Scope for PA Deer Hunting

[Dredly]

I use a Bushnell Elite 3200 on my Ruger, absolutely outstanding scope and the Rain Guard feature is amazing for those crappy nov / dec mornings when it is misting / raining / sleeting / snowing all at the same time.

Power wise I use the 4-12x40mm and normally keep it around 6 power although I rarely rifle hunt in PA.

If you've never looked through a scope with Rain Guard you need to, It will make you look at all other scopes like they are worthless

[Xringshooter]

Really depends on where you hunt. Where I hunt is very thick with scrub oak, etc. A long shot may be 60-75 yards. I hunt with a Ruger 77/44 with a 1.5-4X Bushnell. Typically use my binoculars until I see something and determine if it is legal then switch to the scope.

[kpw]

Typically use my binoculars until I see something and determine if it is legal then switch to the scope.

I really wish more people would do that.

[wis bang]

I really wish more people would do that.

I agree! Binoculars are better than pointing a rifle at someone.

[cameraman]

Really depends on where you hunt. Where I hunt is very thick with scrub oak, etc. A long shot may be 60-75 yards. I hunt with a Ruger 77/44 with a 1.5-4X Bushnell. Typically use my binoculars until I see something and determine if it is legal then switch to the scope.

I am in the same boat and hunt with the same scope. A good set of binos is the way to go.

[BIG MIKE 2003]

always buy what you can afford from the get go.so that said buy a good pair of bin's.then worry about scope's.i have two simmions a-tec scopes.both are 2.8x10.5 one is gloss and the other matte.for the money you can't beat them.

out hear in beaver county you can get some shots out there if you hunt fields but other than that stick with 3x9.

[Tomcat088]

If your main purpose is to hunt deer. You don't need p.a. on your scope. Mil-dots are great for target but not the best for hunting. They tend to wash out faster in low light. I use a fixed 6x Leupold most of the time. Thick or thin, works well. I also use 3-9x Sightrons on a couple. Usually set at 5-6x. Get a decent set of binos and your good to go.

I have NEVER had mil-dot scopes wash out in low light. I spotlight and moonlight shoot a LOT more than most people do in lowlight deer hunting. I shoot pigs, coyotes, skunks, badgers, racoons, and all kinds of animals in lowlight, and a mil-dot scope is one of my favorites to hunt for. They're not just for target shooting, they were designed for target shooting; they were designed for the military (meaning they were designed to shoot living, moving, people targets). If by "target" shooting you mean "people and animals", then yes that is what they were designed for; to me, that application fits VERY well into hunting deer. There will always be varied opinions on what reticle works best in which light, type of shooting, etc.

I'm different from most people in that I use my rifle scope as the "final judgement" on if I want to shoot an animal. I can tell with my eyes, and a cheap pair of binoculars if I'm shooting at a deer, bear, other animal, or a person. It is my OPINION that I'd rather use a cheaper pair of binoculars with large objectives to determine what the target is, then when I know it's something I might possibly want to shoot, I'll switch over to my scope. With my scope I have more magnification, better resolution, and I'm practically on target if I decide that I want to shoot. Especially if you're on budget, it seems a bit odd to me to spend $200 on a pair of binoculars and then spend like $100 or $125 on a rifle scope. You can buy a decent pair of large objective binoculars for between $30-50, and with those you should be able to tell whether or not you're looking at a deer, bear, or a person. Then you can spend the other $300 on a better rifle scope, that has more clarity.

Part of this comes down to what you expect from your rifle scope. When you break into the $300 price range, then you're getting into lifetime warranties, and some decent optics. Technology and prices have come a long way, nowadays, you can sometimes (luck of the draw, like Lycan said) get a scope that will consistently hold zero for 5-10 years for $75-125 price range. The optics will be distorted and not up to par with the $300 scopes, but it'll get the job done, especially up close. Since we're talking about closer shots, you probably won't even dial your dope, BUT if you wanted to, the cheaper scopes are not going to track reliably every time. So IF you were presented with a 200 yard shot and knew what your dope is, you'd probably have better luck just holding the couple of inches that you might need than dialing it in the scope for dead on, because your scope isn't going to track reliably. With a $300 scope, you will have a lifetime warranty, better optics, and it will most likely track reliably. Eye strain and fatigue should also be considered, but under up close shooting situations, it's not typically an issue because you're not doing as much "glassing". That's my feelings on scopes, but as others have said, it all depends on what you want to spend and what kind of shooting you're doing.

In terms of magnification, it's all just a preference thing and what size of target you prefer, and how steady your hold is. Keep in mind that the less magnification, the less "wobble" will "appear" to influence your sight picture. With lower mangification you will generally have scopes with larger exit pupils, which will appear brighter in low light. Keep in mind that you should figure out what each scopes exit pupil is, just because it's low magnification, doesn't always mean that it has a large exit pupil. On a variable power scope, dialing into the lower powers is where you will find your largest exit pupil. Just an example of how magnification is a "preference"; I shoot at coyotes that are running 30mph or faster at 100 yards (sometimes inside of that), at 6-8x. I don't have problem tracking them, and I make hits on them. I personally don't have much use of a scope that is less than 6x, even it it was on a deer sized target at 60 yards that is mostly stationary. Just pick a spot on the animal and focus on it, the crease on the shoulder, their ear, it's not that difficult to quarter a target, as long as you PICK SOMETHING. You don't have to see the entire deer to place a shot properly. It's all a personal preference. My suggestion is that you should try to save and bump your price range up just a bit. Something up in the $300 range (IF you can), like a Nikon Buckmaster, Bushnell Elite 3200, etc. They're great optics for the money and they won't fail you. Hope that helps, and that's just my opinion.

[Qtrborecrazy]

I have NEVER had mil-dot scopes wash out in low light. I spotlight and moonlight shoot a LOT more than most people do in lowlight deer hunting. I shoot pigs, coyotes, skunks, badgers, racoons, and all kinds of animals in lowlight, and a mil-dot scope is one of my favorites to hunt for. They're not just for target shooting, they were designed for target shooting; they were designed for the military (meaning they were designed to shoot living, moving, people targets). If by "target" shooting you mean "people and animals", then yes that is what they were designed for; to me, that application fits VERY well into hunting deer. There will always be varied opinions on what reticle works best in which light, type of shooting, etc.

I'm different from most people in that I use my rifle scope as the "final judgement" on if I want to shoot an animal. I can tell with my eyes, and a cheap pair of binoculars if I'm shooting at a deer, bear, other animal, or a person. It is my OPINION that I'd rather use a cheaper pair of binoculars with large objectives to determine what the target is, then when I know it's something I might possibly want to shoot, I'll switch over to my scope. With my scope I have more magnification, better resolution, and I'm practically on target if I decide that I want to shoot. Especially if you're on budget, it seems a bit odd to me to spend $200 on a pair of binoculars and then spend like $100 or $125 on a rifle scope. You can buy a decent pair of large objective binoculars for between $30-50, and with those you should be able to tell whether or not you're looking at a deer, bear, or a person. Then you can spend the other $300 on a better rifle scope, that has more clarity.

Part of this comes down to what you expect from your rifle scope. When you break into the $300 price range, then you're getting into lifetime warranties, and some decent optics. Technology and prices have come a long way, nowadays, you can sometimes (luck of the draw, like Lycan said) get a scope that will consistently hold zero for 5-10 years for $75-125 price range. The optics will be distorted and not up to par with the $300 scopes, but it'll get the job done, especially up close. Since we're talking about closer shots, you probably won't even dial your dope, BUT if you wanted to, the cheaper scopes are not going to track reliably every time. So IF you were presented with a 200 yard shot and knew what your dope is, you'd probably have better luck just holding the couple of inches that you might need than dialing it in the scope for dead on, because your scope isn't going to track reliably. With a $300 scope, you will have a lifetime warranty, better optics, and it will most likely track reliably. Eye strain and fatigue should also be considered, but under up close shooting situations, it's not typically an issue because you're not doing as much "glassing". That's my feelings on scopes, but as others have said, it all depends on what you want to spend and what kind of shooting you're doing.

In terms of magnification, it's all just a preference thing and what size of target you prefer, and how steady your hold is. Keep in mind that the less magnification, the less "wobble" will "appear" to influence your sight picture. With lower mangification you will generally have scopes with larger exit pupils, which will appear brighter in low light. Keep in mind that you should figure out what each scopes exit pupil is, just because it's low magnification, doesn't always mean that it has a large exit pupil. On a variable power scope, dialing into the lower powers is where you will find your largest exit pupil. Just an example of how magnification is a "preference"; I shoot at coyotes that are running 30mph or faster at 100 yards (sometimes inside of that), at 6-8x. I don't have problem tracking them, and I make hits on them. I personally don't have much use of a scope that is less than 6x, even it it was on a deer sized target at 60 yards that is mostly stationary. Just pick a spot on the animal and focus on it, the crease on the shoulder, their ear, it's not that difficult to quarter a target, as long as you PICK SOMETHING. You don't have to see the entire deer to place a shot properly. It's all a personal preference. My suggestion is that you should try to save and bump your price range up just a bit. Something up in the $300 range (IF you can), like a Nikon Buckmaster, Bushnell Elite 3200, etc. They're great optics for the money and they won't fail you. Hope that helps, and that's just my opinion.

I`ll agree, people will pay 5,6,7, hundred dollars for a rifle and put a 70 dollar scope on top. You only get what you pay for. ALL my rifles and pistols either have Nikon Monarchs or Leopolds on them. I learned my lesson on a mtn goat hunt that junk on top will not do the job, good glass gets the JOB done.

Qtrborecrazy

[kpw]

I have NEVER had mil-dot scopes wash out in low light. I spotlight and moonlight shoot a LOT more than most people do in lowlight deer hunting. I shoot pigs, coyotes, skunks, badgers, racoons, and all kinds of animals in lowlight, and a mil-dot scope is one of my favorites to hunt for. They're not just for target shooting, they were designed for target shooting; they were designed for the military (meaning they were designed to shoot living, moving, people targets). If by "target" shooting you mean "people and animals", then yes that is what they were designed for; to me, that application fits VERY well into hunting deer. There will always be varied opinions on what reticle works best in which light, type of shooting, etc.

I'm a bit familiar with mil dots. They were designed for range estimation, not just shooting people. If you use them well at night, you have better eyes than me. (very possible!) Thicker recticles tend to be more visible in low light and shadows.

I'm different from most people in that I use my rifle scope as the "final judgement" on if I want to shoot an animal. I can tell with my eyes, and a cheap pair of binoculars if I'm shooting at a deer, bear, other animal, or a person. It is my OPINION that I'd rather use a cheaper pair of binoculars with large objectives to determine what the target is, then when I know it's something I might possibly want to shoot, I'll switch over to my scope. With my scope I have more magnification, better resolution, and I'm practically on target if I decide that I want to shoot. Especially if you're on budget, it seems a bit odd to me to spend $200 on a pair of binoculars and then spend like $100 or $125 on a rifle scope. You can buy a decent pair of large objective binoculars for between $30-50, and with those you should be able to tell whether or not you're looking at a deer, bear, or a person. Then you can spend the other $300 on a better rifle scope, that has more clarity.

$200 is cheap for a decent set of binos. There are some decent porros for less but think $300 and way up for good roofs. $30-$50 binos are better than nothing but aren't good for much if your glassing a lot. You'll be amazed at what you see if you try it.

Part of this comes down to what you expect from your rifle scope. When you break into the $300 price range, then you're getting into lifetime warranties, and some decent optics. Technology and prices have come a long way, nowadays, you can sometimes (luck of the draw, like Lycan said) get a scope that will consistently hold zero for 5-10 years for $75-125 price range. The optics will be distorted and not up to par with the $300 scopes, but it'll get the job done, especially up close. Since we're talking about closer shots, you probably won't even dial your dope, BUT if you wanted to, the cheaper scopes are not going to track reliably every time. So IF you were presented with a 200 yard shot and knew what your dope is, you'd probably have better luck just holding the couple of inches that you might need than dialing it in the scope for dead on, because your scope isn't going to track reliably. With a $300 scope, you will have a lifetime warranty, better optics, and it will most likely track reliably. Eye strain and fatigue should also be considered, but under up close shooting situations, it's not typically an issue because you're not doing as much "glassing". That's my feelings on scopes, but as others have said, it all depends on what you want to spend and what kind of shooting you're doing.

Welcome to Pennsylvania deer season. Please don't do any "glassing" with your scope. That's what good binos are for. I get real angry when I'm "glassed" by another hunter looking for game. Binos give you a much wider field of view so you can see what is on either side of what your looking at. If I only have $350-400 to spend, give me a $200 Sightron SII and a decent pair of porros. The glass is as good as a VX-II and they actually track better.

In terms of magnification, it's all just a preference thing and what size of target you prefer, and how steady your hold is. Keep in mind that the less magnification, the less "wobble" will "appear" to influence your sight picture. With lower mangification you will generally have scopes with larger exit pupils, which will appear brighter in low light. Keep in mind that you should figure out what each scopes exit pupil is, just because it's low magnification, doesn't always mean that it has a large exit pupil. On a variable power scope, dialing into the lower powers is where you will find your largest exit pupil. Just an example of how magnification is a "preference"; I shoot at coyotes that are running 30mph or faster at 100 yards (sometimes inside of that), at 6-8x. I don't have problem tracking them, and I make hits on them. I personally don't have much use of a scope that is less than 6x, even it it was on a deer sized target at 60 yards that is mostly stationary. Just pick a spot on the animal and focus on it, the crease on the shoulder, their ear, it's not that difficult to quarter a target, as long as you PICK SOMETHING. You don't have to see the entire deer to place a shot properly. It's all a personal preference. My suggestion is that you should try to save and bump your price range up just a bit. Something up in the $300 range (IF you can), like a Nikon Buckmaster, Bushnell Elite 3200, etc. They're great optics for the money and they won't fail you. Hope that helps, and that's just my opinion.

Pretty much agree except I don't have much use for anything over 6x on a big game rifle. That includes deer at 300+ yds. For that matter, give me a 2.5x, a clear 300 yd shot and it's venison in the freezer. I'm not much on star gazing with my rifles.

Exit pupil for any new to shooting guys...divide objective diameter by the power. If you get below 4, things tend to get murky in lower light. 6-7 is mucho better.

Not ripping on ya. Just differing opinions.

[kmrcstintn]

I got a Simmons Master Series Pro Hunter (now in the 44 Mag category) in 6 - 21 x 44 w/ Side Parallax & TruPlex; the thing has generous eye relief but the thin crosshairs at the center can strain my aiming eye for slow & concentrated shots; I wish that they gave measurements on the side parallax adjustment to make transitions betwee 50 yds, 100 yds, 200 yds, and infinity easier to set; overall I like it enough to keep it and find that they offer alot for the money; my favorite brand is Bushnell, but the Simmons does the job