What Scope and power do you like?

[firstcoueswas80]

Guess I mean expensive as they are the most $ I have dished out for a rifle scope.

 

Maybe I like the price tags of Leupolds because getting them slightly for cheap is no big deal. I just put a Leupold on my Kimber 300 wsm, and my Ar, paid less than $400 for each of them.. I paid $725 (with adding turrets) for my Zeiss on my .257 wby, and that was a good deal on the scope!

 

Plus, the one Zeiss cost the same as what my mortgage payment is!

[Str8Shot]

I have a 6-18 x 40 Nikon Buckmaster with BDC reticle on my 300 Ultra Mag. I took a lion and a deer with just 3 shots last year. You have to limit your shots with .300 ultra mag (so expensive, $3.00 bullet)

 

I like the BDC reticle for longer shots. To me its the best mid-range scope and is second only to a tactical scope in its adjustments.

 

 

Simple Hunter you might want to Start doing Reloads for your 300RUM and get those cost down to $ .80 - $1.20 a round..... I still limit my Shots but it is nice to know I am not spending that $50 - $65 a Box for Ammo....

 

As Far as Scopes I think most post here tell you that a little more magnification is always good ..... Brand is a preference ..... Your Zeiss, Swaro, and some other high end scopes may get you a little extra shooting time 10- 15 minutes , and any system is only as good as its weakest link ( usually in this case our Eye's) .... Find one that you like .... Put the time in at the range to know it .... and Have confidence in Shooting with it ....

 

I think that is the one common here among these guys They All Have confidence in the Gun and Scope they are using and have the knowledge of their own complete systems to Do so.....

 

[Couesdeer]

I like ample eye relief and low mounted scopes. A leupold 6.5-20X40 affords me both. Add an m1 elevation turret and I'm a happy camper....

[TR0UBLE SH00TER]

[coues@186]

I have a Leupold 6-20x50 that has worked well. I would definitely go with a 15x or 16x for the distances we shoot.

[Mattman215]

I run all leupold mark5 in 3-18x. 

[azsugarbear]

As far as magnification goes, I have gravitated to the 6-20/24 range.  On the lower end, I have never found I needed less than 6X to find my target in the scope.  On the higher 20/24X end of things, the extra power provides me with the things I value: such as better trophy identification; better target acquisition; better reading of wind through mirage or watching vegetation downrange.

Regarding optics in general, when I was first getting into serious hunting, the two axioms I heard over and over about scopes were: 1) you get what you pay for; and 2) spend at least as much on your scope as you did on your rifle.  I didn't really take either of those to heart.  Besides, it wasn't in my budget at the time.  Now some thirty years later, I smile at my own naivety.  I also lament the money I spent on inferior optics, often falling for the line "they are nearly as good as..(fill in the blank).  They simply are not.  A new $700 scope is not, and cannot be, nearly as good as a new $1500 scope.  I have left name brands out of the equation as everyone has their favorites (but everyone knows the names of top shelf manufacturers).  The simple fact is: the more expensive scopes come with better glass and much better components.

If I had to do it all over again, I would selectively buy a used quality scope rather than pay the same price for a new scope to put on my rifle.

[trphyhntr]

Sightron 6-24x50 master race 

[azsugarbear]

I'm a big fan of the Sightron SIII 6-24x50.  Great glass and components for the budget minded.