Best hunting long range scope

[KurtR]

Disagree. I don’t buy the slippery slope argument and think there is a sensible approach to all this. It’s why we have a legal system for all things in society. Unlimited technology in the hands of human beings will undoubtedly have negative repercussions.

As mentioned above, it’s on the radar of state agencies. I had a Game Warden stop
me a couple years ago, check my license, and we engaged in a friendly conversation. I was in a unit that formally had a great reputation for mule deer but has declined tremendously. I asked the Game Warden what he thought was to blame. He mentioned a lot of the usual suspects like predation, harsh winters, development, highways, etc., but the first thing out of his mouth was long range rifle hunting, so like it or not, the regulations are coming. And yes, there absolutely is data starting to show up illustrating that the average hunter is more lethal now. Otherwise Game agencies wouldn’t bother examining this. It’s not just to irritate people. I dislike needless and ineffective regulations as much as the next guy, but let’s face the facts, pick your poison, do you want the minor inconvenience of some additional rules? Or do you want less tags and even more difficult odds? One or the other is happening. I’ll take some equipment restrictions gladly. It has nothing to do with hunters going at one another. It’s just the application of logic.

Post up some of those reports i would like to read them. I guess im just lucky where i live as i have more hunting to do than i have time.

 

[KurtR]

Success rates havent really risen in 10 years but those are only part of the story. We have the same success rates, with less people in the field and less time in the field. We are getting more efficient at killing. Statistically speaking the more people you have in the field and the longer they are there, the higher the success rate should be simply due to luck. In Utah, we have cut general season deer tags by ~75%, reduce season length by about the same and maintained similar success rates in the last 40-50 years.

As for regulating ourselves out of hunting, I dont disagree with you but if we dont make changes, we are going to reduce tags to levels that people cant hunt anymore either. Its really a double edged sword.

The honest truth of it is we are going to have to decide what we as hunters want. Do we want to hunt once every 10 years or do we want to be less effective at hunting?

So less people in the field but then every other post is people complaining how there are more people than ever out west hunting. just a quick look there was 97000 general deer tags in 1994 and 73075 in 2022 . Looks like a 33% reduction

https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/fact_sheets/hunting_changes.pdf

Hunt	2021	2022
General-season buck deer	74,025	73,075

 

[CorbLand]

So less people in the field but then every other post is people complaining how there are more people than ever out west hunting. just a quick look there was 97000 general deer tags in 1994 and 73075 in 2022 . Looks like a 33% reduction

https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/fact_sheets/hunting_changes.pdf

Hunt	2021	2022
General-season buck deer	74,025	73,075

More people are applying then ever. Applications are the number of hunters. Tags is the number of hunters in the field. There is a big difference between the two.

1994 was 30 years ago. They use to issue ~250,000 tags in Utah leading up to the 70/80s.

People have always complained about too many people in the field...that will never change no matter how many tags they do or do not issue.

 

[Felton]

I'm sure this subject has been beat to death but I'm a little new. I'm looking to build a light weight rifle scope combo for longer range hunting.

Back on track here for a min…

One scope that seems to be left off that gets good reviews is the trijicon credo or tenmile. I’m fond of their 40-44 mm objectives scopes but that’s just me. Someone on the first page posted a link to a rokslider testing scopes. Only a few scopes so far have faired well in that test and the trijicon was one of them. Optics planet has the ffp moa version on sale right now for ~$1100.

 

[bmart2622]

Back on track here for a min…

One scope that seems to be left off that gets good reviews is the trijicon credo or tenmile. I’m fond of their 40-44 mm objectives scopes but that’s just me. Someone on the first page posted a link to a rokslider testing scopes. Only a few scopes so far a faired well in that test and the trijicon was one of them. Optics planet has the ffp moa version on sale right now for ~$1100.

Ive got 2 Credo Hxs that have been great, Id definitely recommend them

 

[KurtR]

More people are applying then ever. Applications are the number of hunters. Tags is the number of hunters in the field. There is a big difference between the two.

1994 was 30 years ago. They use to issue ~250,000 tags in Utah leading up to the 70/80s.

People have always complained about too many people in the field...that will never change no matter how many tags they do or do not issue.

I see the most tags ever issued counting both general and limited was 1988 248685.

Looking at the average rates of success it has not changed much from the 70's to 2013 so how much has it changed from 2013-2023 because of people who could shoot over 500 yards.

In the 40's and 50's they were clipping right along with over a 50% success rate.

here are the numbers from 1925-2013.

Utah Big Game Report 2013.pdf

drive.google.com

 

[CorbLand]

I see the most tags ever issued counting both general and limited was 1988 248685.

Looking at the average rates of success it has not changed much from the 70's to 2013 so how much has it changed from 2013-2023 because of people who could shoot over 500 yards.

In the 40's and 50's they were clipping right along with over a 50% success rate.

here are the numbers from 1925-2013.

Utah Big Game Report 2013.pdf

drive.google.com

I am really confused because you just keep reiterating everything I have already posted.

 

[KurtR]

I am really confused because you just keep reiterating everything I have already posted.

no you said leading up to the 70/80's they were issuing 250k tags. Thats not true going off the numbers provided

by restricting scopes how does that change the number of people hunting or make it so more people can hunt?

Success rates are that regardless if 15 people are hunting or 15000 30% is 30% so i dont see how any correlation can be made that over 10x scopes are affecting the out come of how many deer are being killed a year.

 

[CorbLand]

no you said leading up to the 70/80's they were issuing 250k tags. Thats not true going off the numbers provided

by restricting scopes how does that change the number of people hunting or make it so more people can hunt?

Success rates are that regardless if 15 people are hunting or 15000 30% is 30% so i dont see how any correlation can be made that over 10x scopes are affecting the out come of how many deer are being killed a year.

I can see how I worded that being confusing. I meant that as in they peaked issuing ~250,000 tags in the 70/80s because I couldnt remember the exact year that they peaked but knew it was somewhere in that range which was correct.

I never said that restricting scopes would make it so more people can hunt. I said that looking strictly at success rates does not show the whole story and cannot be the only metric used to say something is effective or ineffective. I backed that up with explaining why. I also said that as hunters we are going to have to start looking at ourselves and ask ourselves if hunting once every 10 years is enough because that is where we are heading.

Other than the one badly worded sentence, which I will take my lickings for, what have you not just been reiterating that I have posted?


Animals, mule deer in particular, are struggling due to a myriad of factors, not just one. Looking at one thing and saying this is why they are issuing less tags is equally as disingenuous as looking at one thing and saying nothing has changed.

 

[KurtR]

I can see how I worded that being confusing. I meant that as in they peaked issuing ~250,000 tags in the 70/80s because I couldnt remember the exact year that they peaked but knew it was somewhere in that range which was correct.

I never said that restricting scopes would make it so more people can hunt. I said that looking strictly at success rates does not show the whole story and cannot be the only metric used to say something is effective or ineffective. I backed that up with explaining why. I also said that as hunters we are going to have to start looking at ourselves and ask ourselves if hunting once every 10 years is enough because that is where we are heading.

Other than the one badly worded sentence, which I will take my lickings for, what have you not just been reiterating that I have posted?


Animals, mule deer in particular, are struggling due to a myriad of factors, not just one. Looking at one thing and saying this is why they are issuing less tags is equally as disingenuous as looking at one thing and saying nothing has changed.

That’s where my issue with regulations like this lie. Isn’t there much bigger problems to focus on. With the population exploding out west not being able to hunt big game every year may be the result. I don’t see how otc and month long seasons is sustainable.

 

[CorbLand]

That’s where my issue with regulations like this lie. Isn’t there much bigger problems to focus on. With the population exploding out west not being able to hunt big game every year may be the result. I don’t see how otc and month long seasons is sustainable.

Population is not the only issue, it’s a myriad of issues. Currently it is not sustainable to stay with the status quo so we can either reduce tags to sustainable levels or put regulations on ourselves to make us less effective and issue the same or more tags. Either way, it’s regulation.

 

[Duh]

So how about that new maven coming out guys….

 

[Kc w]

Wow this thread took a left turn.I want to thank everyone that gave their opinion on scopes. I have been doing a lot of research and reading on all the options posted. I don't have access to look though some of them locally. Of the ones I could look through it just seems to my eyes that the mark 5 is the clearest and I like the turrets and crisp clicks. I know its probably overkill for my needs but I think I'm going to go that route. Now for the best low light conditions. Would the 5-25x56 be better than the 3.5-18x44? Didn't know if the lower power would make up for only being 44mm. Thanks

 

[fwafwow]

Wow this thread took a left turn.I want to thank everyone that gave their opinion on scopes. I have been doing a lot of research and reading on all the options posted. I don't have access to look though some of them locally. Of the ones I could look through it just seems to my eyes that the mark 5 is the clearest and I like the turrets and crisp clicks. I know its probably overkill for my needs but I think I'm going to go that route. Now for the best low light conditions. Would the 5-25x56 be better than the 3.5-18x44? Didn't know if the lower power would make up for only being 44mm. Thanks

Did you read the link in post #2? If not, but the 5-25 and 3.5-18 are covered here -
Thread '2x Leupold Mark 5 Field Evaluations'
https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/

 

[Kc w]

Did you read the link in post #2? If not, but the 5-25 and 3.5-18 are covered here -
Thread '2x Leupold Mark 5 Field Evaluations'
https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/

I missed that. Thank you

 

[Kc w]

Did you read the link in post #2? If not, but the 5-25 and 3.5-18 are covered here -
Thread '2x Leupold Mark 5 Field Evaluations'
https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/2x-leupold-mark-5-field-evaluations.278289/

That link didn't really answer what I was looking for but seems like a weird test for any scopes. I understand that everyone wants a durable scope but abusing them and then wonering why they don't hold up seems like a mute point to me. I didn't read them all but I bet not very many of them held up.

 

[fwafwow]

That link didn't really answer what I was looking for but seems like a weird test for any scopes. I understand that everyone wants a durable scope but abusing them and then wonering why they don't hold up seems like a moot point to me. I didn't read them all but I bet not very many of them held up.

I’m just trying to be helpful. Some do hold up. Personally I don’t think the tests are abusive.

 

[CorbLand]

The more you magnify things the more light you need to maintain the clarity. If you don’t need the extra magnification, your adding weigh and size for nothing.

As for the tests. It’s designed to replicate things that can and do happen when hunting, specifically back country hunting. Tripping, dropping a gun, bouncing around in pickups, falling over when leaned up against something, etc.

 

[Kc w]

I’m just trying to be helpful. Some do hold up. Personally I don’t think the tests are abusive.

I do appriciate it. I would just take better care of it than that. Personally the better glass would interest me more than being super robust. Thank you for helping tho. Every insite helps

 

[Kc w]

The more you magnify things the more light you need to maintain the clarity. If you don’t need the extra magnification, your adding weigh and size for nothing.

As for the tests. It’s designed to replicate things that can and do happen when hunting, specifically back country hunting. Tripping, dropping a gun, bouncing around in pickups, falling over when leaned up against something, etc.

So you think smaller scope would be as clear (bright)turned down to 3.5 as the 56mm on 5 power? Didn't know if there was any way to figure that out?

I realize things do happen out in the field. Heck I've had them happen. Just seems that many droppes on and scope will be hard on them. Would be interesting to do that test with one drop on scopes and see which ones fair better or fail.