[marylandmike]

I was all set to buy a burris compact 4x for my 06 mountain rifle (rem 700). Then, I saw the leupold vxII in 1-4x, and am giving that some consideration. I hunt the woods nearly all the time, and will not shoot beyond 200 yards, even then with only a solid rest. I like the light weight and short length of both models, and the burris is $80 cheaper. Field of view is similar...which would you buy?

 

[kdub]

All my long guns sport variable power scopes, the majority of them being Leupolds - that tells you what I'd recommend!

However, there's much to be said for the reliability and ruggedness of a fixed power scope. The question is how quick you can pick up a moving animal in the heavy woods with the scope.

My shooting is pretty much long distance and in fairly open terrain - even then, the variables are turned down to the lowest power for quick sighting and then, if the animal cooperates, the power setting increased to the best viewing power.

A 1x4 scope is a good one for close distance shooting, as you can quickly acquire objects at the low setting with both eyes open. For standing or longer shots the 4 power will be of greater benefit. With the fixed 4 power, you'll need to learn target acquisition with a more limited field of view and intervening brush.

 

[Marshall Stanton]

Mike,

I too like the ruggedness of a fixed power scope. Yes, I own quite a number of variables, by a variety of manufacturers, but typically even those variables seldom get set higher than 4x, and often at 3x for 90+% of my hunting needs.

Something to consider as well is the light transmission factor of both scopes. Hunting thick woods limits available light at any time of day, and evening and daybreak are critical when hunting the deep woods, when light is even more scarce. I would wager to say that when you compare the two scopes for light transmisson, the 4x Burris will have a greater brightness than does that variable Leupold 1x4, if for no other reason than the size of the objective lenses.

I'll go for brightness of scope over magnification or field of view in your woods hunting situation.

Of course, this is just my very biased opinion, to take it for what it is, or isn't worth.

God Bless,

Marshall

 

[marylandmike]

Thanks for your replies, I have some additional points to consider now. I want to keep the scope weight to a minimum, and the new scopes all seem much lighter than the 25 year old redfield 2-7x that currently is on the rifle.
Do either of you gents have any other scopes that I may want to consider? Thank you again!
Mike

 

[kciH]

MarylandMike,
I highly reccomend the Luepold Vari-X III in 1.75x6. I haven't had mine for very long, but I think it's the best scope I've bought for hunting. I mainly use Leupold, Burris, and Weaver for my rifles and handguns. The Weaver Grand Slam 1.5-5x32 might also be of interest to you. The Weaver Grand Slams give up very little to the Vari X III from what I can see, and they are quite a bit better than a Vari X II in my opinion.

 

[marylandmike]

Thanks, I will check out those weavers. Do any of you folks know who manufactures the cabela's alaskan guide or outfitter series? Also, have any of you had any experience with those models?
Thanks again,
Mike

 

[Kragman71]

Mike,
I had to make that same decision,two years ago,and bought the Leupold vari X 2,1X-4X scope.
The deciding factor,for me,was the longer eye relief of the Leupold.
I'm happy with it,on my Winchester '94 Carbine.
Frank

 

[Charlie Z]

Either one will suit you fine. I don't think the variability matters, though. There's a Burris 4x on my Ruger #1 '06 that is excellent. I like Leups, too, and they are as good. A M8 6x is on the .270, but is a bit much for here in the east.

I don't like variations in rifle configuration. The fixed 4x (or a 3x) suits my sighting needs very well and my little brain has one less thing to consider when the quarry comes into view.

 

[Mike D.]

I also own a remington mountain rifle in 25-06, and love it. Don't own a fixed powered scope. But I did mount a 3-9 burris compact, and am very happy with it. I am a burris fan, the clarity and brightness is unsurpassed. Great piece of equipment. Also FOREVER WARRANTY.

 

[NITRO]

Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8x36

For about the price of a new Leupold VX-II 1-4x20 you could get a used Vari-X III 2.5-8x36. They have been going for $275-$325 on ebay. That is much easier to swallow than $450 for a new one and you still get a lifetime warranty.

I have one on a 30-06 Browning A-Bolt Medallion and one on a Browning BLR '81 lightweight in 358 Winchester and can't imagine anything any more suited to deer, elk and black bear hunting. Several years ago I had a Leupold 1-4x20 and never used the 1x setting. Even in dense timber 2x magnification is more suited to my 58 year old eyes.

 

[crookedshot]

You know your budget better than I. Go with the cheaper Burris. Most will not agree with this but I would look even cheaper if I was just going to hunt this rifle. NO doubt Leupold and Burris are better scopes than ones I use. But for deer hunting here in the South typical shots being 100 yards and UNDER high dollar scopes are not worth the difference in my opinion. However if will shoot this rifle a lot. Or shooting longer distances 200 yards and out you might stay with the Luepold , Burris or other quality scope. They will probably last longer and stand the abuse of recoil longer than the cheaper ones. Weaver makes a great scope for the money. Look around used. I have a Weaver 6x fixed power on my 270. Paid $35.00 dollars a gunshow. Works good as new one.
Maybe this helps. Maybe not. Just my humble thoughts.

 

[MikeG]

If money is an issue, and you want a fixed scope for a reasonable price, look for used 4x and 6x Leupold scopes at gun shows. I have bought a number of these for around $100-$125, your prices may vary. Nearly indestructable, and you will always get your money back out of one if you decide you don't like it. But you will. They are GREAT on .22 rimfires, just send back to Leupold to have refocused to 50 yards.

I agree that the 2.5x8 VX-III is about the best scope you can hunt with. Smaller and lighter than the typical 3x9, and very durable. You can mount them quite low on the gun. Good long eye relief too, huge field of view at 2.5x. Shot running pigs at ranges measured in feet. Light weight helps keep them in place and reduces stress on the rings/bases. I've also shot pigs with that scope at night (legal here in TX) and it just flat-out works, even cranked all the way up to 8x.

 

[Bandito]

Scope dilemma

I use a M600 with 2.5-8, I have a 1-4X20 with premier reticle, (thick to thin crosshair) on my '99 .358 Winchester. I will get a 2X to 3X fixed Leupold next, with the reticle of my choice. I have a 2.75 Redfield about a '72 production date. That has been on many a rifle and killed lots of small game on the 39A 22 and some whitetail on a Mark X .300 Win. I have to say the fixed 2.75X is my favorite. It was without a doubt the most economical of all my scopes. That low power would have been adequate for even my long shots on varmints. Good luck. Bandito

 

[marylandmike]

Thanks to all who replied. I got the burris 4x compact, and tried to mount it on my rifle. With Weaver mounts and burris zee rings, the scope is too short. I am wondering if going to standard mounts and rings (Leupold, etc) I would have enough clearance. Do you folks think I need to get extension rings?
Thank you in advance!
Mike