Help with advice on scope options. Plenty of info inside.

Jeepdude1987

New member
I want to step up the quality of glass on my Rem. 700 .30/'06. I bought the gun with a cheapy Simmons 8-point 3-9x40 on it. I was looking at these two options and leaning toward the Sightron cause of the mil-dot reticle and the rave reveiws on Midway USA. Weaver is a well know brand with a good reputation and Field and Stream rated it the best new scope of the year and said it scored perfect on the box test, but it is new and therefore untested.

Midway USA Weaver

Midwayusa Sightron


They are about the same price on sale with different dealers, but I'm not sure which of the two is better. I'd really like some opinions or maybe what you would look at in the same price range.


I live in southwest NM I hunt everything from thick pine and deciduous forest to dead flat prairie,and I have intrest in hunting about anything on 4 legs that are legal to hunt. I am using "see through" scope mounts, which work well with my build so I have the option of using iron sights in closer. I am seriously considering getting a higher power scope for improved distance shooting and keeping the iron sights for out to 200 yds the previous owner had them sighted in for shots that far, and killed a cow elk at 217 or so with a well placed group of 2 or three rounds.(He hit in the right spot, but didn't use quality ammo). I figure if the scope is sighted at 200 or maybe 250 I could stretch out to 500yrds or so if I practice to read the distance and have good enough groups at that range. I've done the number crunching and know the round can be deadly to that range if I can ethically make the shot.


I couldn't afford spending more than about 200 or so on a scope in the next 3-4 months so if you have experience with scopes in this range I'd like to hear what you have used and liked or disliked.

Thanks, Joseph
 
Last edited:
You may not care for my advice. However the first thing I would do is get rid of those see thru rings. I do not like them at all. I have seen more problems with them than I care to think about.

You may get away with them if you are only hunting thick cover and long shots are not availale. But where you are at that is not the case.

I have a Sightron SII on a 204 Ruger, and for the money they are hard to beat. Tom.
 
I don't know which particular models that you are considering...But, i have a Sightron SII 6-24x40 with mildot. This is the older SII, not the 'big sky' version or the new SIII. I have to say that it is very clear throughout the magnification range. It has held zero reliably for about 4 years. If you really like the Weavers, i wouldn't worry too much about their model being new. They do have some experience building scopes and bringing out new models.
 
My Sightron 4-16x MilDot is hard to beat and I've tried several different brands in the same price range... I have another Sightron in 3-12x with a duplex reticle that is in reserve for hunting season..

I've used the 4-16x for shooting just about everything from PDs to tiny targets at varying distances..
 
Hard to answer this question without knowing the exact model numbers and prices.

I like Weavers for the money. Always have, cuz they track reliably.

I have to agree with Tom about the see-thru rings. Pure junk IMO.

I have to wonder about guys who buy mil=dot scopes and how many of them actually know how to use them. I use a rangefinder and a duplex. Spin turrets and kill.......
 
I've used 'em. Just don't prefer 'em. I had a Mil-dot Master but gave it away free with a scope I sold. I only have 1 MD scope left.......
 
Gotta agree with Hogghead and 2muchgun.

1st thing to do is ditch the see throughs. Even if you buy a quality set of bases and "high" rings for your "build" you will be happier with your scopes performance and repeatability.

2nd thing is try out the gun after the ring swap and you will probably see that 3X is good enough up to about 25-30 yards (if your that close you should have your bow).

3rd thing is put the $140 (assuming you bought some Leupold bases and rings) you have left in your scope budget toward ammo and practice to the ranges you would like to be able to shoot. 9x is plenty to shoot well at 500 yards.

Good luck and keep us posted on the outcome.

B
 
Originally Posted By: 2GunnerGotta agree with Hogghead and 2muchgun.

1st thing to do is ditch the see throughs. Even if you buy a quality set of bases and "high" rings for your "build" you will be happier with your scopes performance and repeatability.

2nd thing is try out the gun after the ring swap and you will probably see that 3X is good enough up to about 25-30 yards (if your that close you should have your bow).

3rd thing is put the $140 (assuming you bought some Leupold bases and rings) you have left in your scope budget toward ammo and practice to the ranges you would like to be able to shoot. 9x is plenty to shoot well at 500 yards.

Good luck and keep us posted on the outcome.

B


Good advice 9x is enough for a sporter .30-06 and I would personally never consider using see-thru mounts.
 
Originally Posted By: 2Gunner3rd thing is put the $140 (assuming you bought some Leupold bases and rings) you have left in your scope budget toward ammo and practice to the ranges you would like to be able to shoot. 9x is plenty to shoot well at 500 yards.

+1 Just becuase they look closer doesn't make them easier to hit. More practice will go a lot farther towards improving your abilities than more magnification.

And, FWIW, I would throw away the see-thru rings too.
 
Not trying to be negative towards anyone elses choices in optics mounting hardware or start an arguement, but since you asked this is my opinion on the negative aspects of see-thru mounts.

I have several issues with using them on my rifles. The first no cheekpiece is high enough to use them. This trait makes them very uncomfortable for me to shoot. Second the line of sight is so far above the centerline of the bore that the bullet must rise further to meet the point of impact with the line of sight causing crazy hold under and hold over at different ranges. Third is they are normally made of aluminum and mount and ring is an all in one unit, to me this means you are starting with a weaker material and because of the height creating more leverage if the scope happens to get bumped during use.

Just to many drawbacks for me to chance my hunting time on see-thru mounts.
 
I am pretty sure I have ones that us a separate base and rings. The rings are possibly weaker, but if I ever mis-treated a gun enough to break them I would definitely knock of the point of aim on the stroke, and would probably damage the scope in the process. As I believe I said before the mounts actually fit me height wise so I like them.

I'm not arguing, but just stating what I see as to your reasons. I may look at changing them out just cause the iron sights are not very well set for me to sight off them. I'm thinking that I'll get them set and use weaver mounts so I can reset them easily enough if I change ammo weights or get something that has a different point of impact.

As for those who say save the money and practice. Why not buy a scope that I can actually see things out to 500yrds then practice as well. 3-9 is the zoom, but the clarity is lacking even compared to 100 dollar optics. I want to put something on that will work in low light and will reduce glare as well as not fog up when ever it looks like rain.

I will practice plenty. I don't want to spend hours looking into that scope. I might as well go around cross-eyed all day since it would feel better.

Thanks for the advice. I did take it to heart.
 
Back
Top