Scope question

keithmichigan

February 04, 2012 14:51

I just bought a Marlin 1895 Guide Gun in 45/70...the sights are ok, but with my eye sight getting older I was wondering if a scope wouldn't be benificial...any thoughts and what type of scope..make model etc..

0

• 

  keithmichigan

  February 04, 2012 14:51

  I came across a 6.5-20x50AO Leupold scope, in excellent condition. It is late 70's or early 80's production. What's it worth?[?]

  0
• 

  Hawkshaw

  February 04, 2012 22:03

  The biggest trade off to me is the reduced "included angle", between your pupil, and the sides of the field of view. To make this problem easier to understand----imagine what you see through your scope with an eye relief of 3.5" or so, then increase that distance to 10'. Now what do you see??? Nothing has changed with what the scope is doing, only what you see. Hope that helps this area. HAWKSHAW

  0
• 

  oneoldsap

  February 05, 2012 03:52

  At dusk and dawn their light gathering ( or perception of ) abilities are less than optimum . Maybe the longer the eye relief inhibits light transfer ? I know my old eyes need all the light I can find ( more would be better ) for them !

  0
• 

  FEENIX

  February 05, 2012 04:12

  Just how much eye relief you need depends on rifle, caliber, gun weight, how much you shoot and what positions you're shooting from. Given the infinite number of field shooting positions, there are some positions where you simply can't get enough support and/or flexibility to prevent scope bites. In the excitement of the moment you may not be aware of this. It's even worse when you know what's going to happen up front and you're forced to decide whether the shot and the animal are worth the pain.
  
  Many scopes, including some very good ones, don't have enough eye relief for all of their potential uses. One of the pitfalls, too, especially now that variables are almost universal, is that eye relief can change as the magnification is increased or decreased. The 3.5" you get at the lowest setting may be enough under most field conditions, but the 3" you get at the highest setting may be inadequate as Hawkshaw noted.
  
  The ideal, of course, is avoid getting bitten. For me, since I shoot mostly magnum caliber hunting rifles, I need at least 3.5" of constant eye relief in order to keep away from the scope under most conditions.
  
  Good luck and happy safe hunting/shooting.

  0
• 

  tsr1965

  February 05, 2012 04:27

  kiethmichigan,
  
  The biggest trade off you get with an extended, or long eye relief scope is a reduction in the field of view. All other things remain, mostly the same for exit pupil, and light transmission.
  
  I have never used a ling or extended eye relief scope on a rifle, such as a scout scope, but I do use them on handguns. I have a Leupold 2.5x8 on a Ruger RedHawk in 41 Magnum, and several Burris 2-7x, and 3-12x, on Encore's, Contender's, and XP-100's.
  
  If you do go to a long, or extended eye relief scope, I do HIGHLY recommend the Burris(Leupold is second), as they are the hands down BEST in this department. Nikon, Bushnell, Simmons, or TASCO, do not even enter in to the decision making.
  
  Best

  0
• 

  keithmichigan

  February 08, 2012 09:59

  I just wanted to thank you all for your help.

  0
• 

  Cyclonus

  February 08, 2012 23:47

  Reminds me of my first deer taken with an 8mm 3.5 inches of eye relief and I still got a black eye and cut eyebrow I didnt even notice till we were tagging it. Hurt for about 3 days.

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.