power ?

cracker

New member
I was on another forum and there was a thread about shooting 500 yrds. The poster said he was going to put a 10 power scope on his big game rig. He wants to shoot antelope at 500, and everyone said he needed at least a 14 to 24 power scope. I myself have a 3.5x10 on my big game gun and feel it is more then enough for big game out to 500. what do ya all think?
Cracker
 
I agree!My 2.5-8 has more than enough.Though I don't have any experience with them from what I've read mirage can be a real problem with such scopes.
 
A deer's vitals is only around approx a 9" zone that would be 4.5" center to center, a scope at 10x at 500 yards most hunting reticle would cover that whole 9" target.... A scope with a higher magnification is definitely needed.....

Just my 2cents
 
Originally Posted By: Redtail204A deer's vitals is only around approx a 9" zone that would be 4.5" center to center, a scope at 10x at 500 yards most hunting reticle would cover that whole 9" target.... A scope with a higher magnification is definitely needed.....

Just my 2cents

I disagree. A regular duplex isn't going to cover up 9" of target @ 500yds.

I believe it depends on the user for what scope he'd want. 3.5-10 would be plenty by most, then theres people who like a lot of power.

Inside 500yds, 3.5-10 or 4.5-14 is plenty and will get the job done instead of having a hubble telescope mounted on your rifle.
 
Extra power also helps determine the size of the rack, and on deer hunting, if there are broken tines from bucks fighting.

On my longer range rifles, I use 4-16's, 6-24's and 8-32's.

A 250 lb buck standing in grass is a small target at 500 yards. If he is walking or trotting broadside, you don't have much to look at when it comes to examining the rack on 10x.

I paid $3500 to hunt trophy's in Kansas, shot one with only half a rack...will never do that again...always have enough glass. Remember, you can always turn a high powered scope down, but you have your limit when you are limited to 10x.

There is one heck of a difference when it comes to shooting at a fixed, stationary target at 500 yards and shooting at live game.

Folks like different rigs, looks are more important than it is to others. A large scope does not look that appealing to some, while to others it improves the quality of the tool.

I was shooting rock chucks in the late 70's with 4-12's out to 550 yards. We had out limitations with this power scope, for instance if there was only a head sticking out over a rock, etc. When Leupold came out with their 6.5-20's, we all dumped our 4-12's without question.

Hunting big game is so different depending on what kind of terrain an distances that you are hunting.

We have one food plot set up 550 yards from 1 of our stands. I carried a 7 Mag with a Leupold 3.5-10 A.O. out there one day and it has a fine duplex in it. Deer piled out in the food plot about 2 hours before dark. I opted not to shoot because the deer were TINY in the scope and I would have to shoot center of mass on the deer...NOT A GOOD THING! I had about the same amount of hair above and below the reticle as the reticle covered...all I could think was what a joke this scope with it's fine duplex is at that range...hope and a prayer at best.

If I were shooting targets or steel plates, then I would have had no problem with the 3.5-10 in hitting a 10" steel plate(I had a target knob on the elevation, calibrated to 600). Live animals are not steel plates and targets.

I like to place my shot on the animal, or not take the shot.
Shooting center of mass on a coyote is a lot different than shooting center of mass on big game animals.

Hunting on the Mid-West plains were game when hit can run 200 yards and they are still in plain sight is another issue entirely compared to if they are poorly hit in an area of the country where the wooded areas are like Jungles.

What ever equipment you use, practice at those distances. There are not many people that shoot deer at 500 yards, and those that do take their equipment very serious and are very proficient with it at those ranges, no matter what scope they are using.
 
I am no expert and we all no this. In my opinion there is a difference between shooting a deer at 500 and examining a target at 500. That target could be a deer or a paper target. A 9x scope with good clarity and good adjustments will be able to take a deer at 500.
 
My issue with the extra HighX scopes is that when using the BP type reticles most only calibrate at the highest power setting.
 
i usually carry a shotgun coyote hunting and have a 6-18 or 6-20 scope on my rifle. it's rare for me to turn it up but i'm glad i have extra when i do. 10x is not enough for me when hunting at night and you see eyes at 200+ and need to identify the animal. just depends on how you hunt. if i'm shooting at 300 i really like to get up close. if i were back east in the thick stuff it would be overkill.......but i'm not.
 
I like higher quality glass on my rifles that I keep to shoot or hunt with and when you say 10x is enough if you got good glass it can be enough but if you got poor quality glass you tend to buy higher power scopes. Only you can decide how much power to use but 10x gets me by pretty good at 500 yards.
 
Tim, a spotting scope is just more crap to pack around. Ever try sitting up in a climber tree stand and manipulate a spotting scope and rifle?

10x is still 10x. 10x will not show you G2's and G3's that have been broken off in a fight often at 300 unless they are staring right at you.

You have to remember that deer are not always standing staring at you for minitues on end, you often have to make a decision while they are trotting, running, or walking at wierd angles in brush and vegetation.

You can always turn a high powered scope down.

Once I started hunting with 4-16's, 6-24's, and 8-32's my 3-9's and 3.5-10's are on rimfires...they are not cheap scopes, neither are the rim fires. I usually hunt open areas where 250-300+ shots are common, not deep woods.

For shooting round steel plates, a 6x would be sufficient.
 
Nope never hunted from a climber or a treestand for that matter with a rifle.

I've got nothing against power over 10x ,just don't run it on my big game rifles. I hunt flat farm ground and shots are as far as a guy can shoot.

My rimfire carrys bigger glass than 10 x .....
IMG_0350.jpg
 
I don't big game hunt but as for coyote I find 4x is good to 300 yards. 6 or 7 x would be fine for 400.

I personaly think 4x on big game at 400 yards would work for me.

10x for certain would be plenty to 500 yards and I still would probably stick with 2-7 or 3x9.

These days high power scope with big objectives are all the rage. You give up so much on eye relief, clarity, light transmission, and FOV when you start getting past 10x that its really not good for hunting IMHO. Only hunting I see a use for more then 10x is prarie dog style hunting with tiny targets at long ranges.

I should mention that with my glasses on I can hit shotgun shells with iron sites out to about 75 yards. Soda can's at 100 yards with the irons is just boring. Although I can only hit the red coke can's cuz they are bright enough to see. So if you don't wear glasses or you are an old fart with bad eyes then you might need more power.

part of me also wonders if your average person ever messes with adjusting the ocular. I am willing to bet your average joe just buys a 500 dollar scope and doesn't even adjust it to match their eyes. This results in blurred images, headaches, and blurred cross hairs and the feeling that more power is needed.
 
Last edited:
I turned my leupold all the way up to 18x on the coyote I killed a couple weeks ago, and he was under 100 yards away.

For some reason I am just a guy that likes shooting zoomed in, it is why I just ordered a 6500 elite in 4.5-30x

4.5 is plenty low for me on close close dogs, I'm also excited to see the mil dot reticle, never owned one and have always wanted one.

When I had my 8-32x black diamond I always had that thing on 32x when target shooting at 100, even on the coyotes I shot at, they were all under 100 and I was on from 16 up to 23 ish power.

Different strokes for different folks as they say. I do admire the marksman that can shoot moa at long range on low power, just isn't me. YET
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Bernie P.Tim what make gun/stock is that?I don't recall ever seeing one like that before.

Cooper LVT ,AA+ wood in 17 HMR.
 
Originally Posted By: howlingif you got poor quality glass you tend to buy higher power scopes.

wow. that was kind of an ignorant comment. i doubt anyone would consider my glass "poor quality" and i still like higher magnification.
 
Originally Posted By: nightcallerOriginally Posted By: howlingif you got poor quality glass you tend to buy higher power scopes.

wow. that was kind of an ignorant comment. i doubt anyone would consider my glass "poor quality" and i still like higher magnification.



It is true you can make out more stuff with less power when useing quality optics. With my vx-3 i can just barely see .22 cal holes on 4.5 x at 100 yards. With my weaver rv-7 I need to crank it up to 7 to make out the bullet holes. On cheap scopes like a bushnell 22mag I have to crank it closer to 9x to see them. Even though the objects appear larger with 9x on a cheap scope it just doesn't have the clarity to make out the details. This can be critical when trying to make out fur against a tangled background.
 
Originally Posted By: TripleDeuce660Originally Posted By: nightcallerOriginally Posted By: howlingif you got poor quality glass you tend to buy higher power scopes.

wow. that was kind of an ignorant comment. i doubt anyone would consider my glass "poor quality" and i still like higher magnification.



It is true you can make out more stuff with less power when useing quality optics. With my vx-3 i can just barely see .22 cal holes on 4.5 x at 100 yards. With my weaver rv-7 I need to crank it up to 7 to make out the bullet holes. On cheap scopes like a bushnell 22mag I have to crank it closer to 9x to see them. Even though the objects appear larger with 9x on a cheap scope it just doesn't have the clarity to make out the details. This can be critical when trying to make out fur against a tangled background.

let me rephrase: it "can" be true, but its ignorant to assume it applies to everyone.
 
Back
Top