Scope weight

[bmart2622]

^^^^^^

 

[realunlucky]

Jim Shockey hunts far more often and in far more rugged places than ANYONE here..much, much more and lets see, just what does the pro of pro's Jim have on his Nosler rifle? Anyone care to guess? Argument is over. ENOUGH SAID!

This honestly is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.

Hope it was in jest.

 

[Balderdash]

Jim Shockey hunts far more often and in far more rugged places than ANYONE here..much, much more and lets see, just what does the pro of pro's Jim have on his Nosler rifle? Anyone care to guess? Argument is over. ENOUGH SAID!

The bobber's tickled but still above water. Nice cast, though.

 

[TheGDog]

Well I'd imagine it'd kinda depends on how much magnification it is that you personally feel comfortable with having in order that it will allow you to still make those 500-600yd shots with your cartridge, that you're stating you need to be able to make. At targets of the size in you intend to go after.

I'd say it'd also hinge on what's the smallest kinda game animal you plan to shoot with that particular rifle.

Cause like... let's say it was a .243 Win, and the guy is using it for Deer... but also occasionally touches-up his skills on things like Ground Squirrels or Prairie Dogs at distance.

So for those smaller targets at distance like that, that's where you really start enjoying more magnification. And generally speaking when the magnification goes up? The weight goes up. And when the quality of glass goes up? Generally the more the weight of the glass seems to go up as well. At least as far as I've seen. Then with more money they can try to make the metal parts of the scope be lighter, while still being strong.

So perhaps if you know this rifle will only ever be used just for deer up in the Alpine. Then since Deer are bigger targets, you could probably get away with a lesser amount of magnification on the top end. Compared to the guy that's pulling double-duty with his rifle.

 

[Macintosh]

Its a shame there is no beating a dead horse emoji around here. Feel sorry for the OP ask a question about weight and get the same boringly predictable back and forth. Man, this endless scope thing gets reeeeeeeaaaaallly old really fast. It’s religion, blonde vs brunette, ford vs chevy, and pig wrestling all rolled into one seemingly harmless topic. For the love of all that’s holy will someone just make a “durable scope manifesto” with a few links to the HUNDREDS of virtually identical threads on each of the various subtopics where this was discussed ad endless nauseum (lightweight scopes, scope magnification, illuminated, ffp vs 2fp, do-all scopes for dialing, what scope for a 7mm, the running score-board of drop-tested scopes, etc), make it a sticky in the standard optics forum, and let that link do the talking when this question inevitably gets asked (weekly), so we can dispense with the bickering and egos?

 

[Balderdash]

Its a shame there is no beating a dead horse emoji around here. Feel sorry for the OP ask a question about weight and get the same boringly predictable back and forth. Man, this endless scope thing gets reeeeeeeaaaaallly old really fast. It’s religion, blonde vs brunette, ford vs chevy, and pig wrestling all rolled into one seemingly harmless topic. For the love of all that’s holy will someone just make a “durable scope manifesto” with a few links to the HUNDREDS of virtually identical threads on each of the various subtopics where this was discussed ad endless nauseum (lightweight scopes, scope magnification, illuminated, ffp vs 2fp, do-all scopes for dialing, what scope for a 7mm, the running score-board of drop-tested scopes, etc), make it a sticky in the standard optics forum, and let that link do the talking when this question inevitably gets asked (weekly), so we can dispense with the bickering and egos?

Does it strike you as ironic in any way that, given your stated distaste for redundant scope discussions, you'd select this thread in the first place, take the time to read through the posts, and then proceed to use your time and energy to compose and post a longish diatribe on how old scope discussions can get?

 

[Ross]

Depends on your hunting style. If not covering tons of ground or vertical go with whatever you like. If looking for an all mountain rifle and weight is important keep it in the lighter range. You can get a very reliable score in the 12-15 oz range. Pack a heavy rifle scope combo day after day in rugged country and you soon May question a sniper setup.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

Does it strike you as ironic in any way that, given your stated distaste for redundant scope discussions, you'd select this thread in the first place, take the time to read through the posts, and then proceed to use your time and energy to compose and post a longish diatribe on how old scope discussions can get?

While I don't have a huge distaste for the scope questions, the inevitable dropped vs not dropped crowd stuff is getting old. Yet I still read it, because it is somewhat entertaining. I mean, this thread brought us the my horse stepped on it standard, which is next level.

Example: Someone chimes off "I shoot a leupold, and its the best, you are all wrong, and oh by the way it is also so durable I did "X" to it."

And: then people just can't help themselves.

I value the durability testing, the published results, and all that stuff. It has certainly shaped what I would consider buying for a rifle optic. I also appreacite when people compact that whole line of thought into "did you read X forum on this topic" rather than just launching into it all.

This is kinda like the guys who used to hop on talking about how their new Kuiu pack was the greatest thing ever, and then the Kifaru crowd would let loose.....it'll pass with time.

 

[ChrisAU]

Jim Shockey hunts far more often and in far more rugged places than ANYONE here..much, much more and lets see, just what does the pro of pro's Jim have on his Nosler rifle? Anyone care to guess? Argument is over. ENOUGH SAID!

You talking about the guy who also has commercials about having to have a laser with him at all times to check and adjust zero? Wonder why he thinks that is an essential product to have for a hunter?

 

[venado mula]

While I don't have a huge distaste for the scope questions, the inevitable dropped vs not dropped crowd stuff is getting old. Yet I still read it, because it is somewhat entertaining. I mean, this thread brought us the my horse stepped on it standard, which is next level.

Example: Someone chimes off "I shoot a leupold, and its the best, you are all wrong, and oh by the way it is also so durable I did "X" to it."

And: then people just can't help themselves.

I value the durability testing, the published results, and all that stuff. It has certainly shaped what I would consider buying for a rifle optic. I also appreacite when people compact that whole line of thought into "did you read X forum on this topic" rather than just launching into it all.

This is kinda like the guys who used to hop on talking about how their new Kuiu pack was the greatest thing ever, and then the Kifaru crowd would let loose.....it'll pass with time.

A guy ask's for an opinion based on experience and you end up getting the denialists and delusionists that can't except reality. And we let these people vote.

 

[Happy Antelope]

You talking about the guy who also has commercials about having to have a laser with him at all times to check and adjust zero? Wonder why he thinks that is an essential product to have for a hunter?

Well to be fair it's a bore sighter not a laser to zero in a scope. Lots of options for bore sighting, lasers, bore sighters, looking own the barrel, etc. I carry a bore sighter with me on any hunt with long or plane travel also, especially when you only have a limited amount of ammo. There are maybe less than 10 people on the planet who have hunter more places and harder than Jim. The guy is far from a joke. That being said he does make money from endorsements, but so do most humans on the planet who are exceptional at something. Jim can be sponsored by any optics company he wants I would imagine.

 

[Happy Antelope]

Having sold tens of thousands of scopes over the years I agree with a lot of the comments in here. There is NO right answer, there are options. If you are trying to get super lite, the Swaro Z5 or something lite like it is a super great option. If beating the tree with your scope is important, we all know the few brands. I would however put some value in plastic vs metal parts for durability if thats the concern, turret height can be an issue when knocked around, etc. Animals are killed with all sorts of scopes, find what you like, check off a few boxes and good luck.

 

[ChrisAU]

Well to be fair it's a bore sighter not a laser to zero in a scope. Lots of options for bore sighting, lasers, bore sighters, looking own the barrel, etc. I carry a bore sighter with me on any hunt with long or plane travel also, especially when you only have a limited amount of ammo. There are maybe less than 10 people on the planet who have hunter more places and harder than Jim. The guy is far from a joke. That being said he does make money from endorsements, but so do most humans on the planet who are exceptional at something. Jim can be sponsored by any optics company he wants I would imagine.

For the record I love his show, he’s obviously much more experienced than nearly all of us, and I envy his lifestyle. I like him as a person as far as I can tell.

But as far as his endorsement meaning anything, we all know that is crap. I’ve read a few of his stories where his scopes magically lost zero. Here’s a funny one.

Jim Shockey Learns VX-6 Lesson the Hard Way

For the record I'm not a fan of his, can't stand his stupid bandanas(those belong in the 'hood) he buys his hunts instead of relying on skill. Saw an episode of his show where he was sheep hunting in Russia, getting helicoptered to and from various camps and finally got a shot on a good...

www.longrangehunting.com

 

[Happy Antelope]

For the record I love his show, he’s obviously much more experienced than nearly all of us, and I envy his lifestyle. I like him as a person as far as I can tell.

But as far as his endorsement meaning anything, we all know that is crap. I’ve read a few of his stories where his scopes magically lost zero. Here’s a funny one.

Jim Shockey Learns VX-6 Lesson the Hard Way

For the record I'm not a fan of his, can't stand his stupid bandanas(those belong in the 'hood) he buys his hunts instead of relying on skill. Saw an episode of his show where he was sheep hunting in Russia, getting helicoptered to and from various camps and finally got a shot on a good...

www.longrangehunting.com

I have seen the episode, Russia ya? The product is marketed and called a bore sighter, definitely not to zero a scope. The greatest hunters in the world all make mistakes, lucky for him it wasn't a situation where it cost him his life like a lot of guys.

 

[Marbles]

Its a shame there is no beating a dead horse emoji around here. Feel sorry for the OP ask a question about weight and get the same boringly predictable back and forth. Man, this endless scope thing gets reeeeeeeaaaaallly old really fast. It’s religion, blonde vs brunette, ford vs chevy, and pig wrestling all rolled into one seemingly harmless topic. For the love of all that’s holy will someone just make a “durable scope manifesto” with a few links to the HUNDREDS of virtually identical threads on each of the various subtopics where this was discussed ad endless nauseum (lightweight scopes, scope magnification, illuminated, ffp vs 2fp, do-all scopes for dialing, what scope for a 7mm, the running score-board of drop-tested scopes, etc), make it a sticky in the standard optics forum, and let that link do the talking when this question inevitably gets asked (weekly), so we can dispense with the bickering and egos?

My small ego is only capable of beating a dead horse, so I appreciate having dead horses to beat rather than never getting to beat anything.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

A guy ask's for an opinion based on experience and you end up getting the denialists and delusionists that can't except reality. And we let these people vote.

Careful. "And we let these people vote" is straightup garbage, you can stuff that somewhere else. I can't follow the logic of how a personal attack on the internet provides any sort of value, and you certainly are not in a position to render any sort of judegement on the topic via Rokslide interactions. I also take exception to your use of language; it is "accept."

Regardless, if you are referring to me calling out this horse on optic situation, good on you. I'm not doubting it, but it makes for a most excellent example of "but my scope survived this so they all are good" - I'm not saying yours did not. Bringing actual field experience to the table is certainly valuable. But your example is quite bombastic. Thank you for sharing. I would absolutely LOVE to see a photo of the aformentioned scope, post horse, if available.

 

[Balderdash]

A guy ask's for an opinion based on experience and you end up getting the denialists and delusionists that can't except reality. And we let these people vote.

Kinda like denying that others have had trouble with models and or brands of scope that you champion? Or is someone only living in reality when they state something that agrees with your experiences, thoughts, beliefs, etc?

I had trouble with 4 gold rings over the years. Had many of them at one time. Failure to hold zero and failure to RTZ after dialing were the issues I experienced. I can assure you without any equivocalities that it was not delusion but reality that they were not working as they were supposed to.

 

[35WhelenAI]

How do you define reliability? When you travel to hunt, do you sight in your rifke when you arrive to your location, or close to your hunt location? Have you done a ladder test? Have you ever dropped your rifle? If so, did you sight it in after the drop?

I can define it as 30 years hunting Colorado high country on foot, packing in on foot and packing out. Never lost a zero, plenty of opportunity with the bumps and scrapes over the years in the woods and in camp. VX-IIc, VX-II, Leupold compact, B&L 3200, Redfield Illuminator, all 3-9X. YMMV.

It is foolish after a notable drop or impact not to verify zero. Animals deserve better than that. Just because it survives a drop test doesn't mean the mounts haven't gotten jostled.

 

[Macintosh]

No, I dont find it ironic at all actually, because Im not talking about the actual scope discussion. I enjoy the minutia, and I appreciate durable equipment having had the usual suspects lose zero multiple times myself, and now having other scopes NOT lose zero. A guy asks a question about weight (I dont particularly notice a difference in balance and handling with scopes having weights between 11oz and 28oz even on a really light rifle, so my scopes I tend to not quibble over a couple ounces and err on the side of durability having had problems with that…you can find lotsof info on that here that matches my personal experience ), and all of a sudden here’s the same old put-downs, questioning of others experiences and even moral character.
The point is that I DO enjoy the question and answers, that’s WHY the same old thing gets old, and why it’s worth the “somewhat lengthy diatribe”. Its not that hard to say the same thing without going around and around on it. It’s not the scope discussion, its the laughing emojies directed at one persons experience that results in comments about why certain people are allowed to vote, etc. yawn and deja vu all at the same time. Not why Im here, and I know for a fact Im not alone.

 

[Bubblehide]

I can define it as 30 years hunting Colorado high country on foot, packing in on foot and packing out. Never lost a zero, plenty of opportunity with the bumps and scrapes over the years in the woods and in camp. VX-IIc, VX-II, Leupold compact, B&L 3200, Redfield Illuminator, all 3-9X. YMMV.

It is foolish after a notable drop or impact not to verify zero. Animals deserve better than that. Just because it survives a drop test doesn't mean the mounts haven't gotten jostled.

Well, leopold has not worked out for me, and many others I know. In fact, as I stated previously, I have one that came apart, and a horse didn't even step on it. But hey, I glad they work for you.