|
|
Post by Purebred Redneck on Sept 20, 2011 21:52:28 GMT -5
Alright, I'm torn...
I want a scope for a Remington 742 semi-auto but I can also see it going on a slug gun someday.
Intentions would be:
--- To shoot at 100 yards at the range and under 100 yards when hunting (quite possibly 25-50 yards - though I should mention my intentions are to use a see-thru mount as well)
--- Take moving shots if need be ie: deer drive
There is some advantage to the 1.5 vs the 2 at extreme close range. This is going to go on a close range rig.
There seems to be however a greater distinction when you compare the 4.5 max power to the 7 max power. 7x would be the prefered range shooting power (though I don't shoot but a 1/2 box a year) but perhaps more importantly 7x would give you a much better look at deer given we are for the most part an antler restriction state.
I should note, the 1.5x4.5 would be a Firefly glow reticle vs the 2x7 standard reticle.
What say you?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Sept 20, 2011 22:18:43 GMT -5
I say, if you're going to use see thru mounts, forget the whole thing and stay with the open sights. See thru mounts are too high- they will force you to take your cheek off the cheekpiece and hunt around for a view through the scope. So, when that deer comes by, and you don't have much time, instead of hunting around for a view through the scope you may never get, stick with the open sights, where you can put your cheek on the cheekpiece for a good cheek weld, and get fast alignment of your eye and the sights.
Now, if you ditch the garbage mounts and use a decent set of low mounts on that rifle, different story. You'll be able to get good alignment of your eye through the scope, and quickly acquire the target.
Since you're not going to do a lot of range shooting, I would probably select the 1.5-4.5 to get the larger field of view at the lower power. Although, a 2-7 isn't bad, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Sept 21, 2011 7:47:52 GMT -5
2x7. Never had a problem at 2 power even at close range.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimiowa on Sept 21, 2011 11:09:52 GMT -5
I agree with Jack! I tried the see through mounts and they were never right for either scope positioning or iron site shooting.
Besides which this is a heavy rifle and making it even more top heavy will have a negative effect on handling.
An autoloader for hunting (jump shooting) should point and handle like a shotgun.
The see through mounts are in a junk box!
As far as 1.5 VS 2X I don't think most people could distinguish a difference.
Firefly VS Standard reticule. That depends on whether you intend to use it under failing light Dawn or Dusk? Times that would be marginally legal in Iowa, due to shooting hours provisions.
What I'm saying is if it's too dark to see the reticle, it's probably not legal.
Lighted reticles are only good if you carry extra batteries and take extra precautions to check the batteries and turn them off when not in use. And remember Batteries fade quickly in cold weather.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimh on Sept 21, 2011 11:54:31 GMT -5
jim the firefly model does not use batterys. you hold a flashlight against the objective face for about 30 seconds and the reticle glows for about an hour on its own. but the cross hairs are way too thick for my taste but to each their own.
|
|
|
|
Post by dovehunter on Sept 21, 2011 15:15:13 GMT -5
I guess I'm going to be in the minority here and recommend the 1.5-4.5 based on the type of shooting you anticipate. I personally have never had any problems with the see-thru mounts. I have always felt more comfortable with higher mounts anyway. Maybe I have a long neck or something.
|
|
bounce
Royal Member
Posts: 5,727
|
Post by bounce on Sept 21, 2011 21:32:38 GMT -5
A 3-9 x50 SIMMONS with Weaver 1" mounts sits on my 742 works great for me & several deer now. Corse in .243 I always have to use all 5 shots just to bring them down, then I re-load to finish them off............lol. Now that's MO. Red Neck style an't it ? I know the $39 I paid for the scope new is.....lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmarriott on Sept 22, 2011 18:27:08 GMT -5
Get the refield red. 2-7 X33. Better for the shooting bench and just as good in the field. Lifetime warranty, Made in USA only non usa part is the lens made in japan. Leopold is now the owner of redfield. Shameless link. That is the way i voted. If the coatings are right the firefly is not needed. swfa.com/Redfield-2-7x33-Revolution-Rifle-Scope-P44466.aspxPersonally i like the 1-4 X 24 (or even the leopold ultra light 2.5X) on light rifles Mounted so you can just get a match under the scope and barrel. Warne makes nice quick release rings and with the ultra light you can normally see the factory irons with a quick twist of the screws in case of emergency, heavy fog, heavy snow or rain ect. Personally I think magnification in an east of the mississippi rifle is overrated. Now all you west coasters might think different. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack on Sept 22, 2011 22:19:27 GMT -5
Interesting point about east of the Mississippi- and not wrong. Where you're going to be hunting makes a lot of difference.
Where I am in the East, the longest shot I routinely see is about 175 yards, across a food plot. Typical woods ranges are more like 40-60 yards. Consequently, I have a couple rifles set up for that food plot type opportunity. One rifle wears a 2-8 Burris Signature, the other a 3-9 MeOpta.
Rifles that I'm likely to carry in the woods have either a peep sight, or a scope in the 1-4 range. Those rifles probably wouldn't be much use out in Bounces, Twomoons, and D-D's territory, but they work well in the thick stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by deputydon on Sept 23, 2011 7:32:35 GMT -5
Interesting point about east of the Mississippi- and not wrong. Where you're going to be hunting makes a lot of difference. Where I am in the East, the longest shot I routinely see is about 175 yards, across a food plot. Typical woods ranges are more like 40-60 yards. Consequently, I have a couple rifles set up for that food plot type opportunity. One rifle wears a 2-8 Burris Signature, the other a 3-9 MeOpta. Rifles that I'm likely to carry in the woods have either a peep sight, or a scope in the 1-4 range. Those rifles probably wouldn't be much use out in Bounces, Twomoons, and D-D's territory, but they work well in the thick stuff. I think the others here would agree with what I'm gonna say ...... MOST of the deer I kill year in and year out are shot @ less than 100 yards..... However there are/have been times where I will see the deer serveral hundreds of yards away and put "The sneak" on it. That's the beauty of here. Crick bottoms are thick and the "high" country you can see across the ridgetops forever........ And if a guy feels jumpy and the deer is worth it a ridgetop to ridgetop shot can be a several hundred yard shot!!!! I have hunted in alot of far away places but,,,, there's nowhere like home..... |
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Sept 24, 2011 8:50:18 GMT -5
Use to be that 100-200 yd shots was the norm. Up here in SD where I hunt if you can't shoot 300 you might be in trouble. 600 yd shots are not unusual. If you don't mind shooting a little wiener buck you can usually drive up on one of them but if your looking at an educated buck/doe you spot it with bino's and then stalk as close as you can and that might be as close as 300 yds or some time as close as 600 yds. Hunting open prairie with no tree's can prove to be a challenge. All my rifles carry 6.5X20 scopes except for two and one has a 8.5X25 on it and the other a 14X35.
Now if your hunting hills deer and you got an old .30-30 and can hit a pie plate at 50 yds your good to go. That could change with the Spruce beetle eating its way through the Forrest up here and Forrest fires do open things up a bit.
|
|
bounce
Royal Member
Posts: 5,727
|
Post by bounce on Sept 24, 2011 8:56:59 GMT -5
Puting on the sneak over your Rattle snakes don't excite me much bill, I'd rather drive up on the little one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Sept 25, 2011 9:27:03 GMT -5
Aahh that does present a whole new set of problems Bounce. ;D I think that might be under the subject of Running and Gunning.  |
|
|
|
Post by deputydon on Sept 25, 2011 9:52:28 GMT -5
Puting on the sneak over your Rattle snakes don't excite me much bill, I'd rather drive up on the little one. That's my excuse for a new set of "Snake Boots" from Cabela's...... Someday Bill "might" invite me out to hunt..... |
|
