.308 hunting rifle. Ideal scope?

[MalleeFarmer]

Ok so I've got a few rifles. A 204 .22-250 and 2 308s.
One of my .308s has a high mag scope which I use for target shooting on my own property. No Comps and no actual range. But I have a Mauser with open sights that is to be a hunting rifle. Now I want a scope with relatively low power suitable for anything from 25yds out to 300 yards. Most likely. 50yds out to 200. I also don't want to break the bank. Cheers in advance

[southeast varmiter]

red dot 3 moa. I have a Bushnell trophy. Hits dead on to 300 yards

[Chronos]

I'm struggling to understand how a .308 is going to shoot dead on to 300y. Even with a 200y zero there would be nearly 9" of drop at 300y

Anyway I've taken a 3-9x40 VX2 off my .308 and put a used 2.5-8x36 VX3 on it. I think it's a very hard to beat scope on a walk around hunting rifle.

Chronos

[brett1868]

What Chronos said...all my hunting rifles have a Leupold VX2 4-12x50 and they're fine from in close out to 200-250 without any bother. Prices for the VX2 are around the $850 mark and factor in the cost of a quality set of rings. The VX3 range currently has a $120 mail in rebate from NIOA if purchased before 31/12/15 and they are priced from $800 to $1650. Might be worth checking out the VX3 and buying before the rebate expires.

Much depends on the definition of "breaking the bank", do you have a budget in mind?

[Chronos]

.

Much depends on the definition of "breaking the bank", do you have a budget in mind?

Yeah I have 2 VX3 2.5-8X36 scopes (one on my .308, another on my .338WM) and I bought both secondhand around the $300-350 mark.

Chronos

[southeast varmiter]

I'm struggling to understand how a .308 is going to shoot dead on to 300y. Even with a 200y zero there would be nearly 9" of drop at 300y
Chronos

Dial the turret.

[tom604]

3x9 you can go a bit lower or a bit higher but imho (okay not so humble) this fits the bill nicely,you can wind it down in scrubby areas but if you forget its not too high that it causes a massive problem and if the critters are far away you can dial it up,get comfy and its all over red rover (bunnys can be a challenge ) with hunting i dont think there is a perfect scope as you can come across critters at any time and at varying ranges hope that has helped

[Wm.Traynor]

Don't get a straight tube scope if the lighting is going to be poor, when you hunt. A 33mm objective gathers more light.

[Oldbloke]

I use a 3x9x40 Wouldnt use a 3x9x32. Lacks in low light situations. But what about a 4x40? Not a bad all rounder. What is the budget?

[Strikey]

Have a look at the JOL line of scopes, formally known as Hakko, they have a very nice 3.5-10 with glass quality that Leupold VX2's could only hope for

[deye243]

http://nightforceoptics.com/shv/3-10x42 at around $1000 i would take one of these over a vx3 and i have 4 of them

[Browning]

There's a Swaro Z3 4-12x50 for 900 on used guns...
And a 3moa red dot dialed in at 300m..sigh

[pomemax]

any 3x9x40 just to get you going the rest depends on the $$$

[Chronos]

http://nightforceoptics.com/shv/3-10x42 at around $1000 i would take one of these over a vx3 and i have 4 of them

the thing Leupold does really well is keep their stuff light, the vx3 2.5-8 is just over half the weight of the SHV you mention and on a hunting rifle 10 oz here and there can make a rifle a joy to carry. THe night force has heaps of elevation adjustment which is overkill on a 300m scope but nice if you'd like to try shooting at 800m with a 3-10

I'm a nightforce fan but i'm not convinced the advantages they offer are warranted on a general use hunting rifle and i'd probably buy a Z3 3-12 or a Conquest HD5 2-10 over a NF SHV buy that's just one view

Chronos

[Gwion]

I was also going to mention the Ziess Conquest HD5 2-10.... If it is in your budget. It will be my upgrade when I can afford it.
Nikon are also bringing out a 5x optical zoom range with a 2-10 available. They are the Monarch range with varying standard of glass depending (as I understand it) on the suffix: M5, M7...

[Rocker]

3-9 with a 40mm or if budget permits 50mm objective.

if you really are shooting as close as 25y then any higher mag like 4-12 is going to suck so close.

[MalleeFarmer]

I have decided that I will probably ignore my budget and save my bickies and go for a Nightforce! Might take 12 months to save up but hey I'm hoping it'll be worth it! Thinking of a Nightforce Mil-Mil 2.5-10x42!
Thoughts anyone?

[Strikey]

I reckon that Nightforce should do the job nicely, they might be a bit more than you originally planned to spend but I look at quality scopes as a lifetime investment, reckon you will be happy with it

[Gwion]

Still think you should look at the Ziess HD5 3-15x50 with a Varmint reticle or the like. Much cheaper than NightForce while still being good quality; or get the HD5 in 2-10x42 for about 50% cost of the NF NSX. Will you really tell the difference in most hunting situations??? Also, for a hunting rifle, you may find that the capped turrets in the HD5 are a better option than open 'target' or 'tactical' style turrets on the NSX.

[wrenchman]

there are lots of scopes that will do what you want and wont break the bank and are well made i would go with a 2x7 or 3x9 burris leapold redfield all well made andwont break the bank

[MalleeFarmer]

Cheers for the replies guys I already have a few midrange scopes (bushnell elites) and I'm happy with them I'm more interested in the ability of the Nightforce to hold zero after impacts etc. also be nice to have something higher range to have in my small collection

[Gwion]

If you want something really tough to take rough treatment, look at US Optics. Some online torture tests are very, very impressive. Also quite.... Umm.... Not cheap.

[bigfellascott]

I'd go a 3-9x50 or similar mag range if it was me.

[happyhunter]

I have decided that I will probably ignore my budget and save my bickies and go for a Nightforce! Might take 12 months to save up but hey I'm hoping it'll be worth it! Thinking of a Nightforce Mil-Mil 2.5-10x42!
Thoughts anyone?

Great optics if most your shots will be from a supported position. Personally I'd keep the choice within the range of optics designed for hunting conditions rather than tactical target type stuff.

[huccl]

Thinking of a Nightforce Mil-Mil 2.5-10x42!
Thoughts anyone?

Nothing wrong as such with that but it's a bloody expensive option for a hunting rifle.

Looking at options like the Leupold VX-3 3-10x40mm or Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x50mm, they are half the price as just as good (if not better).

2c.

[MalleeFarmer]

Ok all things taken into consideration the need for a target/tac style scope the need for a heavy tough scope. And the need for a high $$ scope. I decided most of you who said these were unnecessary have convinced me. all the above! Unnecessary. So I decided to go with something I know and trust. Maybe not the best but I like mine. I got a bushnell elite 3500 3-9x40 with multi-X reticle. Cheers for those who convinced me not to waste money.

[bigfellascott]

Ok all things taken into consideration the need for a target/tac style scope the need for a heavy tough scope. And the need for a high $$ scope. I decided most of you who said these were unnecessary have convinced me. all the above! Unnecessary. So I decided to go with something I know and trust. Maybe not the best but I like mine. I got a bushnell elite 3500 3-9x40 with multi-X reticle. Cheers for those who convinced me not to waste money.

Should do the job fine mate.

[Gwion]

Good idea. Leave the big, heavy, bullet proof, $5K scope for if and when you get into serious long range shooting... in which case you will probably also have a $5K rifle and treat your whole rig with kid gloves, so the need for a scope that can be thrown from a cliff will again be irrelevant!

[Herdsman]

Solid choice