Use the lowest power scope you can see the vital zone in.

[Tycer]

I didn't want to hijack another thread so here goes.

I am of the belief that lower is better.

If you can see the aiming point is on the vital zone of the intended target you are good to go. Anything more is a waste of field-of-view and a distraction due to aiming point shaking.

I can't see so good at 150 yards at one power anymore, but 1.5 or 2 is clear for me and heavy crosshairs or the 4MOA triangle (6"@150) on my Trijicon is ethical harvesting in my book. If I have a stationary target and time to futz, I can alway crank one up to 4.

The snipers of WW2 made consistent 600m+ shots with 4x scopes. 4x is plenty for any range I consider myself capable of ethically shooting. I do have one 3-9 for that long range shooting I never do.

Great optics trumps power every time. Larger objectives are better than small at low light. Solid shoulder mount and cheek-weld are key to consistent shot placement at any yardage regardless of parallax.

There is no substitute for trigger time. The rule of being able to put x number of rounds on target at x distance where x=yards has improved my marksmanship more than any hardware.

My 2¢

[Bigahh]

The older I get the more sense your theory makes to me. I usually have trouble holding steady on the Vitals of a Buck with my Higher powered scopes at 50 yards. I switched Scopes this year to a 1.5 x5 Leupold, and am able to hold it totally steady Free hand. I do believe a Bigger scope also Upsets the Balance of some rifles.

[centershot]

Amen to that, Tycer!!! I use a 1-4 Leupold with heavy crosshairs (it's a shotgun scope really) and leave it set at 2X. I've made shots out to about 125-150 yds using my inline muzzleloader (you really can't shoot much further than that around here, ANY shot over 50 yds here is a LONG shot, and rare). I've never been left wanting for more magnification!

[El Chivo]

I like the 1x-3x Weaver for its light weight. I use the 1x for walking in case I surprise something, and if I sit and wait over an area I might up it to 3x.

I'm comfortable sighting on a 6" bullseye at 100 yards, so at 3x I should be good for 300 yards, right? At that distance I'm holding over the back anyway.

To me a scope is just an aiming device, who cares about high definition viewing? That's been done already with binoculars. I don't like the jiggling. I don't need to count the hairs, just rip and go.

[KCSO]

I use either a Weaver 3x or a Redfield 1.5 to 5 for all my scoped rifle hunting. I have killed deer out to a measured 268 yards with the scope set at 2.5X and I don't think I ever shot anything at over 3X. Had a 222 with a 6X scope on it once and couldn't pick up running coyotes fast enough with it so I went to the 3X. I can't understand why someone needs a 4x16 scope on a deer gun but I guess when you don't have anything else to do on the stand it lets you play with the scope and then you have a good excuse for missing your deer.

[Hobie]

I'm with you. I'm a big fan of the 2½ power scope even on squirrel rifles.

[CEMENTHEAD]

AMEN !!!!

[JReed]

I have a 4X on my .308 and it is plenty for hunting in open country.

[Old Savage]

Two longest shots I have made were with 4Xs at 275 and 280.

[tman]

Another big fan of 4x fixed power scopes. Sadly, there isn't much out there anymore, especially in a lightweight compact, decent quality and priced one

[86er]

If I am shooting at 250 yds and beyond from a rest such as sticks, or a blind with rest I like the ability to crank the magnification up for more precision shot placement. For example, I recently shot a deer that was 285 yds in belly-high light grass. At 3.5 I could not see the density of the grass and I could not define the indent just behind the shoulder of the deer that I knew was there. I cranked up to 10X and was able to easily see that the grass was thin and the bullet would not make contact with more than a blade or two. I was also able to settle the crosshairs right in the vital triangle like I wanted. One shot hit right where I aimed. In another example of the elk this year, it was facing me and partly obscured by a cedar. With the naked eye I could only see the antlers, face and one leg below the belly. When I first aimed I had the scope at 3.5X. I couldnt tell if I could get the bullet in the neck and I couldn't differentiate where the dark throat hair stopped and the light chest hair started. I stayed aimed in as the rifle rested on sticks and I zoomed in to 10X. I could now easily see the spot I needed to hit and the clear path for the bullet to get there. So I appreciate the higher magnification for a lot of situations. On the other hand, I use a 2.5X scope (scout) on my 45-70. Since I only shoot out to 175 yds and maybe 200 yds with a rangefinder, low wind and steady rest, I find the 2.5 works fine. However, I do notice that my shot placement is less precise. In other words, I often hit higher or lower than where I thought the bullet would strike. I will agree with the original post that 4x or less is suitable for most hunting under 175 yds with good animal presentation and time to take a steady shot. At longer range, less than ideal presentations and other variables I'll take the higher magnification.

[damienph]

I also tend to use lower power scopes. Most of mine are fixed 4x or low powered variables, plus one 2.5 fixed (thanks Stan). I rarely turn my 3x9s higher than 4 or 5. My handgun scopes are 2x or 4x. I have one 2x7 on my 30 Herrett Contender but I can't hold it steady enough offhand to use it past 4x. The only scopes that I crank up very high are on my prairie dog guns; both .223s, one is a 6x18 the other is a 6.5x20. Only two of my levers are scoped, an older 336 30-30 with a fixed 4 power (which was my very first centerfire rifle) and my 444P with (sometimes with) a 1.5x4.5 and it usually stays between 1.5 and 2.

[stretch]

Another big fan of 4x fixed power scopes. Sadly, there isn't much out there anymore, especially in a lightweight compact, decent quality and priced one

+1

If you can't do it at normal hunting ranges with a 4X scope of no more than
32mm, the problem ain't the scope. I think fixed powered scopes are more
rugged, there are fewer places to leak, and fewer things to break. Point
of aim is consistent between powers, too............

-Stretch

[buckeyeshooter]

I use 2.5 power fixed scopes on lever guns to 150 yards. I use a variable generally set at 4x for longer ranges. If its over 300 yards-- i generally zoom up, sometimes to 9x. Aim small/ miss small.

[buckeyeshooter]

I use 2.5 power fixed scopes on lever guns to 150 yards. I use a variable generally set at 4x for longer ranges. If its over 300 yards-- i generally zoom up, sometimes to 9x. Aim small/ miss small.

[Chuck 100 yd]

Yup!

[MrMurphy]

I don't have a problem with variables, the 2-7X and 3-9 being my favorites if i was buying glass (I'm not).

The only scoped rifles i have at the moment are classics with the original scopes (Weaver K4s and a 6X of undetermined brand) from the 50s.

That and dot scopes on my ARs.

[BigSky56]

The gun magazines have done a disservice to the hunters by promoting huge glass and high X hunters use it for looking (scoping) instead of using binocs, see it all the time get a 21/2 to 3 power or a 1-3, 1-4 variable then go buy some binocs (my preference is german glass) and go hunting. danny

[Malamute]

I've used mostly scopes up to 4x, but am leaning towards more magnification now. There are some situations that having more magnfication is worwhile, like times you want or have to count point for a legal or choice of horn size you want. There was one particular time I was looking thru a 4x Leupold at a deer in a bunch, fading light, last day, and couldnt see how many points he had. It was a minimun point count in that area that year. It was open ground, so no stalking closer. I didnt get a deer. A little more power and I could have seen. I bought a 2-7 Leupold after that. It's an outstanding scope for general purpose use. 3-9 is a good general purpose power range also. I tend to leave the 2-7 at about 3x most of the time.

I think one of the biggest problems with higher magnification scopes is people tend to set them at higher powers and leave them, then can't make a quick shot. Leaving them at lower powers as a matter of course, and having the abilty to use more power if needed is what I'm going towards. There have been a couple other times I really could have beneficially used a bit more power and didnt have it. Yes, you can get by with less glass, but I don't see any reason to if there's a use for a bit more. I'd rather have the choice. Joe explained it well.

I agree that a scope shouldnt be a substitute for binoculars, but there are some times when more than 3-4x is really useful.

[olyinaz]

The only thing I use the higher powers for on my scopes is shooting groups from a rest or bags. Off hand it looks like I'm in the grip of an Earthquake and while it's true that I may not be Steady Freddy, I don't like having to look at it.

The Nikon Monarch 2.5x10 is a fantastic scope for the money, as is the Bushnell 4200 Elite 2.5x10. I have them both and they're simply fantastic.

Cheers,
Oly

[stinson]

In this age of hulking scopes that are as big and heavy as spotting scopes, we should be thankful that Leupold still makes two of the finest all-around hunting scopes of all time: the VX-II 1-4, and the VX-III 1.5-5. They are also incredibly light, something no other maker seems to be able to do, and reasonably priced. I have a bunch of these, and if there were no other scope on the market, they would do nicely for all of my big game hunting. They are essential equipment for mountain hunting. I cringe when I see an article featuring an ultralight rifle with a pound+ scope on it.

[JB]

I believe the average sniper range in WWII was in the 150 to 200 yard range. The optics (and rifles) available back then weren't anywhere near the quality we have today. The low powered scope were plenty for those ranges and allowed the rifle to still be used for close quarters. When variable powered scopes first came out, they were just terrible.

One of my favorite scopes is the the Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5-16x42mm. The 2.5x great for a quick up close shot, but the 16x is great for a long range varmint.