HEAD0001 said:
If you want to pack around a 15# rifle in the mountains then that is your business. However you hopefully know that you are the minority. And by minority I mean maybe 1/2 of 1% of the hunters out there want to carry that type of rifle around in the mountains. Probably much less than 1/2 of 1%.
I have no idea how many hunters I have seen in my life above 5,000 feet in elevation. And I don't think I have ever seen a hunter carrying a 15# rifle in the mountains. Personally the heaviest rifle I have ever seen in the mountains is a Sharp's rifle that I was hunting with. With open sights. Heaven forbid if you had to shoot with open sights. Good lord how would you adjust them??
It doesn't matter to me if you beat your chest like King Kong when you carry that 15# rifle up the mountain. Calling a person who wants to carry an appropriate weight rifle "fat and lazy" is uncalled for.
I also do agree that it takes good glass to see. And I also believe in your theory about a $2,000 scope and a $200 rifle. I also agree with that.
But that does not make the NF a better choice for hunting. Sure NF has good glass. But it is not Swaro. glass!! NF is known for its durability, but they do not have the ultimate high grade glass.
A 3X10 Swaro., even with the ballistic turret would be a much better choice for what the OP asked about. And that Swaro. glass would be of better optical quality than your three times as heavy NF.
And who sights a rifle in dead on at 100 yards for hunting?? Nobody. Normally everybody sights there rifle in one to 3 inches high for fairly flat trajectory to 300 yards. Which is 100 yards past the OP's 200 yard range. I do it all the time. And that is with a slower 223.
And exposed turrets for most mountain hunters is definitely not a good choice. Tom.
Tom,
I don't beat on my chest my dad just raised a real man that can very easily pack 15 lbs ALL day every day! That's neither here nor there, My normal hunting rifle is a .300 wm that is only 12.82 lbs, just weighed it at the 1k shoot in Montana this weekend so I am getting week and lazy in my old age.
I never called ANYBODY fat or lazy but myself!!! it might be uncalled for but I give myself permission
I agree with you that Swarovski is in a class all by there self, I really like mine. Although N/F has very good glass, some of the finest, if it didn't have very high quality glass, ALMOST everybody shooting LR Bench rest wouldn't be using them!
I also agree with your choice of scope for Dan's rifle, if you go back over my posts you will see I suggested the 3.5-15X32 N/F scope, very similar to your suggestion.
I sight most of my rifles in at 100 yards, 200 maximum, I dial or use my velocity reticals, A bear or coyote or what ever vermin I am aiming at, at the distances I hunt at usually don't even know I am in the country so I have plenty of time to dial or hold, if you do a 300 yard zero you are way high at 200 and the rabbit is probably safe.
Oh and by the way I have a 45/70 that I kill bears in the brush with and for the longer bears on the open hill sides the ADJUSTABLE vernier sight works great

take care and shoot straight.
Wayne.
JRS,
I could agree the little .223 and a 3.5-10 would be a nice little 200-300 yard setup. I also agree with you that the thread has gone south. I apologize for spouting off, I really do like heavy accurate rifles with big clear expensive glass. I do have the cheaper 3-9 vxII on my little short range 30/30's and what not.
Wayne.
Dan,
I am sorry your thread got off topic, I will delete my posts tomorrow, I have always enjoyed our conversations and hope to continue. I really think you would like the smaller N/F but whatever glass you get, get the best you feel you can afford, good glass just can't be beat especially on the early morning/ late evening shots, take care and good luck, and let us know what you come up with.
Wayne.