Jump to content
Practically Shooting
Sign in to follow this  

RR lar-8

Recommended Posts

I have iron sights, 1-4X, 3.5-10X, 10X fixed, and 2.5X Scout scopes on .308s. It depends on their use. So I have to ask: For what? Hunting in dense woods, shooting targets of known size on a range, 3-gun matches, combinations of all, etc.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like you'll be wanting a variable.

If using a variable, I usually start with picking the low end magnification first. What's the closest I'd be shooting? How little magnification do I need?

If I'm a little short on magnification at long distance, I can usually get by. It may not be easy, but I can do it. On the other hand, if I have to shoot up close and have too much magnification, it's usually a mess.

A small amount makes a bigger difference up close, too: I can't tell much different between an 8X and a 10X at 500 yards. It's not like having either 1X and 2X at 20 yards, where I can tell a big difference.

I can shoot with both eyes open up to around 2X to 2.5X. More than that, and I have to close an eye. So if I'm going to be doing anything close and fast, I won't go any higher than 2.5X on the low end. Like a 2.5-8X.

If I'm going to be doing more close shooting than far, I'll go lower on the low end. A 1-4X or 1.5-5X would be my choice there.

If I'd usually be shooting around 100 yards, with some closer and some farther, then I'd raise the low end. I could probably use up to a 3X in most woods hunting around here, so using that as a starting point, I'd get a 3-9X.

If I doubt I'd be shooting closer than 100, then I'd go to a 3.5X or 4X on the low end. I like the 3.5X-10 Leupold.

Looking at the high end, I honestly don't see much need for any more than 10X on a .308. Although one could, a .308 is not usually used on prairie dogs, and most things I'd be shooting at with a .308 would be bigger. I might be in the minority there, but that's how I see it. I don't see a .308 needing a lot of magnification. Not bad enough to raise the low end magnification, anyway.

You need to remember I lean to the low end on any scope. Many people would look at some of my scope choices and double the mag on them.

Some of that is from shooting Highpower, and after shooting to 600 with irons, a 4X is a big luxury.

Some of it is from trying to shoot at closer ranges and wishing I had less mag, too.

Here is what I have on my .308s:

Steyr Scout: 2.5X Scout (LER) Leupold.

Winchester 100: 4X fixed (would like a 1-4X) Leupold.

Savage 10SP: 10X fixed SWFA.

ArmaLite AR-10 (before I traded it off): 3.5-10X Leupold.

FNH SCAR17S: 1-4X Trijicon.

FAL, M1A, and others: iron sighs.

None of them are over 10X at the high end, and I keep the low end as close to 1X as I can.

There are a lot of wide range variables now (1-6X, 2-12X, 1.5-10X, 3-20X, etc. The 1-6X and 1.5-10x are pretty desirable. Obviously they give both-eyes-open speed up close and plenty of power farther out. Sounds great, right?

Expense is the killer. They are usually double or more than the same makers' comparable line in normal ranges like 1-4X and 3-9X. I'd love a 1-6X, but don't want to pay $900-1,800 for it. I do expect they will come down someday, but that day may be a long time from now.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...