Wondering who has just lived with having a heavy scope on a light weight rifle?

[Outdoorsman12b]

No free lunch. 24oz is actually really light when talking about scopes that make shooting at distance repeatable achievable.

If you honestly willing to keep shots within 300 then you can get away with something more slender and fitting for a regular weight hunting rifle.

 

[Elite]

No free lunch. 24oz is actually really light when talking about scopes that make shooting at distance repeatable achievable.

If you honestly willing to keep shots within 300 then you can get away with something more slender and fitting for a regular weight hunting rifle.

I definitely like to shoot to 1000 yards at the range and would and have taken game at 500 yards. I found the 3x9 did not have the magnification for the range


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[peaches]

Butt heavy and top heavy rifles are NOT a joy to carry. A SWFA 3-9 is about as heavy as I like on a light rifle like a TIKKA. For non-dialing a Ballistic plex Burris or Trijicon will make hits at most hunting ranges we encounter. It's that what-if scenario that drives you nuts when making a decision. Of course, not everyone hunts the same way or same terrain.

 

[Mojave]

I had a 34mm 5-25x56 on a Blaser K95 until I sold it. Gun weighed 5 pounds, scope and rifle weighed 7.

 

[BradArnett]

I have a 20oz swfa 3-9 on my 5.5# seekins element. Rifle is still only 7# with that scope

 

[Seeknelk]

I had a 34mm 5-25x56 on a Blaser K95 until I sold it. Gun weighed 5 pounds, scope weighed 7.

Now that's a heavy scope! 7#?

 

[huntsman22]

I have a LRHS on a Kimber Montana.

 

[SDHNTR]

Why don’t scope manufacturers use titanium so we don’t have to agree to this weight vs durability tradeoff?

Serious question I’ve wondered for a few years, ever since I graduated from set and forget scopes. Yes I know it would cost more but people are already spending $4k on scopes these days. Eliminate the tradeoff and we’d really have something innovative!

 

[PathFinder]

Titanium wouldn't likely be lighter. It's quite a bit heavier than aluminum, so it would have to take advantage of its superior strength and be extremely thin. Something that precise would be even more difficult to manufacture, titanium is not cheap or easy to form or machine.
An extremely rigid composite with very low CTE is a more likely option. Lighter, stronger than aluminum, easier to manufacture. Just needs to be extremely rigid.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Marbles]

Why don’t scope manufacturers use titanium so we don’t have to agree to this weight vs durability tradeoff?

Serious question I’ve wondered for a few years, ever since I graduated from set and forget scopes. Yes I know it would cost more but people are already spending $4k on scopes these days. Eliminate the tradeoff and we’d really have something innovative!

Titanium is a good bit heavier than Aluminum. It is also a lot harder to machine. 7075-T6 Al is stronger and stiffer by weight than grade 4 Ti. A lot easier to work with to.

 

[505Wapiti]

Have Nightforce SHV on ultralight. It’s like mounting a brick on top but it’s a tack driver so I deal with it.

 

[slowelk]

Titanium is a good bit heavier than Aluminum. It is also a lot harder to machine. 7075-T6 Al is stronger and stiffer by weight than grade 4 Ti. A lot easier to work with to.

I’ve never found a clear answer on what types of aluminum is used in scope tube bodies. I’d love know to see if there were any correlation between performance and material type.

6061 is your generic and most commonly used “aircraft grade” aluminum. 7075 is somewhat common, but less so, but also twice the strength of 6061. I just don’t know if a stiffer shell would really improve performance when dealing with impacts.

 

[Marbles]

I’ve never found a clear answer on what types of aluminum is used in scope tube bodies. I’d love know to see if there were any correlation between performance and material type.

6061 is your generic and most commonly used “aircraft grade” aluminum. 7075 is somewhat common, but less so, but also twice the strength of 6061. I just don’t know if a stiffer shell would really improve performance when dealing with impacts.

The point was that for weight, titanium is not king. I'm sure plenty of manufacturers use the cheaper and easier to work 6061 Al. I could not tell you if one could design a lighter scope that is equally as strong using 7075 or not. My guess, is you could.

Nightforce uses 6061. The Trijicon ACOG uses 7075, Trijicon does not say for most of their other scopes, so probably 6061. S&B supposedly uses 7075, but that is not from a reliable source.

 

[sdupontjr]

Tikka T3 308, Schmidt Bender Polar 4-16x56. And for what I do with it, wouldn't change 1 thing.

 

[30338]

Big fan of lighter rifles and heavier scopes. And solid rails and rings.

 

[Macintosh]

If your criteria is 15-18x, dials accurately and repeatably, and takes a licking, then 24oz IS a light scope. Even the leupold version of the that size scope weighs just 2-4oz less. TANSTAAFL.

 

[teesquare]

Big fan of lighter rifles and heavier scopes. And solid rails and rings.

And a fan of wrong-handed rifles for those of us in our right mind! I am a left hand shooter - and like your set ups.

 

[ChromeKype]

Tikka T3 308, Schmidt Bender Polar 4-16x56. And for what I do with it, wouldn't change 1 thing.

How’s your cheek weld on that? I love the Polar and want to get one for a Blaser r8.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk