Scope recommendation for 270 Hunting rifle.

[mpett1]

Iam looking for a quick recommendation on a scope for my weatherby 270 win hunting rifle. I would be shooting no further then 100 or 150 yards.

Thanks

[Xringshooter]

You could go with a number of different types/powers. A 3-9x40 is a good all around scope, good at the shorter distances and good out farther if needed. If you absolutely know you'll be 150 and in you might want to go with something like a 1.5-4 variable, especially if you're hunting in heavier brush. Whatever you get, get as large an objective lens (the 40 in 3-9x40) as you can get. The bigger, the better the light transmission.

I have a 1.5-4 on my Ruger 77/44 and hunt in heavy brush. I can leave it in 1.5 power to scan the woods if I detect some movement and when I spot something I can zoom it up to 4X to get a closer view.

[Water-Man]

Leupold Rifleman 3-9x40 is a decent scope for around $200.00.

[FireHawk77028]

Just another point... if you are worried a lot about light transmission, fixed power have fewer lenses from end to end.. which means fewer lenses to block light (each lens only allows a certain percentage of light to pass, higher quality glass lets more pass.. cheaper passes less... larger objective gathers more to start).

[dk99358]

Suggestion to the OP:

I've had a Leupold M8 6X on a 270 Win for years. I've shot groundhogs and deer to 350 yds without any problems. Lots of eye relief, relatively lightweight, no chance of missing a shot while fussing with the power change ring. A fixed 4 power would work just fine at the ranges your talking about also.

I have a 1.5-4 on my Ruger 77/44 and hunt in heavy brush. I can leave it in 1.5 power to scan the woods if I detect some movement and when I spot something I can zoom it up to 4X to get a closer view.

Suggestion to Xringshooter:

BUY BINOCULARS!

If you're scoping me, your closer view will probably involve me scoping you!

Dale

[mpett1]

Thanks for the input so far. I think I would like to go to a 3-9x40. I believe that would be a good all around scope I just done know what brand model would be the best for value perspective.

[1911shooter]

Thanks for the input so far. I think I would like to go to a 3-9x40. I believe that would be a good all around scope I just done know what brand model would be the best for value perspective.

Leupold end of story. IMHO

[1911shooter]

Just another point... if you are worried a lot about light transmission, fixed power have fewer lenses from end to end.. which means fewer lenses to block light (each lens only allows a certain percentage of light to pass, higher quality glass lets more pass.. cheaper passes less... larger objective gathers more to start).

Actually the larger the objective yes more light comes in the reall light that
the ocular will transmit to your eye is more important the obj. size. the human eye can only use about 7mm of light and almost all ocular lens's only transmit about 5mm of light. i would have to reccomend he stay with a 44mm obj. and go with a 30mm tube instead of a 1" tube then he will get more light transmission to his eye and he will also gain more MOA adj.

[Xringshooter]

dk99358, you wrote:

Suggestion to Xringshooter:

BUY BINOCULARS!

If you're scoping me, your closer view will probably involve me scoping you!

Dale

Well, I was just giving one example on how I can use a variable power scope. I never said I didn't have/use binoculars. I tailor what I carry into the field on what I am hunting, where I am hunting, the weather, time of day, etc. The OP did not ask about general optics for hunting. If he had, I would have told him to get a good pair of binoculars to complement the scope.

Oh, and since you addressed me, instead of making a general statement, I highly doubt that you will ever scope me in the woods. Mainly because you don't know anything about me, where I hunt, how I hunt, my tendencies, etc. BTW, Why would you be in the woods scoping other hunters? There is only one correct answer, I hope you know it.

If you were trying to make a joke, guess what, it bombed, at least with me. If you come back and say "lighten up, I was just kidding", there are things you can use to have readers understand that you are joking with a person (, , j/k, LOL, etc.) when you write reply to a post. If you would have done this, I would have taken it in a whole different light and probably replied completely differently.

'nough said on this subject, I apologize to the other posters, I'm done.

[dk99358]

For the OP

There is a whole pile of good 3-9 variables available. Leupold as already mentioned, Bushnell Elite's, Sightron, Zeiss, etc. Buy the best you can afford. The Elites and Sightron Big Sky series have a lens coating to prevent moisture problems on the outside lens. I've got an Elite 4200 on a Tikka T3 SS/synthetic for use in crappy weather.

For Xringshooter776834

No, I wasn't joking and yes, you're right, I don't know a lot about you. I do know that you made the following statement.

I have a 1.5-4 on my Ruger 77/44 and hunt in heavy brush. I can leave it in 1.5 power to scan the woods if I detect some movement and when I spot something I can zoom it up to 4X to get a closer view.

What if that movement is a person? Now you're pointing a weapon at something you don't intend to kill. At least I hope you don't intend to kill them (see, I do know about the smilies ).

I jumped on your statement because it was promoting an unsafe practice. Someone who has little experience with firearms may see your statement and think its OK.

BTW, Why would you be in the woods scoping other hunters?

The only reason I would be scoping another hunter is because he scoped me first and it is a way to make a very strong statement that I don't appreciate what they are doing. Some people just don't learn unless you smack them upside the head. And that is what a return scoping does.

Dale