Looking for scope advice to replace Kahles 3-9x42 American Hunter

[ShawnieP]

Do you understand the downsides?

Btw, I shot an aoudad last week too.

I earned that response, touché.

I guess I don’t understand the downsides. I’m thinking this rifle will get shot 200-300 times or less total over the rest of my life. When y’all say the sub $1000 high power scopes don’t hold zero, is this after getting pounded repeatedly during heavy range sessions? Or is it like a doesn’t hold up the life of a barrel or what?

 

[prm]

If someone wants more zoom they really don’t need to justify it to the crowd.

The Trijicon Credo has 4-15x50, 2.5-15x56, or 2.5-10x56, come in just under 1k.

 

[Wrench]

That Kahles is one of the best optically out there in that range. They punch way above their belt.

You can get more mag and you can get turrets.....but you're not likely to best it optically for less than twice your budget.

I would look at the trijicons at eurooptic and the lrhs at GAP. You're going to end up quite a bit heavier and higher rings will mean higher cheek weld too.....so plan that into your budget.

 

[SDHNTR]

I earned that response, touché.

I guess I don’t understand the downsides. I’m thinking this rifle will get shot 200-300 times or less total over the rest of my life. When y’all say the sub $1000 high power scopes don’t hold zero, is this after getting pounded repeatedly during heavy range sessions? Or is it like a doesn’t hold up the life of a barrel or what?

That’s what I’m trying to communicate. People who think they want or need more zoom often don’t even understand what they are saying. They don’t understand that there are big downsides. There is pretty much never a reason to use more than about 14x when hunting, and certainly not in second focal plane. ( Do you know what that means?) Higher mag dramatically shrinks field of view, that’s bad. Really bad for hunting. It makes it nearly impossible to see your impacts, which is critical. It also makes it difficult to re-acquire your target after the first shot. Sometimes, a follow up shot is critical too. High mag, over about 14x in most scopes, shrinks field of view to the point of making any additional magnification actually a genuine negative in the field.

Furthermore, higher mag scopes require bigger objective lenses to make that mag usable at lower light. This is the world of 56mm objectives. That makes a scope heavier and also requires higher mounting (bad for consistent cheek weld on most hunting stocks). It also requires a longer scope tube, again more weight, and/or challenges with parralax.

So when I say no one needs more than 14x mag while hunting, that’s not just my subjective opinion. There are legitimate negatives to that much magnification that most fans of such magnification don’t even understand.

Keep an open mind and educate yourself before you dismiss important factors.

 

[btmonnat]

I prefer nothing over a 10-12 max power but my limit where I Hunt is 400 yards. I like to maintain a good fov