scope size?
I'm curious what size scope to put on a 300 WSM. I'll be using it in Wyoming muley/elk hunting.
0
-
The smallest I would use is a 3x9...and would prefer a 4x12. Lots of fairly long shots on both those species, and the more glass, the better.
A friend will post your bail. A good friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying, "man that was fun!"0 -
My view is a little different. I hunt both in New Mexico, not much different. You really do not need more than 6x for aiming at either up to 300 yards. Unless you are a very fine and experienced shooter, that may be further than you should be shooting at live game. More magnifaction yields a smaller field of view and makes the game harder to find. A 3x-9x is all you will need and will hold better resale value given that most every one uses variables these days in that range. The most important part is getting a quality scope. In optics you get what you pay for and you will likely regret cheaper glass. Think Burris, Leupold, Nikon, and check out www.bearbasin.com or www.natchezss.com for good prices and service as a comparison to whatever other source you are looking at.
He Dog0 -
You have to find the best compromise for the type of hunting you will typically be doing. Consider what your average shot distance may be and the terrain you'll be hunting. Consider the optimimum field of view that you'd like.
Too much scope and you loose the field of view and struggle to get the glass on the critter. Two little magnification and the longer shots get tougher.
Variable scopes are good as you can acquire at lower power and ramp it up for the shot.
3x9 is a good all around ... 4x12 (to me) comes next. Going over 4x12 is not something I would do unless the majority of your shots are going to be 300 yards or longer.
If you only have time to do two things so-so, or one thing well ... do the one thing!0 -
A few things to remember about variable scopes, the higher you set the magnifcation on the scope the les field of view. Yes you can zoom in on your target but you will also find it difficult to hold the crosshairs on the mark at the higher settings.
If you ain't got a sense of humor you got no business bein here!0 -
I have a Kahles 3-9x on my 300 wsm. It has a 42mm objective and has the TDS reticle. Not one of the best ranging reticles but with a little practice it gives you some hold over points out to 500 or 600 yards. I've used it for elk and muley hunting and really like it. It's pretty light and compact. 12inches long and weighs about 13oz. 0 -
I will agree that range of game has much to do with scope choice. For a max range of 200yds,...a 4x up to a 9x is plenty. I am one of the board members who overpowers my optics,....but for game such things are of no consequence. A rifle shooting a 1" group or even a 1.5" group with a 9x scope is more than enoigh for a 200yd shot.
I lean towards a 24x being small and a 32x being average,....but I won't pull the trigger unless thegame is at least 300yds away,..and then, I am still on a lower power around 16x. I use the high power for load workup,..and the lower power for hunting. (that being the beauty of variable power scopes).
If you wish to graduate to long range hunting (500-1000yds) then go high magnification,..but if your shots may be 300yds at most,...don't go for more than 16x. The picture gets clouded and dark when the dusk shot presents itself,..and then you find yourself backing off the power to 10-12x anyway. Been there done that,..and still doing it.
why chase the game when the bullet can get em from here?....
Got Balistics?0 -
I would have to vote with the 3x9 because at the higher magnifications can't seem to hold an the target. 0 -
I agree with He Dog!
Thanks, Grizztribefans@sssnet.com0 -
3x9 is fine for what you have described. Nowdays I tend to go to the newer 2x10 or 2.5x10 because it gives you a wider field of view if you hunt in timber or at close range. -- People got by fine for years with straight 4x or 6x and they still work well unless you get a shot at very close range at a large target like an elk and all you can see is hair in your your scope (i've seen it happen). Both targets you mentioned are large and easy to see. Don't need the high power optics unless you will be shooting at varmits with the same gun on the same trip. I generally shoot some rock chucks while I'm in Wyoming hunting deer or antelope...........[8D] 0 -
OK my 2 cents
look at burris "fullfield II 3x9-40"
I like see-thru mounts, for a quick shot if needed (i hunt in bear country & have had to fight a brownie to keep my deer)
Weight that i have to pack afield is a concern & still i want adequate equipment to do the job. my daddy, about 50 year ago, told me to practice and know your ability. do not shoot farther than you can dependably hit a vital spot. it is a pure-d shame to wound an animal and lose him! good equipment will enhance ability but is NOT a substitute!
"all I really need to know I learned in kindergarten" Robert Fulghum
anyone who says "nobody needs a full auto" has never been in front of a brown bear charge0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments