Scope Power

C

ColColt

Guest
I need some suggestions for a scope to be mounted on a Remington 700 BDL .222 caliber. I'm looking at the Leopold brand along with their rings and one piece mount. Always been a fan of Leopold. I'm not sure about the ring height needed and I suspect that's dependent on the chosen scope. I was more curious about what power would be needed for 100-200 yard targets. Would a 3-9X be sufficient, 4-12X or a higher power be more desirable? I'll be shooting at standard BR targets at those ranges.
 
Maybe

I would suggest a Weaver T-36, 36 power scope.
You can spend more but I think you will like this scope.
Or a 45x Leupold.
Centerfire
 
It takes that much power to see a 1/2" square at 100-200 yards?
 
Well

Just where do you wish to exactly place your shot in that square?
The 36 power and greater allows you to quarter your bullet hole if that is required.
I suppose I thought you were just wanting to shoot paper, if not I would stay under 15 power and under 200 yards to quickly access varmints.
Centerfire
 
It will be used primarily for punching targets. Would a Sightron SIII 8-32X be a good bet?
 
If you're shooting paper, you can't get too much glass. Most of the people I compete with @ 100/200 yds use 42x to 45X. I have one 15x55 and two of the guys use 10x60s. 32x is OK, but you can get a used 36X Weaver for less and you will like it better in the long run.

Rick
 
I guess I don't understand this. I used a 3-9X weaver on a 270 Winchester years ago and was shooting at BR type targets with the center square white about 1/2". With that scope and the duplex reticule at 9X I could see it well and with the cross hairs centered had plenty of white all around the center of the reticule. I could see hits at 100 yards with that scope. Unless one doesn't have a spotting scope I don't see the need in a 24 or 32X scope. Maybe I need an education on that.
 
ColColt said:
I guess I don't understand this. I used a 3-9X weaver on a 270 Winchester years ago and was shooting at BR type targets with the center square white about 1/2". With that scope and the duplex reticule at 9X I could see it well and with the cross hairs centered had plenty of white all around the center of the reticule. I could see hits at 100 yards with that scope. Unless one doesn't have a spotting scope I don't see the need in a 24 or 32X scope. Maybe I need an education on that.
Click to expand...

Well, you asked the question and got some answers. I guess it depends on how important it is where the hole appears on the paper. It might be a good idea for you to visit a match and see what your options are.

Rick
 
If you want to shoot varmints, get a 6-24 or thereabouts. If you want to shoot paper, accurately, you'll appreciate the 36X. It's hard to do justice with something like a 222 that has the potential to make one ragged hole when you can't tell what's going on.

If you have a strong Leupold preference, there are Leupold 36x BRDs that come up every so often for about $500. Best glass ever. But, make sure it is a BR*D* and says so on the objective ring.
 
I saw a BRD on GunsAmerica but it was sold already. The other one I saw was rated 97%. That was all of the description so , not sure what that meant. I wish they'd take items off when they're sold. Some are still there from 2005 and 2009. I think I'll go with Weavers T-36. It seems to get a good rating from several places. I'm just not sure about the thin cross hairs on hot sunny days and if they'd be a problem seeing them.
 
March has a tremendous variety of scopes. I've always liked the Duplex Reticule Weaver and Leopold had or still does offer on some scopes.
 
If you're used to 3-9X scopes, then something at 36X might be hard to get your mind around, particularly in bright mirage conditions.

You've mentioned that you're a Leupold fan. They make a couple of very nice variables that might suit you better - the VXIIIs in 6.5-20X or 8.5-25X. They'll both give you wriggle room to cut back the power if & when you need to.
 
John Kielly said:
If you're used to 3-9X scopes, then something at 36X might be hard to get your mind around, particularly in bright mirage conditions.

You've mentioned that you're a Leupold fan. They make a couple of very nice variables that might suit you better - the VXIIIs in 6.5-20X or 8.5-25X. They'll both give you wriggle room to cut back the power if & when you need to.
Click to expand...

Yeah something like this. Don't think I've ever had too much magnification in a scope. Always seems I needed more even with 45X and 42X.
 
There's a lot of variables and even more varieties. All that makes a decision hard. I probably haven't used a scope since my .270 with a Weaver 3-9X back in the early 80's. Most of my shooting in the past ten years or better have been with pistols/revolvers and BPCR's with iron sights. I have wondered indeed if I could get use to a 36X scope but, maybe it's like most anything else that takes getting use to.
 
ColColt said:
There's a lot of variables and even more varieties. All that makes a decision hard. I probably haven't used a scope since my .270 with a Weaver 3-9X back in the early 80's. Most of my shooting in the past ten years or better have been with pistols/revolvers and BPCR's with iron sights. I have wondered indeed if I could get use to a 36X scope but, maybe it's like most anything else that takes getting use to.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing but I had a 3-9 Weaver on a gun that was more than marginal for coyotes, a 30-06. When I started wanting real accuracy there was no substitute for power. I like 6-24's on my 22's.
 
Other than the Weaver T-36 I've looking over a Leupold VX-2 Target Rifle Scope 6-18x. Would that be a sufficient all around target rifle? The summer heat waves(mirage) problem keeps coming to mind. It gets a bit warm in the South in July and August but I'm not going to be out shooting in 95-100 degrees either.
 
That's pretty much the one I think I'll go with. I found it for $419...not a bad price. I just hope these old 67 year old eyes can make out that fine cross hair at 200 yards.
 
Look at the 1/8 " dot reticle instead of the fine cross hairs -you might like it better .
It is easier to see and I like the dot better for holding off for wind etc.

I know it is very hard to judge optics on the internet.
The best would be a rich friend with all the new toys so that you could try stuff out .
Then make up your mind.

The .222 Remington is under appreciated today and still one of the most accurate cartridges available .


There is a definite learning curve with these higher magnification optics .

I am sure that you will really enjoy shooting with a Weaver 36 .

Wind Flags next ?

Glenn
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top