Author Topic: 336 scope suggestions (Read 4917 times)

Swampman · « **Reply #30 on:** September 14, 2010, 10:06:16 AM »

First off don't buy See-Thru rings. I just through away a big bag of them that came off 336s.

There are 2 great 336 scopes. The Bushnell Banner 1.5X4.5X32 and the Nikon Prostaff 2-7X32. You can spend more but you can't buy better.

trapper57 · « **Reply #31 on:** September 28, 2010, 03:49:03 PM »

thanks for all the input , ended up going with the weaver k-series 4x38 & low rings . i love it . now i've got a rossi 357 less than a year old i need to swap for something[MARLIN]that i can put a scope on.

mrussel · « **Reply #32 on:** November 23, 2010, 07:12:08 PM »

What sort of mount and rings are best to use? I just got a 336 in 35 Remington that has a Weaver 3-7x wide view scope on it. The scope is mounted on an old school weaver mount that has hinges on the left side and a pair of clips on the right. The scope rides so low you it gets in the way of the trigger. You end up pinching your finger between the scope and the trigger trying to get it to half cock,that is if you dont drop the hammer all the way.

p15camborne · « **Reply #33 on:** November 24, 2010, 07:30:11 AM »

I use a Leupold VX-I rimfire 2-7x28mm on my Marlin 336. Looks great and shoots great. The smaller scope looks perfect on lever actions.

bilmac · « **Reply #34 on:** November 24, 2010, 07:45:29 AM »

I like the shotgun scopes. They generally have very heavy reticals. They have the parallex set for 50 yds. but I can't see that it makes any difference. Stay away from see through mounts. Lever gun stocks have low combs anyhow, so if you want your eye behind the scope when you mount it, you sure don't need an extra high mount.

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #35 on:** November 24, 2010, 12:51:25 PM »

Mine has a 2.5x Simmons. I saw one that a gunshop just bought last week with a 4-12x Redfield with see-through mounts. Wierd, but the seller claimed to have shot 2 deer with it. That's 2 more that I've shot.

billyjack · « **Reply #36 on:** November 25, 2010, 12:46:56 PM »

I like a good 2x7x32 on a lever gun or maybe a good 4x fixed.

Ghostman · « **Reply #37 on:** November 26, 2010, 02:10:18 AM »

Quote from: federali on September 14, 2010, 09:50:57 AM

I too think the 336 is best served with either a 1-4X or 1.5-5X variable, the best you can afford. I use these scopes on everything and for hunting, I keep them cranked to their lowest magnification for the largest possible field of view at short ranges.

The most important reason for low magnification is not field of view as most assume but the fact that it allows you to use the scope with both eyes open for much quicker target acquisition. The more powerful the scope, the more disorienting it is to keep both eyes open.

Exactly!!!!

Never could understand why anyone would mount a scope on see through mounts or rings. The rediclulously high head position a shooter has using this setup is not condusive to best accuracy. In addition testing has proven sighting and alignment on game is much faster using a low power scope than trying to line up a front & rear open sights.

bilmac · « **Reply #38 on:** November 26, 2010, 08:02:36 AM »

Mrussel,, you need a hammer extension that attaches to the side of your hammer so that you can pull the hammer back. Probably need to go to a good sporting goods store or gunsmith to find one. If you can't use the hinged mount that you have I would recommend just a Weaver mount and rings, again you need to go to a good sporting goods store, they can set you up with the right stuff.

Swampman · « **Reply #39 on:** November 26, 2010, 10:14:41 AM »

I just threw a sack of 336 see-thru mounts away. I hate them.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #40 on:** November 26, 2010, 12:30:47 PM »

I was happy with the 4x Weaver on my 336 for years but aging eyes was the excuse I needed to buy a variable 2x7-35MM. Because of the larger Eye Box I had to go from low to medium mounts to clear the hammer. I do not care for See Thru mounts. I have had free ones offered to me in the past and I turned them down. Weaver 4x shown.

I shoot from the right and left side. I replaced the one sided hammer extinction on my 336 with one designed for the Thompson Contender. I had to file it down on the lower side to gain proper clearance. I did this at the time I replaced the 4X Weaver with the 2x7-35MM Burris. I can safely cock the hammer with the two side extension and return it to the half cock position. Burris scope shown.

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #41 on:** November 26, 2010, 01:20:38 PM »

I hate see-thru mounts. They are less than usless as far as I am concerned! Just use a mount that raises the scope above the hammer and use a hammer extension. If you can't find one, modify one as Siskiyou did.

Empty Quiver · « **Reply #42 on:** November 26, 2010, 07:06:59 PM »

I have a 1.5x5 on my 1895. The see through mounts are pretty useless when it's down to 1.5 power, it is very nearly a red dot at that point.

I have mine mounted with quick release rings. Makes the gun that much more versatile. The mounts don't interfere with the iron sights and make the thing ideal for drives or rainy weather too. The scope has been on and off dozens of times and hold zero just fine, you aren't shooting across canyons so even 4moa shift wouldn't be the end of the world. I see something like .75MOA max change at the worst and usually nothing at all. The bullet is nearly that wide and I'm not concerned in the least.

cheapskate · « **Reply #43 on:** November 27, 2010, 01:48:37 PM »

:PWell here's my two cents, if you put a scope on a lever gun and still want a "quick" gun then use a scope with a 50mm objective to open up the field of view as much as possible. I know most people think i'm crazy, but every little bit helps. Most are 3x somethin's but you don't have to turn it up, i leave mine on 3x power and i'm very pleased with the results. Just buy a quality scope and practice till your wallet hurts!

mrussel · « **Reply #44 on:** November 27, 2010, 11:19:40 PM »

Quote from: cheapskate on November 27, 2010, 01:48:37 PM

:PWell here's my two cents, if you put a scope on a lever gun and still want a "quick" gun then use a scope with a 50mm objective to open up the field of view as much as possible. I know most people think i'm crazy, but every little bit helps. Most are 3x somethin's but you don't have to turn it up, i leave mine on 3x power and i'm very pleased with the results. Just buy a quality scope and practice till your wallet hurts!

I practice with a patch over my left eye,after a while,whenever I look through the scope,my brain focuses on the right one,but my right eye is weak to start with so I need to practice regularly like that that make it keep working. If I let it go for a few months it goes right back to not even really seeing the scope,but instead the image from my left eye when I put the rifle on my shoulder.

Bearcat 74 · « **Reply #45 on:** November 28, 2010, 02:46:44 AM »

a 3-9x50 has pretty much the same field of view as a 3-9x40, the objective size has to do with light gathering and extra weight.

VXII 3-9x50 - FOV @ 100 yds (ft) 14.0 9x (32.3) 3x
VXII 3-9x40 - FOV @ 100 yds (ft) 14.0 9x (32.3) 3x

VXII 1-4x20 - FOV @ 100 yds (ft) 28.5 4x (75.0) 1x

For quick shots with a varible nothing compares with a 1-3 or 4 or 5x scope for field of view.

Ghostman · « **Reply #46 on:** November 28, 2010, 01:50:38 PM »

Quote from: cheapskate on November 27, 2010, 01:48:37 PM

:PWell here's my two cents, if you put a scope on a lever gun and still want a "quick" gun then use a scope with a 50mm objective to open up the field of view as much as possible. I know most people think i'm crazy, but every little bit helps. Most are 3x somethin's but you don't have to turn it up, i leave mine on 3x power and i'm very pleased with the results. Just buy a quality scope and practice till your wallet hurts!

FOV is determined by scope power not objective diameter e.g. a 1-4x20 scope has a LOT more FOV than a 3-9x50. The only thing objective diameter does is let in more light.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #47 on:** November 28, 2010, 04:04:58 PM »

I will join the parade and fly the flag with Bearcat 74 and Ghostman.
Scroll down the page and you will see the field of view of the 3X-9X-50MM does not come close to matching the field of view of their 2X-7X-35MM scope.

http://www.burrisoptics.com/fullfield1.html#2x7x

From my experience with the Burris 2X-7X-35MM on my 336 I am rather impressed. The miracle of modern coated lens over the lens on the old El Paso Weaver it replaced is love at first sight. Hunting in plantations mix with brush, into timber, and then into a recovering clearcut made me a believer. I made a mistake that I normally do not make. I had left the scope turned up to 7X and kicked a small buck out. I quickly shoulder the rifle and I could see the buck was a spike, and free to go. I realized from the magnification the scope was at 7x and I turned it down to 2x. From that experience I believe I could hunt all day with it at 7X if I want to work with the reduced field of view.

I came across this article after ordering my scope. I’ll give the conclusion a plus 1.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/burris_fullfield_II_2-7x.htm

I have a couple of Weaver Classic scopes manufacture in Japan, one is a 3X-9X-38MM and the other is a 2X-10X-38MM scope. I went into the gun store I had purchased the two scopes looking for a 2X-7X but ready to buy another of the above because they are basically the same size as the old 4X Weaver. I know times are tough but the 2X-7X Browning scope was discontinued and could be had for $60 less on the net. If it had been priced right I would have bought it. In turn they had one 3x9 Weaver that had seen a lot of handling and was overpriced.

Years earlier I had bought one of my Japanese Weavers from the store and was happy with it. I do not stop at the place often because it is a 100 mile round trip. I was near there on business and reading the paper at lunch spotted their ad and they had the Weaver scopes on sale. On my way home I stopped and bought one. I looked at the demo, and they handed me one it the box and I failed to check it because I was in a hurry. Being in a hurry can be costly. When I got home I pulled the scope out and it had real nasty scope ring scars. I made a return trip to the store that night and they replaced it. Needless to say I was not happy burning the extra gas and time. I still go into the store about once a year, but they are a not a favorite stop any longer. Okay I got off track, buyer beware.

cheapskate · « **Reply #48 on:** November 28, 2010, 05:21:38 PM »

Hope i didn't ruffle any feathers with the scope comment, so let me clarify my thoughts on the subject as i should have in the first place. I 100% agree that f.o.v. is determined by scope design and magnification, what i was getting at is that i believe a good 3x??x50 is a good scope for general use, the objective does allow for a better picture in low light conditions and the 3x power has a pretty good f.o.v., not near as good as a 1x, but i like it. The weight part i agree with too, but i'm a pretty big feller and i don't pay as much attention to that as maybe i should, but as i said that was my two cents. I also concede that a 1x4x20 VXII may look a little better on a lever gun than a big-tubed behemoth, but then again i think you can't get any better looking than a good set of irons on a classic lever, eyes permittin'. I'll do better next time and thanks for correcting me.

Bearcat 74 · « **Reply #49 on:** December 04, 2010, 04:48:30 AM »

I should have been more clear about the weight comment, I meant in weight in the handling aspect of the rifle and balance. To me a lever should be a quick pointing and easy handling rifle. My 336 wears a 1-3x20mm scope and the 1895G wears a Skinner peep.

Siskiyou · « **Reply #50 on:** December 04, 2010, 06:50:02 AM »

No feathers ruffled at all. My hunting partners and I normally spend a couple of weeks together during hunting season, plus there might be an extra relative or two. Differences of opinion are respected. And we respect the right of one to reinforce his side of the issue.

demented · « **Reply #51 on:** December 23, 2010, 08:22:42 PM »

I use a 1.5x5 on mine with regular Weaver bases and rings. No see throughs for me, always considered them like training wheels on a bicycle, never learn to pick up moving deer in a scope switching back and forth.