Author Topic: 4X or 6X? (Read 799 times)

Losthwy · « **on:** July 25, 2003, 07:03:35 PM »

4X or 6x. Is the 6x too much? Main concern is quickly finding the target. What is your experience?

Zachary · « **Reply #1 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:29:25 AM »

It depends. What will you be hunting? Where? Etc.

If you will be hunting Elk in thick woods, then even 4x would be too much. If you will be hunting varmints out in the open west where 500 yard shots are common, then 6x is too little.

That notwithstanding, many people, especially seasoned hunters with more than 20 years of experience, will tell you, and perhaps rightfully so, that 4x is all you need for most of your big game hunting. In fact, several years ago (like 30 years ago) the vast majority of scopes were 4x for big game rifles, where as 6x were the norm for varmints. If a big game hunter had a 6x on his big game rifle, then he was considered somewhat of a radical.

(It's true.)

Today the norm has shifted to variables because, unlike 30 years ago when the variables were not all that dependable as a fixed scope, today variables are SUPER reliable. The most popular magnification range is the 3x-9x-40.

Accordingly, the question begs to be asked: Why aren't you considering a variable 3x-9x? It would definately be must more useful.

Zachary

longwinters · « **Reply #2 on:** July 26, 2003, 04:19:12 PM »

Yup, I gotta agree with the Zach man, even though I hunted with a 4x wideangle for years I would never give up my variables. Although, the straight 4x would be great on my blackpowder rifle. :-)

Losthwy · « **Reply #3 on:** July 28, 2003, 05:29:17 PM »

Two main reasons I'm going to a fixed. One they weigh less and this is going on a rifle that will be used long days in the mountains where every ounce counts. Also the fixed powers are very bright. From what I've heard the Leupold 6x42mm is brighter than the Swaroski varibles.

jhm · « **Reply #4 on:** July 29, 2003, 04:03:33 AM »

Losthwy: Since you stated you were going to be using it in the Mtns. I would go with the 6x as you may have a little bit longer shot than you think, but both are excellent choices

JIM

Zachary · « **Reply #5 on:** July 29, 2003, 01:04:00 PM »

Actually, it is true that fixed scopes (all else being equal) are brighter than variables. The reason for this is because fixed scopes have fewer lenses. You know how certain companies say that they have 91%, 95% etc. light transmission? Well, they mean "per lens." As such, the more lenses there are, the less light transmission there is.

As for the weight, I think that there are some compact scopes out there that are just as light, if not lighter, than fixed scopes.

Still, I don't want you to think that I am necessarily forcing you to get a variable scope. Granted, at least to me, I don't think that a couple of ounces will make a big difference, even at the end of a long day in the mountains, but I respect your decision either way.

Accordingly, as for your specific question - fixed 4x or 6x, if I had to pick one of the two, then it would be the 6x, and the Leupold is a good bet.

Zachary

waldo · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2003, 05:13:15 PM »

I'm becomming increasingly disenchanted with variable power scopes.

There was once a day when I just HAD to have a high magnification variable with all the bells and whistles. :roll: I peaked with a 6-24x Black Diamond with a Ballistic Plex on my varmint/deer rifle. It's not that that setup doesn't work, it does. Or at least it can. I layed waste to hundeds upon hundreds of varmints and downed several deer-of-unusual-size with that rig. HOWEVER, in hind sight it was merely a phychological advantage combined with ton's of practice that accounted for my success. Today, that same rifle (25-06 Ruger Varmint, tang safety) wears a Weaver 6x. And I've never enjoyed that rifle more! I probably do more with that single gun than all others combined, so it's a good fit. What's more, I'm as lethal as ever, target acquisition is easier, and frankly more shot's connect more often. And I didn't miss all that much before!!

The last coyote I blasted was over 400yds; no problem. The ONLY gripe is that LR pdoggin' ain't what it used to be! :roll: But then my 12xtopped .22-250 is the propper tool for that job.

Funny, I have a 4x on a 223 an don't feel it's underscoped at all. Infact, I find shots with that rifle are more often missed 'cause of the wind.

What it boils down to (at least in my mind) is that higher magnification will NOT make you a better shot. I am of the thought that as variables have become more reliable and effective, the shooter has generally become less. Save your $$$ where you can and invest in ammo and practice. That's a shooter's best bet. IMHO