentax. If you want a scope that will last a lifetime buy a Leupold. In any case, 3X9 is plenty for longer shots than 225 yards on larger animals.

That said, more animals have probably been killed with 4X fixed scopes than any other.

VaFisher · October 17, 2008, 06:52 AM

Leupold, leupold and leupold in the optic of choice you prefer.

October 13, 2008, 08:24 AM	#1
Waterengineer Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 2006 Location: Aurora, CO and Palm Beach, FL Posts: 863	Match my Tikka to a scope OK, I just got a really nice Tikka T3 in .270. My expected uses are Mulies/Elk in open country upto about 225 yards (about my responsible distance limit) I with do some experimenting with cartriges but with my old .270 I was liking boattails in 150 and 180. Please make recomendations for a scope. I'm will to go mid-range but not crazy money. Thanks ahead of time - Craig

October 13, 2008, 08:53 AM	#3
The Terminator Senior Member Join Date: February 3, 2002 Location: Georgia, 35 miles Northwest of the armpit Posts: 946	I think that Leupold is a very good mid-range scope. Around $300, you get a good scope. I believe that I'd opt for a 4x12 over a 3x9 if I were taking long shots. Best - __________________ The Terminator John 3:16 (I hope to see You over there.)

October 13, 2008, 09:36 AM	#5
cbm1948 Senior Member Join Date: August 10, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 143	Zeiss CONQUEST 3-9x40 MC http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...2/ai_n15978703 Can usually find sub $500.00, they are clear, bright and keep zero. Cannot ask for much more. __________________ Illegitimi Non Carborundum

October 13, 2008, 11:01 AM	#6
Waterengineer Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 2006 Location: Aurora, CO and Palm Beach, FL Posts: 863	Taylor - yep your right Taylor: Yes you are right: 130/150 grain. Who knows what I was thinking about. I was spacing out, I guess! Also, thanks to everyone for the ideas. - Craig

October 13, 2008, 11:18 AM	#7
sholling Senior Member Join Date: May 18, 1999 Location: Hemet (middle of nowhere) California Posts: 4,261	Get a 3-9x40 Nikon "Team Primos" while they last. Nikon Monarch quality for a bargain price. __________________ Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation. Annual Member: Revolutionary War Veterans Association (Project Appleseed) and the Madison Society.

October 13, 2008, 08:47 AM	#2
taylorce1 Senior Member Join Date: November 18, 2005 Location: On the Santa Fe Trail Posts: 8,249	Are you talking about 130 and 150 grain bullets? I know Barnes used to make some 180 grain Orginals, but they have since dropped that grain of bullet. I know Hawk makes some custom 170's but I don't know of any 180's out there for the .270 Win any more. I'd stick to 130 grain for deer, but since you added elk to the mix then I'd use the 150 for both. Leupold VX-II 4-12X40 if you want a little more top end power, a 2-7X33 or 3-9X33 Ultralight if you want to keep weight down. I don't know if that is your idea of a mid range scope or not but I'd consider those mine. I use an old Bushnell Sportview 3-12X40AO on my .270 Win. I keep saying I'm going to replace it when it quits working, but hasn't yet nor are there any signs of it ever failing on me.

October 13, 2008, 09:18 AM	#4
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	I'm gonna stay with my notion that field of view is a lot more important than magnification when deer hunting. And I know from experience that 3X worked just fine for me on a 350-yard buck, once upon a time. Most any decent fixed 4X will meet NEED. You don't need a bunch of magnification to look that buck over to see if you want him. You've been making that judgement with your binoculars, right? Don't misunderstand: I think folks oughta get whatever they think they want. No problem. But there's a ton of difference between "need" and "want". It's just that from my experience in messing with Bambi, these high-end, high-power scopes are like cocaine: God's way of telling you that you have too much money. However, gotta give credit to Leupold, Nikon, et al, for making decent 3x9s in the $200 price range...

October 13, 2008, 11:30 AM	#8
kraigwy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2008 Location: Wyoming Posts: 11,061	I just got one of those new Winchester Featherweight M-70s in 270. I'm gonna put the luppy fixed 6 X on it. I like fixed powers for hunting guns. But thats just me. __________________ Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071

October 13, 2008, 02:08 PM	#9
elkman06 Senior Member Join Date: March 14, 2006 Location: Wyoming Posts: 885	I have a 6X Burris on one T3 and a 3x9 Redfield on the other T3. I'm kinda partial to the 6X. Seriously for 200yd shots about anything in the 4X and up will work just great. elkman06 __________________ "The right of the citizens to bear arms in the defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied." Wyoming Constitution Article 1, Sec24 "Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6"

October 13, 2008, 02:15 PM	#10
blketer66 Junior Member Join Date: May 4, 2008 Location: ca Posts: 6	Bushnell elite 4200 with rainguard $300 @ SWFA #423944M. It's a 3-9x40

October 13, 2008, 03:00 PM	#11
wyobohunter Senior Member Join Date: August 21, 2008 Location: Back in Wyoming Posts: 1,125	I'm putting a Leupold VXII 3-9x33 ultralight on my T3 lite (30-06) to keep the weight down (it will be here any day), I don't have experience with this particular scope yet, but I will soon. I have a Leupold VXII 4-12x40 on my long range rifle and love it; my buddy has a Leupold VXII 3-9x40 on his T3 lite (300 wm) and really likes it. Sorry, I don't have experience with other brands of scope, bought a Leupold Rifleman once and have stuck to the brand since.

October 15, 2008, 12:37 AM	#13
dmozer Member Join Date: February 25, 2008 Posts: 53	I put a Scheel's 3.5-10x42 on my Tikka T3 Hunter Stainless, and I love the scope. That being said, If I had been able to spend more than $200 on glass I would have opted for the Zeiss Conquest that was previously mentioned. Absolutely wonderful rifle scope. Very clear, and the light gathering ability of the scope is phenomenal.

October 15, 2008, 03:01 AM	#14
phil mcwilliam Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2007 Posts: 573	Both my Sako hunting rifles have Leupold 3x9 x40 scopes. I have to admit the majority of game taken with either rifle has seen the scopes set on 4x. Occassionally when culling feral goats, I have to take cross canyon shots of up to 400 yards. This is where I like the option of dialling up 9x. I find any more power than 9x on a scope magnifys my inability to hold a rifle perfectly still. Scopes with higher power than 9x are also more prone to heat mirrage,& critical eye relief in my experience. Last edited by phil mcwilliam; October 15, 2008 at 05:25 AM.

October 15, 2008, 06:23 AM	#15
stevelyn Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2004 Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell Posts: 2,655	I slapped a Leupold FX-II fixed 4x 33mm on mine. __________________ Stop Allowing Our Schools To Be Soft Targets! http://fastersaveslives.org/ East Moose. Wear Wolf.

October 15, 2008, 07:11 PM	#16
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,809	I vote for the Leupold 2.5-8X scope with 36mm objective. Perfect size and weight for this rifle. Not too big or too small. The perfect all around scope.

October 16, 2008, 09:01 PM	#17
whiskey Senior Member Join Date: January 19, 2000 Location: Clarksville, TN Posts: 431	I don't like BIG scopes. I picked up a Busnell Elite 3200 Short Action with Rainguard. The standard length would work nice for you. I got the 3-10x40mm, but you could go with the 4-12 if needed. The Nikon Pro Staffs are hard to beat too. __________________ "So he cocked both his pistols, spit in the dirt and walked out in to the street."

October 16, 2008, 09:22 PM	#18
HuntAndFish Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO. Posts: 580	I prefer the lighter scopes and find that out to 225 yards a very high power isn't needed. I would choose one of these. http://www.swfa.com/pc-3342-307-leup...iflescope.aspx http://www.swfa.com/pc-3348-307-leup...iflescope.aspx ETA: I like Art, Vanya and stevelyn's idea about a fixed 4x. It's cheaper and still lightweight. http://www.swfa.com/pc-3613-94-leupo...iflescope.aspx __________________ NRA Benefactor MSSA Life Member

October 17, 2008, 01:08 AM	#19
Inspector3711 Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2008 Location: Puget Sound Washington Posts: 1,553	I've got a Bushnell elite 3200 3X9X40 and it's good. I have a Burris Fullfield 2 3X9X40 and I like the view through it better. I think the optics are a little better. I have a Leupold 4.5X14X40 VXIII but really can't compare it since it's a higher end scope. I will say it's excellent but so is the Fullfield. You can't beat the Leupold warranty but for the money I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Burris. It all comes down to how you like looking through it and how much money you have. I would definitely look through a Burris and see what you can get for a reasonable price. Nikon is great too and so is Pentax. If you want a scope that will last a lifetime buy a Leupold. In any case, 3X9 is plenty for longer shots than 225 yards on larger animals. That said, more animals have probably been killed with 4X fixed scopes than any other. __________________ "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." The Dalai Llama (5/15/01, The Seattle Times) "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." George Orwell

October 17, 2008, 06:52 AM	#20
VaFisher Senior Member Join Date: January 24, 2006 Posts: 596	Leupold, leupold and leupold in the optic of choice you prefer.