best scope around $2000

Originally Posted By: RePeteOne scope for two rifles isn't something I'd even consider.

KISS---You don't need specialty scopes, you need hunting scopes.
Put a 4.5-14 VX3 on the Sako and a 3.5-10 VX3 on the Deer rifle and call it a day.

This is a good idea but, I'd go with a 3x18 vx6 on the Sako
 
Trijicon is the way to go. Go to your gun store and look thru one. You can get a good Trijicon Accu Point for 800-1500 and have 4 models to choose from. The glass and reticles are idea for coyote hunting. After 30 years of hunting coyotes I have gone back and put Trijicon's on everything I shoot.
 
Originally Posted By: cbass16Originally Posted By: 2muchgunA scope weighing 35 OUNCES for hunting?



Raise your hand if you're NOT already packing around a little more than 35 extra oz into the field for no reason. Either on your boots, your belt, your pack or your belly.

I love to see people that are 20lbs over weight, worry that their hunting rifle is 2lbs over weight.

This is a coyote hunting rifle, where 99% of shots will be off sticks or a bipod.
It weighs roughly 1lb more than your, Leupold VX6 2-12x42 suggestion.
What's the problem?

You obviously don't get it. None of the things you mention sit ATOP MY RIFLE.

"Only a pound"? Only a pound heavier than an already too heavy scope and roughly 3X heavier than what I use.

It is a 34MM tubed tactical scope. Not a hunting scope. And would be ridiculous on an A7, IMO. BUT---nothing amazes me any more. Apparently the Hubble Telescope is now required to kill coyotes......
 
As mentioned above, if you shoot at first or last light, exit pupil is key, which can then be shored up with glass and coatings. Have you looked at a Zeiss Victory HT 3-12X56? Cameraland has a demo for far less than your budget (member name gr8fuldoug on here, site sponsor also...)
 
Originally Posted By: RePeteOne scope for two rifles isn't something I'd even consider.

KISS---You don't need specialty scopes, you need hunting scopes.
Put a 4.5-14 VX3 on the Sako and a 3.5-10 VX3 on the Deer rifle and call it a day.


I'd do this and have money left over for ammo!
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunApparently the Hubble Telescope is now required to kill coyotes......
Ohh here we go again.
A piece of crap 3-9 air rifle optic will work to kill coyotes. You, I and everyone here knows it. That's not the point.

No one said anything about required or needed. I said what you get, for the money you spend makes it a a superb optic. If you can't handle the weight...Fine. That's not to say someone else can't or won't. I'm a 33 year old former college athlete that moves 70lb boxes around all day, every day, all year long.
At the end of the day, a 3lb optic feels like an empty paper towel roll.

You want to single me out because of a suggestion, that YOU deem as inappropriate for predator hunting... when the OP is specifically asking about a 2k optic for predator hunting, knowing full well that it doesn't take $2k optics to kill them?

Give me a break.

Glad I sold my 243WSSM. Wouldn't want anyone accusing me of using a howitzer to kill coyotes.
 
Last edited:
You still MISS the point. I don't care if you are the incredible hulk. The scope does the rifle no justice. That's because it was NOT made with such a rifle in mind. Nor close.

It is a tactical scope. Not a hunting scope. Think "Sako A7".....
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunYou still MISS the point. I don't care if you are the incredible hulk. The scope does the rifle no justice. That's because it was NOT made with such a rifle in mind. Nor close.

It is a tactical scope. Not a hunting scope. Think "Sako A7".....

You still miss the point. I don't care what rifle it's going on. Every piece of equipment can serve multiple applications.

The AR platform was not designed to be a hunting rifle. Yet here we are.
Where would we all be today if people like you had an online presence when people started hunting with the scary black ASSAULT rifles.

"HEY!!! You can't hunt with those, that's not what they are for."
 
Not the same thing.

I don't buy scopes to serve multiple applications. I buy the scope that serves the single application in mind best.

What is it going to do that a scope weighing half as much or less isn't going to do in regard to coyote hunting(Other than make the rifle balance like crap, ruin a good cheek weld, and make the user carry unnecessary weight)??
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunNot the same thing.

I don't buy scopes to serve multiple applications. I buy the scope that serves the single application in mind best.
Not the same thing?
"Tactical" scope design vs "hunting" scope design
"Tactical" rifle design vs "hunting" rifle design
SAME THING, in fact...it's identical.

Great, you don't buy optics to serve multiple applications. I do. And I'm sure MANY people do.
People that are buying the scope of a life time, that is slot budgeted at $2k..might like to use it for more than one purpose. Maybe, maybe not. That's not your call...and since he already said he would LIKE to run it on more than one rifle. A deer/elk gun specifically...well I guess the OP agrees. This isn't COYOTE SPECIFIC. This is MULTI-PURPOSE.

Originally Posted By: 2muchgunWhat is it going to do that a scope weighing half as much or less isn't going to do in regard to coyote hunting(Other than make the rifle balance like crap, ruin a good cheek weld, and make the user carry unnecessary weight)??


Well that would depend what scope you're comparing it to, now wouldn't it.

EVERY hunting style stock, including the A7, that has a cheek piece that's below the bore line, was designed for iron sights...so any optic you put on top screws up the cheek weld. Everyone compensates.
Cheek weld has nothing to do with a 34mm tube, and MANY MANY "hunting optics" are available with a 50mm objective.
You don't use one? Great. THOUSANDS of other people do.

If traditional style stocks were built to be used with scopes...it would be IMPOSSIBLE to get your face low enough to use irons. Many come standard with irons.

Adding weight toward the rear of the rifle, or more accurately...BETWEEN your support hand and shooting hand, AT THE ACTION, counters the weight of the barrel, which is in FRONT of your support hand. That doesn't make it balance like crap. That's a ridiculous statement.
A SUPPRESSOR makes rifles balance like crap. Adding weight to the action, makes it balance DIFFERENT. If you think "different = crap" then that's your perception. Not fact.

Again. Anyone that is worried about carrying unnecessary weight had better step on the bathroom scale before they put their rifle on it.
 
Originally Posted By: cbass16 I'm a 33 year old former college athlete that moves 70lb boxes around all day, every day, all year long.


You went to college to learn how to move heavy boxes around???

What was your major?
 
Forget it. It is a lost cause and he still doesn't get it.

Talking about AR-15s, heavy packs/boots, 70lb. boxes, being physically overweight, suppressors.....loses me...
 
I'm a similar kind of a hole, I run a tikka sporter in 223 with a Bushnell xrs up top.
That's a 9lb rifle with a dead baby on top. 34mm tube, ffp, 4.5-30x50, with a horus h59 reticle.

I hate regular hunting style stocks now, before this gun I had a savage model 10 action inside an adjustable McMillan a5 with a 26" rock creek in 260 screwed onto it. Sightron SIII 8-32x56 on top. Before the McMillan and rock creek it sat in a choate tactical, factory 308 tube. My first introduction to tactical style stocks, won't go back unless it's a double rifle, shotgun, or levergun.

I hike the 13-16lb rifle I'm using in an eberlestock lo drag, miles, and if it's winter I may be in snow shoes, these are/were all coyote guns.

What does this mean to you... Maybe nothing, but my Bushnell xrs is $2k and those quick dynamic shots using a reticle says a)front focal plane and b)capable reticle and c)accurate dimensions. All of which this scope has and a second focal plane scope will lack.

But, on a sako a7 with a "hunting" style stock, lightweight... If you want it to sink trigger down, I'd look at March, 3-24x42 should be possible in your $$.

Insistent on sfp... Certainly a guy could do worse than a Z6 or z5.

I say all this for this... Do as you wish, it only takes a second to realize I don't use what's "right" to some, but it's me, so 2much can do 2much, you can do you, I'll do me, and we'll all be happy regardless of who's "right."
 
Swarovski Z5 3-18x44 with either the BRH reticle or Ballistic turrets.
It's a perfect power range for predators, great glass, not too heavy, and is below your budget.
 
Thanks for the info fellows...didnt mean to start any fights and appreciate all the info each of you guys shared.
I think Im gonna pull the trigger and purchase a Leica ER 3.5-14X42, should work well.
 
Originally Posted By: RePeteOriginally Posted By: cbass16 I'm a 33 year old former college athlete that moves 70lb boxes around all day, every day, all year long.


You went to college to learn how to move heavy boxes around???

What was your major?

Graphic Design and Computer Aided Multimedia...but when the family business is going down, there is a responsibility to raise it up.
I'm a full time Apiarist running over 4000 hives from SD to TX.
 
I'd build a custom black/yellow "bee" gun. Would be sweet as honey....seriously.

I gotta go try to shoot a monster buck now. Firing up the Wrangler and packing up the crossbow..........
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunI'd build a custom black/yellow "bee" gun. Would be sweet as honey....seriously.


Who was it that built one like that? Dasher maybe?
It was cool.

Be even cooler chambered in 218 Bee....
 
Back
Top