Best hunting rifle scopes

[keen]

Hi guys,

I'm looking for at new hunting rifle scopes.

I see there is the Bushnell DOA 600 reticle which seems like a cool idea with the hold over marks and side marks for measuring against deer antlers to judge distance.

Cool, but I guess a bit gimmicky too. Not sure that I'd actually use this or if it would just get in the way in the end...

Do you guys think much of these reticles?

Or other opinions on the best hunting rifle scopes? Open to suggestions.

Thanks.

[reddog]

I don't think you would use the reticule for judging antlers , good set of binos for that . I've got a Leupold VX 3 3.5-10x40 on
my .270 Winchester Supergrade , just a standard duplex . I think I will probably get a VX 3 2.5 -8x 36 to put on it instead , I
reckon it would be the perfect hunting scope especially size wize . The 3.5 -10 is a bit big it is actually longer than my VX 1 4-12.
I reckon 8 times mag on the top end is plenty on a hunter.

[Lorgar]

I don't think you would use the reticule for judging antlers , good set of binos for that.

The DOA 600 reticle has side markings which are intended for that.

There are sets of marks on the side that get closer as you go down the hold over marks. In theory if the deers antlers tough the marks at 100m, he's 100m away. If they match the 200m marks he's 200m away and so on.

They don't factor in the size of the deer though obviously so it's a pretty lose system...

The holdover marks are fair enough, but that bit I do reckon is just a gimmick.

[reddog]

Yep very loose thats what I meant , bit of difference in the size of a hog deer and sambar , not to mention wide short racks , long skinny ones
Big gimmick , theory is great in books

[Xerox]

As above, the deer sizing/distance marks are pretty loose. The hold over marks are about the same...

You could try and match a load the the marks, but it might not be the most accurate load. If you're shooting heavier or lighter pills faster or slower your trajectory and points of impact will all be different to the whole overs on the scope.

None of it's worth it IMO.

If you want something to help judge distance or provide rough hold over points, I'd look at a mill dot reticle instead. You can do everything the holdover marks one will do and more.

[reddog]

You do need to be able to see the deer behind all the crap in the reticule

It is a deer not a 1 inch target at 1,000m. I don't what your max range is when hunting - 300, 350 maybe even 400 at the trophy of a lifetime but I would expect most shots will be between 150 and 300 meters.

Why would you need a mildot ? Too confusing for a hunting scope. Take dead on aim you would hit any deer at 300m.

Take your rifle to the range with your hunting load and learn where it hits at those distances, much easier than trying to remember what mark goes where with a 12.5 kmh wind at a 30 degree angle to the muzzle, with a 5% downward slope to the deer which is at a laser ranged 217 metres, now where did that deer go ?

[Lorgar]

You do need to be able to see the deer behind all the crap in the reticule

It is a deer not a 1 inch target at 1,000m. I don't what your max range is when hunting - 300, 350 maybe even 400 at the trophy of a lifetime but I would expect most shots will be between 150 and 300 meters.

Why would you need a mildot ? Too confusing for a hunting scope. Take dead on aim you would hit any deer at 300m.

Bah, all you anti mil-dot people!

I love my Bushnell 6500 with mil-dot reticle, you can shutup

[Xerox]

Why would you need a mildot ? Too confusing for a hunting scope. Take dead on aim you would hit any deer at 300m.

Not saying that mil-dot is the best hunting reticle, just saying that if you're choosing a reticle with the intent of using it to gauge distance, buy one that is a proper measurement system, not a gimmick.

My 2c anyway.

[headspace]

I think we are beginning to get too reliant on technology.

Hunting is, or should be all about the skill of trying to get as close to the target as possible and take a clean shot. I'm a fan of keeping it simple and the less clutter the better.

Better to spend the money on a scope with good light gathering ability than trying to rely on crap like mildots and extraneous graduations. Learn your rifle and learn to stalk.

It should be a matter of pride that you can achieve those skills rather than relying things that in the long run won't make you a better shooter.

Probably said too much by now, time for my milk and cookies...

[Carter]

I think we are beginning to get too reliant on technology. Hunting is, or should be all about the skill of trying to get as close to the target as possible and take a clean shot. I'm a fan of keeping it simple and the less clutter the better.

Can't remember the guys name, but there was a post here (maybe?) about a famous WW2 sniper who wouldn't use a scope because of it catching light, so shot with iron-sights and was still hitting targets 1km away and so on.

Low-tech as can be.

Trying to remember the guys name... Grrr.

[Die Judicii]

I've got a Zeiss Duralyt 3-12 x 50 with #60 reticle on my varmint rifle in 22/250.

Absolutely love the firedot, especially for low light and night sniping.

I dont particularly go for the gimmicky "ranging reticle" stuff though.

Cheers

[AusC]

Can't remember the guys name, but there was a post here (maybe?) about a famous WW2 sniper who wouldn't use a scope because of it catching light, so shot with iron-sights and was still hitting targets 1km away and so on.

I suspect he was a slightly better shot than you or I though

[teedo]

I suspect he was a slightly better shot than you or I though

I'd need to have a shipping palette hung up to have a chance at 1,000m iron sights

[Member-Deleted]

Hi guys,

I'm looking for at new hunting rifle scopes.

I see there is the Bushnell DOA 600 reticle which seems like a cool idea with the hold over marks and side marks for measuring against deer antlers to judge distance.

Cool, but I guess a bit gimmicky too. Not sure that I'd actually use this or if it would just get in the way in the end...

Do you guys think much of these reticles?

Or other opinions on the best hunting rifle scopes? Open to suggestions.

Thanks.

What rifle is it for? What cal, what is the most common distance you would normally shoot. What's a rough budget your trying to stick to.

[Norton]

What rifle is it for? What cal, what is the most common distance you would normally shoot.

That's key if you're looking at reticles like the DOA 600 or over holdover ones.

Typically they're for either .308 or .223 in all the ones I've seen, and even then they're a rough guide only.

Obviously if you're shooting starting loads or max loads your trajectory will be significantly different and the hold overs won't be exact.

I'd look at other options personally. More gimmick than function IMO.

[Brute]

Typically they're for either .308 or .223 in all the ones I've seen, and even then they're a rough guide only.

Yep, this is the one to check.

A hold over for lobbing heavy 30 cal pills will be completely useless for light flat shooters.

[Dirtdart89]

Can't remember the guys name, but there was a post here (maybe?) about a famous WW2 sniper who wouldn't use a scope because of it catching light, so shot with iron-sights and was still hitting targets 1km away and so on.

Low-tech as can be.

Trying to remember the guys name... Grrr.

Simo haya I'm pretty sure is the guy you are thinking of. He killed nearly a thousand Russians (some of those with an SMG) but yeah, he's the only sniper I can think of that didn't use a scope.

He ended up getting half his face taken off by the Russians trying to carpet bomb him out of the Forest. They didn't kill him though, ha ha. It was during the Prussian war though bit prior to WW2.

[Carter]

Yup, that's him Dirtdart.

Thanks for the find. A bit of blurb on him here for anyone who's interested...

During the Winter War (1939-1940) between Finland and the Soviet Union, [Simo] Häyhä served as a sniper for the Finnish Army against the Red Army in the 6th Company of JR 34 during the Battle of Kollaa.

In temperatures between -40 °C and -20 °C, dressed completely in white camouflage, Häyhä was credited with 505 confirmed kills of Soviet soldiers. A daily account of the kills at Kollaa was made for the Finnish snipers.

Remarkably, all of Häyhä's kills were accomplished in fewer than 100 days - in other words, approximately five kills per day - at a time of year with very few hours of daylight.

Häyhä used a Finnish militia variant of the Russian-made Mosin-Nagant rifle, the White Guard M/28 early variant "Pystykorva" (literally Spitz, due to the front sight's resemblance to the head of a spitz-type dog) chambered in 7.62x54R, the Finnish Mosin-Nagant cartridge, because it suited his small frame (5 ft 3 in/1.60 m).

He preferred to use iron sights rather than telescopic sights to present a smaller target for the enemy (a sniper must raise his head higher when using a telescopic sight), to increase accuracy (a telescopic sight's glass can fog up easily in cold weather), and to aid in concealment (sunlight glare in telescopic sight lenses can reveal a sniper's position).

A "Swedish donation rifle" Simo later received as gift was a Finnish model M/28-30 but he did not use it in battle.

The Soviet's efforts to kill Häyhä included counter-snipers and artillery strikes, and on March 6, 1940 Häyhä was shot in his lower left jaw by a Russian soldier. He was picked up by fellow soldiers who said "half his cheek was missing", but he did not die, regaining consciousness on March 13, the day peace was declared. Shortly after the war, Häyhä was promoted from Alikersantti (Corporal) to Vänrikki (Second Lieutenant) by Field Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim. No one else has gained rank so quickly in Finland's military history.

Sounds like a real pain in the ass for his enemy

[Dirtdart89]

That war also produced Larry Thorne he ended up enjoying killing Russians so much later commanded a waffen ss unit in ww2 and after that became a green beret in America fighting the vc. Went MIA in a Huey crash if memory serves right. Not a sniper but I can't possibly think of a bigger pain in the arse for communism especially over so many wars... I don't know where he was for Korea though...

[Boatman]

I don't know where he was for Korea though...

Off doing things that aren't to be known about probably