What Scope would you suggest

[daisygordoninc]

I will put a scope on my Winchester 94 AE 444 Marlin, any shot I will take will be inside 200 yrds.
Will be looking for both Moose and Large Bear, Any suggestions?

Gordon Johnson

[86er]

Leupold compact 4X or lightweight 4X

[Centennial]

Inside 200 yards I would stick with iron sights and practice on paper so I know them real good.

[Pete44ru]

.

I've had excellent results, on my .356 BB94AE, with the new (not ElPaso) Weaver V-3 Classic 1-4x20 variable.

I've found them to offer clear/bright optics, with no POI change as the power is changed.

The low power is great for close, brushy, or suddently-presented shots; the 4x is more than ample @ 200yds (the distance I zeroed the .356 BB).

I bought two from http://swfa.com/Weaver-1-3x20-Classic-V ... P2864.aspx , who now has them priced @ $170 w/matte finish & Duplex reticle.

FWIW, SWFA ( http://www.swfa.com ) has about the best/lowest priced (new) optics (U name it, in optics) on the web - and I've found them to be reliable, honest and just plain good folks to do business with ( I've bought several different scopes from them over the past 10 years).

OTOH, I've also had excellent results out to 250yds with a drop-in Williams 5D-94AE peep ($50) - which zeroed using the issue (height) front sight blade.

.

[rbertalotto]

NOOOOOOO! Say it isn't so! A SCOPE on a Lever Action!....AHHHHHH!

Tang sight is all you need for big critters like you are apt to hunt.

I have 62 year old eyes and I thought I HAD to have a scope ona hunting rifle. I tried a Marbles tanf site and I'm simply amazed how these old eyes work with that nice tiny peep hole. And the accuracy I get is comparable to a scope of 9X out to 200 yards.

(Don't you hate it when you ask a simple question and someone takes the thread in a whole new direction?......Me nether!)....

[Grizz]

I suggest NOT using a 4 power where there are hungry toothy critters

a 1-4 or a 1.5 is far far better because

in a 4 power scope a bear looks like a wall of fur inside of about thirty yards

in my experience anyway

Grizz

[Old Savage]

Leupold 1.5-5x is a great scope that gives a lot of variation in view.

[JB]

A good quality 3-9x40mm. Those small low powered scopes have their uses, but they aren't for hunting in low light. The 40mm will let in a lot more light than the 20mm objectives will. A good scope will be easier to use accurately than fixed sights in low light as well. 3X is plenty low enough for any close shots on possibly dangerous game.

[Old Savage]

Leupold and Weaver have both made 2.5x scopes at some point.

[Blaine]

I'm a big fan of 2.5X Leupold Scout Scope on a rail with Leupold QRW rings...

[PaperPatch]

I like the Leupold 2x7. Hunt at 2x...........test loads and such at 7x.

[stretch]

I think a fixed-power scope of no more than 4X would be
the ticket here. 2.5X, as some have suggested, might be
better. Nothing more than a 32mm objective is needed,
either. Something like a modern Leupold at 32mm usually
transmits as much light as the human eye can use. And
the fixed power scope is more rugged than the variable.

-Stretch

[Paladin]

Leupold 1.5-5x is a great scope that gives a lot of variation in view.

This with the Illuminated reticle on as on my 45-70 because because mother nature likes the dark.

[Borregos]

On my Marlin 444 I have a Bushnell Scopechief 1.5X-4.5X, I hunt with it set at 2X and use 4.5X to develop/check loads

[hightime]

Oh goodness! I had to do the same thing. It was very hard on me to do it, but "if'' I had to, it would be on the AE 94. I didn't mind the look of the Leatherwood 3/4'' straight tube scope, but alas not too practical. I finally came to the conclusion an old blued Weaver with a straight tube front would be the best. I found a good 2 1/2 power. I like it just fine. Worked like a charm on the first deer I saw.

Owen

[Mescalero]

Good choice.

[BigSky56]

I hunt dark timber and alder thickets with a receiver peep on my 30 wcf & 348 but my one general purpose rifle a 300 savage I run a brunton 1.5-5x20 it works in the brush and at distance too. If you run a scope in thick timber and brush and can have a encounter with a animal that can stomp bite or claw use a low power, I like to see the whole animal at the end of my barrel. If you dont have a need for distance weavers 1-3 would work and bushnell makes a 1-4 with a 6" eye relief. danny

[AJMD429]

Inside 200 yards I would stick with iron sights and practice on paper so I know them real good.

Same here, unless I were going to hunt in dim twilight; then I'd use a Redfield 2.5-7x most likely, due to good experience I've had with one on my 375 Ruger. I suppose for even better 'light gathering' though, a 3-9x55 or something like that would be nice.

[Buck Elliott]

I prefer my "scopes" paired up and hung from my neck by a strap.. 10X is just the ticket for 'lookin'', and I still like irons for shootin'..

Just me... YMMV...

[jackruff]

A 40mm scope at 3 power has an exit pupil (diameter of the exiting beam of light) of just over 13mm. A 20mm scope at 3 power has an exit pupil of 7 mm. At first thought 13mm is way better than 7mm, but if the diameter of your eye's pupil is only 5mm, which is typical (mayber even generous) for an adult eye, it really won't make any difference in the brightness of the image. Only better anti-reflection coatings can make the image produced by the 40mm scope brighter than that of the 20mm scope. Plus, the 40mm scope is bulkier and heavier. I love my little Weaver 1-3x20's!

[Glenn]

As many have stated, low power is the way to go (not over 2x). You need field of view, not magnification. How much magnification do our preferred iron sights have, that work so well at 200 yards (with good light and good eyes)? The scope removes the problem of lining up the sights and the target, and helps in low light.
Glenn

[iceman]

I am a fan of low power scopes. 1.5 to 4.5 or 2 to7 on most of my rifles with scopes. I do have a 3 to 9 but it is usually at the lower setting. I only use the higher setting to check out the rifle. If I can't see the target (animal ie deer etc) at the lower setting it is too far away in my opinion.

[hightime]

Like these guys said . if your shots are under a hundred yards on a deer sized target a low power scope will help you find the target faster. The scope will help with old eyes that have trouble focusing on iron sights in low light. I tried the 1.5 power and opted for 2.5. I still use a tang peep if I know I won't be sitting 'til dark. After all scoping a gun is against our religion.

Owen

[M. M. Wright]

Lets see, 4 BLRs, 3 with 2.5X fixed, 1 Redfield and 2 Weavers, 1 BLR with 2-7X Leupold, ML with 2.5X Weaver, Browning High Wall with 2.5X Weaver. You get the picture. Oh, and a couple of them have post reticles, uh, make that 3.

[Canuck Bob]

Mine handled like a dream with a 2.5X Leupold M8 Compact fixed. I had it refurbed and it is on my 223 right now. I used it to 200 yards for moose and deer with no problems. My longest shot on a moose was 175 yards, DRT big bull on a cutline at last light. The sight picture and precision was very satisfactory for any hunting rifle and deer size. I took it off not because of a problem with the scope. I just preferred the hand carry and handling of a lever action Marlin 444 with a Williams FP peep.

I tried a variable 1-4X years ago but I didn't like the variable eye relief much. With my vision these days I would consider a 1-4X with constant eye relief over a 2-7 or 3-9. That is strictly personal as some real good hands like such glass. I find over 4X too shaky for offhand and up close I want a sight picture from low power. I've never used one but a 1X long eye relief scope with a non-fussy sight picture and both eyes open just seems real sensible up close. An optical peep sight. The 2.5X works great with both eyes open. It is more of a comfort and confidence thing for me. If your inclined to stalk big bears in the bush my suggestion is a few trusted riflemen with backbones of steel along for the stroll.

[Old Savage]

The 1.5-5x Leupold is the best choice. Mine has survived 1,000 rds on a 7-08. Anything else is a compromise.