The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Bolt, Lever, and Pump Action

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 6, 2019, 11:42 PM   #26
Blue Duck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 2006
Posts: 343
Another great scope for a leveraction or even a bolt action is one that I recently robbed off of another gun and installed on a newly acquired Browning BAR in 30-06 is a Leupold 1-3/4 x 6 x 32mm vari-x III
This scope is not made anymore but there are other's similar or you might might find a used one, although they are a little scarce. It has a great wide field of view on low power and 6 power is plenty, and the vari-x III's had pretty good glass on them. Personally, I think it would be nearly unbeatable on a fast handling leveraction or in this case a Browning BAR semi-auto.

Frankly, I can make the long shots with about any scope mounted on about any old gun, at a standing deer, given time to get steady and touch off a well aimed shot, but the opportunities that still haunt me are the ones that got away because I couldn't get off a quick well aimed shot on a big deer moving fast at close range. And that is where my bet is on a low powered variable, and it's wide field of view. And that combination has paid off for me, a lot more often then excessive magnification on a poor handling, over scoped gun has.
But then again, maybe if I was a better hunter or hunted over game feeders more, I would get more easy standing shots. A man's got to know his limitations.

Last edited by Blue Duck; December 6, 2019 at 11:57 PM.
Blue Duck is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 12:46 AM   #27
bamaranger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 6,934
Who cares?

Seems a lot of us care that a big scope on a 30-30 (or a .444) is too much optic for rifles with an effective range of 200 yds or so at best. Not only does it look goofy, but it adds more weight and bulk to a firearms that are supposed to be compact and handy. The .444 is not much of an improvement trajectory wise either. If one is inclined to run that much optic, you might as well get a high performance bolt rifle offering more reach.

A big bell scope does not guarantee low light performance. I am far from an expert on optics, but seems as if I've read that a once you juggle the numbers, a 6x42 or somewhere there about , delivers all the light that the human eye can utilize anyhow. That matches my experience as well. I've looked through a lot of scopes in bad light, backing off the power on a variable) always helps. It's not so much how much light your scope can suck in ( and some are better than others, no doubt), but how much light your eye can utilize.

But a big scope will guarantee more size, weight and magnification that you don't need, every time.
bamaranger is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 02:15 AM   #28
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 4,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamaranger View Post
Seems a lot of us care that a big scope on a 30-30 (or a .444) is too much optic for rifles with an effective range of 200 yds or so at best. Not only does it look goofy, but it adds more weight and bulk to a firearms that are supposed to be compact and handy. The .444 is not much of an improvement trajectory wise either. If one is inclined to run that much optic, you might as well get a high performance bolt rifle offering more reach. If everyone thinks back, the set up for leavers used to be those dang see thru mounts. A bunch of deer got killed with that set up.

A big bell scope does not guarantee low light performance. I am far from an expert on optics, but seems as if I've read that a once you juggle the numbers, a 6x42 or somewhere there about , delivers all the light that the human eye can utilize anyhow. That matches my experience as well. I've looked through a lot of scopes in bad light, backing off the power on a variable) always helps. It's not so much how much light your scope can suck in ( and some are better than others, no doubt), but how much light your eye can utilize.

But a big scope will guarantee more size, weight and magnification that you don't need, every time.
All other things being equal, the big scopes with the long bells are brighter than the small scopes at a given power. I have a Meopta that with a bit of moonlight, I can hunt at night.
Who cares how their hunting rifle looks? You want to kill deer and hogs or talk about the one you couldnt get a shot at?
reynolds357 is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 03:46 AM   #29
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,991
Claims that I see of having great clarity with optics like the 'XZY Super-Doot Eleventy-Twelve Tacti-master 9000' beyond such times fall into the "flaming BS" category.
...Maybe in your backyard. With a full moon. With artificial lighting. From your back porch. Outside the tree line, over the strategically-placed bait pile.

Short of IR and NVG optics, it ain't happening in the real world.

"But there was a full moon. And it was from my living room. ... And looking at my white IPSC target at 15 yards. ... And I had my truck's headlights on. ...And Mars and Venus were in opposition. ... And Jupiter was in the house of Adrian. ... And I had just found a 5-leaf clover. ... And we had a really big bonfire. ... I wasn't exaggerating! It was just that one-time that I tested. ... While drunk. With my buddies. After having a campfire argument about how awesome my new scope was, because I paid $2,600 for it!"

Quote:
You want to kill deer and hogs or talk about the one you couldnt get a shot at?
30 minutes before sunrise.
30 minutes after sunset.
Anything else is against the law where I hunt, and unnecessary.

Bottom feeder scopes can't do it.

But even the best scopes still need light to do their job.

It isn't about picking out a paper plate or sight-in target in low light. It's about positively identifying a game animal, and being able to make a clean shot.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 08:21 AM   #30
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 4,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankenMauser View Post
Claims that I see of having great clarity with optics like the 'XZY Super-Doot Eleventy-Twelve Tacti-master 9000' beyond such times fall into the "flaming BS" category.
...Maybe in your backyard. With a full moon. With artificial lighting. From your back porch. Outside the tree line, over the strategically-placed bait pile.

Short of IR and NVG optics, it ain't happening in the real world.

"But there was a full moon. And it was from my living room. ... And looking at my white IPSC target at 15 yards. ... And I had my truck's headlights on. ...And Mars and Venus were in opposition. ... And Jupiter was in the house of Adrian. ... And I had just found a 5-leaf clover. ... And we had a really big bonfire. ... I wasn't exaggerating! It was just that one-time that I tested. ... While drunk. With my buddies. After having a campfire argument about how awesome my new scope was, because I paid $2,600 for it!"


30 minutes before sunrise.
30 minutes after sunset.
Anything else is against the law where I hunt, and unnecessary.

Bottom feeder scopes can't do it.

But even the best scopes still need light to do their job.

It isn't about picking out a paper plate or sight-in target in low light. It's about positively identifying a game animal, and being able to make a clean shot.
Use some of the newer Meoptas and get back to me. Some of the newer Euro glass is unreal. 30 before and 30 past is for deer, not hogs. On the nice green background of my food plot, hogs are visible with moonlight.on a brown background, aint happening. If I am going dedicated hog hunting, I take my rifle with night vision scope and illuminator, maybe I will move up to thermal one day. When deer hunting and I hear the hogs, In the woods, I wait them out till past dark and shoot them. Thats assuming enough moon.
My Son has a new Nikon Monarch 5 on his rifle. One evening at few minutes before legal light was over he was looking for a deer in his scope. I handed him my rifle and he immediately found it and identified it as smaller than he wanted to shoot. I dont know what Meopta is doing to their glass, but you have to see their new scopes to believe them.

Last edited by reynolds357; December 7, 2019 at 08:31 AM.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 07:32 PM   #31
Blue Duck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 2006
Posts: 343
I think it's a given, by most anyone with common basic knowledge of how scopes work that the bigger the barrel of the scope (1" vs. 30mm) for instance and also the size of objective will affect how bright the optic will be, with some overlap due to the quality of the glass, coatings, used, etc.

That's really not the question here the way I see it. If it really was then, why wouldn't we all be using huge scopes with very large objectives on our lightweight hunting carbines? Do we really need to mount a $2000 scope on a $350 carbine with a 5 pound trigger? There is a thing called balance and handling, and sometimes less is really more.
Blue Duck is offline  
Old December 7, 2019, 07:41 PM   #32
Koda94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,202
its all about perspective and ones experiences. Lever guns excel in heavy timber and brush with or without a scope and the majority of people thats how they use them then use something different for open country hunting. If thats the case, then a low power lightweight scope makes more sense and is just fine.
I grew up hunting deer with my 3030 in both coastal brush and eastern open range country. The rifle was all I had for many years, I put a 3x9 on it and it worked fine in both environments taking some game out at 200yds just fine.

If one wants versatility, a larger scope is an option that works. If one doesn't need to then a smaller scope works great too. I personally don't find the larger scope heavy or overbearing on my Marlin and made certain to get a scope with a good field of view on the low end so win win.
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2
Koda94 is offline  
Old December 8, 2019, 12:02 AM   #33
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,991
Quote:
its all about perspective and ones experiences.
Indeed.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old December 8, 2019, 03:43 AM   #34
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 20,491
Had a 3x9 on a Marlin 336 for a couple decades. Did add a bit of bulk over the unscoped rifle but didn't make it unwieldly for me, anyway. On a Marlin 1895 .45-70 I used a 2.5x with a post/crosswire reticle. Not a problem, for me, anyway.

Personally, I wouldn't bother scoping a Henry, or for that matter a Win 94. But the Marlin is easy, and efficient.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 8, 2019, 01:25 PM   #35
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Musicmatty, how do you get a good cheekweld with that rig? It may get you in the bullseye from the bench, but you'll have issues getting on target when time is short.....
__________________

Jim, that’s a fair question. 30 years ago this was my first rifle and set up with a scope. I guess being this is my only rig to work with back then, I learned how to live with it and make it work. It now has become my favorite go to rifle when heading out to hunt deer. I guess we learn to adapt with what we have to work with
I've gone through this as well, and seen it several times 2nd hand - G'pa's 270WIN 721 was handed down to me just before he passed in 1996 ...... it had a scope put on in the 80's ..... his eyes were not what they were in his youth- hard to focus on that front sight and the target and the rear sight- old eys just don't do that as well ..... so his kids got together and upraded his rifle a bit ..... he had to relearn mounting the gun to hit moving targets, but at least he could see them ...... with practice, he made it work. When I got the gun, I endeavored to be able to shoot it as well as he did ..... dry fire, prairie dogs, milk jugs ..... I tuned handloads for it ..... did pretty well, but could never get on target quickly, and recoil seemed punishly harsh after a box of ammo ...... and then I read somewhere (on this forum or another one, maybe THR?) about sight height and cheekweld and recoil tolerance ...... do a search, I know I've posted about it 1/2 a dozen times here in the last dozen years ..... it made an immediate difference, especially on running game ....... the 721's original stock, as with most guns designed before scopes were the order of the day, is built for the irons on the gun, and there was more than an inch difference between that sight plane and that of the scope - cheek weld was tenuous at best ...... and finding the sight pic was a separate task after mounting the gun ..... not smooth=slow.

I put a neoprene and foam cheek riser (Beartooth Products? IIRC) on the stock, to lift my face up to the right height upon mounting the gun. It works. This November I shot a doe (70 yards) and a buck (35 yards), both running full tilt in less time than it took my daughter to yell, "There's a deer!" <Bang!> (knocked doe down, she started to get back up) <clack-clackBang!> and "There's another one! It's a Bu<clack-clackBang!>HEY you stole my deer!" .......
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old December 8, 2019, 04:10 PM   #36
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 4,669
Cheek weld is over rated. You can shoot great without cheek weld. Cheek weld is a way to be consistent, not the ONLY way.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old December 9, 2019, 10:58 AM   #37
JJ45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2015
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by reynolds357 View Post
Cheek weld is over rated. You can shoot great without cheek weld. Cheek weld is a way to be consistent, not the ONLY way.
You can shoot well from a bench, etc. without a consistent and comfortable cheek weld. Possibly when open country hunting such as pronghorn. After all , you can hunt big game with a handgun that requires no cheek-weld.

That said, I would not want to hunt whitetail where I hunt, and I emphasize where I hunt, without a rifle that comes up instantaneously on target and this means a perfect cheek weld.

Hunting rifles I have with high combs require me to use about medium height scope rings to get the rifle to "come up" on target the way I want it to come up on target. Some of these higher comb rifles are vey uncomfortable to use with the issue iron sights, if they come so equipped.

For a low comb rifle like the Marlin 336 I use old style, Weaver low rings to achieve this purpose....This allows a scope with a 32mm objective bell to just clear the rear sight, very low....I don't know about the newer 336 as it seems you can't even find a new pellet rifle without a high comb built with large objective scopes in mind.

As an aside, a few years ago, I bought one of the newer Benjamin pump pellet guns. Unlike the old, iconic, Benjamins or Sheridans, this rifle has a ridiculously high comb and it is not even meant to be scoped!!!...I mounted a Williams peep and still have to squeeze my head (not even cheek) down so far that my neck is nearly sideways, very uncomfortable
JJ45 is offline  
Old December 9, 2019, 11:05 AM   #38
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 588
This!

A scope ruins the looks, bsalance, etc pof a lever gun. I tried a coyple on 94 Woincjesters, and took them back off after one hunting trip.

I currently use Lyman receiver sights on lever guns.
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover is offline  
Old December 9, 2019, 01:17 PM   #39
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Cheek weld is over rated. You can shoot great without cheek weld.


Which other supports to marksmanship fundamentals are over-rated, Mr. Reynolds? Natural point of aim? Trigger squeeze? Maybe breathing control? How about follow through?

Oh, I got it now: I just need to drop 2-3 Grand on a telescope suitable for studying moon craters, and put on a 26" custom hand lapped barrel and I can shoot any critter in any conditions ...... way out past Fort Mudge ...... whatever, dood. Have a nice day.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old Yesterday, 06:30 AM   #40
bamaranger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 6,934
looks

At this point, it's like the fella that kissed the cow, to each his own.

I believe that big scopes on little rifles are ugly, compromise handling and portablility due to size and weight, and offer magnification that really isn't needed for most whitetail hunting done with lever carbines and moderate cartridges. Folks want to go another route, have at it.

I'll never hunt a Meopta, a NightForce, a Kahles or Zeiss, 'cause I can't afford them. I've gotten by with very average Leupold's, a couple of Burris's and a Nikon, many bought used. Legal shooting hours (and maybe just a tad later) anyplace I've ever hunted, they've served just fine. Some scopes are certainly better than others, but there is indeed a limit on what the human eye can do in bad light no matter with what scope they hunt.
bamaranger is offline  
Old Yesterday, 05:04 PM   #41
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 4,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamaranger View Post
At this point, it's like the fella that kissed the cow, to each his own.

I believe that big scopes on little rifles are ugly, compromise handling and portablility due to size and weight, and offer magnification that really isn't needed for most whitetail hunting done with lever carbines and moderate cartridges. Folks want to go another route, have at it.

I'll never hunt a Meopta, a NightForce, a Kahles or Zeiss, 'cause I can't afford them. I've gotten by with very average Leupold's, a couple of Burris's and a Nikon, many bought used. Legal shooting hours (and maybe just a tad later) anyplace I've ever hunted, they've served just fine. Some scopes are certainly better than others, but there is indeed a limit on what the human eye can do in bad light no matter with what scope they hunt.
I have bought all my Meoptas and Night Force scopes cheap. I am not wealthy, but I shoot with a lot of people who have more money than sense. Whenever a new model number comes out, they fall out of love with the old model and sell them for about 1/3rd of what they paid for them.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old Yesterday, 05:39 PM   #42
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 6,397
good friends to have--especially when the newer ones doesn't turn out as good as everyone thought.
__________________
If you’re ever hiking in the woods and you get lost, just look up and find the brightest star in the sky and you’ll know which way space is.
I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk!
stagpanther is online now  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07817 seconds with 10 queries