Scope Magnification

[CatShooter]

Field of view isn't as simple as a math formula. The 6.5x20x50 Leupold has 5.5 feet at 20 and 14.3 feet at 6.5 Where the Burris has 7.5 at 20 and 22 feet at 6.5 power. That is a big difference. Matt

Yes it is...

For scopes that have the same power and same ocular diameter, then field of view is purely a function of eye relief.

If you are going to compare scopes, you can't cherry pick your specs - for the same power, it is only eye relief that determines the field of view.

The Burris has ~3.2" of eye relief and the Leupold has ~4.5" of eye relief. So the Burris have more field of view, at the expense of having less eye relief. So if you are shooting a 223, or a 300 Win Mag, you have choices to make.

 

[Raythemanroe]

I don't understand cherry picking, it sounds like a good observation to me!

 

[CatShooter]

I don't understand cherry picking, it sounds like a good observation to me!

It IS about math formulas... to try to pick examples and "prove" it isn't, is cherry picking - but the poster did not understand that he was proving the very thing he was trying to disprove.

 

[wyoming .260]

To the OP , I would think a scope that will fit your purposes would be a good Quality variable in the 4.5-14 to 6-24 range. You did say you were gonna be using a .223. There are lots of companies that offer a choice of reticles matched for .223 loads. In my past I lived in North east Pa. and used a 2-7 scope on a handgun successfully on G-hogs to 300-350 yds. And they have horrible fields of view. Mirage ain't as bad there as here but can be a problem on warm summer afternoons.
My top picks for myself IF I was looking for something in your situation would be the Zeiss conquest in 4.5-14 or 6.5-20. I do not know your price range , but even these can be had for a reasonable price if you shop around. JMHO

P.S. I see you live on Long Island. Does N.Y even allow any .223's anymore???????????

 

[Grimstod]

I would vote for the low power. I have hunted with a 20x fixed scope and lesson I learned was it took a lot of time to find the animal in the scope even at 250yds.

I have no problem shooting deer at 350yards with a 4x fixed scope so I would vote for the low power. Especially if your after Coyotes because they some times appear suddenly and closer then you anticipated. When hunting always have your glass set to minimum power. If you see something a long way off odds are you will have plenty of time to zoom in. But if they suddenly appear on you up close then you won't have time to zoom out. If you are already at lowest power its no problem. 8)

By the way last deer I shot was at 10yds from a ground blind. I was set to 5.5x power and could not see the head or the knees. Wish I had been set to 3x because I could have made a less panicked shot. it was pure luck I hit dead center.

 

[Grimstod]

P.S. I see you live on Long Island. Does N.Y even allow any .223's anymore???????????

Only if you paint it pink and put a rose in the end of the barrel. : :

 

[MQ1]

Scattergun,

I have that rifle in 17 Remington, and have a 4.5x14 Burris on it. I've shot groundhogs and squirrels out to 300 yards with no issues.

The last Coyote I shot was at 500 yards. He was standing, staring a a cow that was giving birth to a calf. On 11 power, which was where my ballistic reticle was calibrated at, I wasn't lacking in power to take him out.

I have contemplated moving from the 4.5x14 to a 3x9, because I feel the 3x9 is a better fit on the rifle (size) and for the hunting I do, 3x seems better on the low end, and 9 is plenty on the high end.

YMMV,

MQ1

 

[CSM19Z5M]

There is a lot of good input here but I found it troubling to hear so much talk about shooting moving targets. I don't want to insult anyone or lecture but I will say that if you shoot at moving critters you own that critter until you find his body. I have hunted all my life and have found far too many deer and elk lying rotting with bullet holes in all parts of the carcasses. I don't care if it's an elk or a coyote, you owe that animal a clean kill shot. Ever think about it if the roles were reversed? Don't want to start an argument, just making a statement about shooting ethics.

 

[wyoming .260]

Even tracking an animal in the scope to wait for a standing still shot is easier with a better field of view.

 

[Raythemanroe]

Ya, I got to say that everyone's reason for hunting and opportunities differ drastically. If all you have is a heavily wooded high pressure spot to hunt you will most likely need to be good at moving shots..I think the best medicine is to understand what you need to do to be successful and to know your limitations!

 

[chevytruck_83]

I dont know why everyone's pushing guys to get lower power optics all the time. What do you need..? Thats up to u. There are guys that could do that with iron sites. However. Take your 6.5-20 or whatever and pick a target at 300. What setting do you think you have the best chance of hitting it.. obviously its 20. If theres mirage turn it down. You may get better answers if you post a price range you want to be in. Otherwise I say march 8-80x56. Tell me you guys with your super sweet 10x scopes can shoot better groups at distance with a 10x then that march..

 

[Charles]

I use a 3/9 ziess for praire dogs and deer out to 300yds.

 

[scattergun2570]

To the OP , I would think a scope that will fit your purposes would be a good Quality variable in the 4.5-14 to 6-24 range. You did say you were gonna be using a .223. There are lots of companies that offer a choice of reticles matched for .223 loads. In my past I lived in North east Pa. and used a 2-7 scope on a handgun successfully on G-hogs to 300-350 yds. And they have horrible fields of view. Mirage ain't as bad there as here but can be a problem on warm summer afternoons.
My top picks for myself IF I was looking for something in your situation would be the Zeiss conquest in 4.5-14 or 6.5-20. I do not know your price range , but even these can be had for a reasonable price if you shop around. JMHO

P.S. I see you live on Long Island. Does N.Y even allow any .223's anymore???????????

Groundhogs at 300yds with a handgun? Who are you,Bob Munden? As to NY allowing .223`s..of course..just not AR platforms.

 

[stinnett1981]

I want to get a CZ 527 in .223. For shots on Coyotes/Groundhogs out to 300yds..how much power would you suggest?

I would tell you to get a Leupold VX-R. They have 30mm tubes, illuminated reticles and come 2-7, 3-9 and 4-12 power. I looked through one the other day and they have great glass. That 30mm tube on 6 power with a firedot reticle you would be able to find your target, get on target and make a fast shot. I been thinking about putting one on my rifled barreled 20 gauge Savage slug gun. I think they would make a great coyote scope too!

 

[dkhunt14]

There are a lot of guys shooting groundhogs at 300 yards with a pistol. Most of them have 2-7 power or less. Some of the more serious guys put on a Niteforce. I shoot a lot 1000 yard and most times shoot at around 25 power. Lots of 4 to 5 inch 10 shot groups at that power. Sometimes mirage will let you turn them up a little more. Have a 5.5x22 Nightforce on my longrange hunting gun and shoot out to 2000 yards accurately. Matt

 

[tuck2]

In 1953 I mounted a Weaver K 4 scope on my 270 rifle. I shot pronghorn, mule deer, elk , and other smaller unwonted critters using the 4 X scope. I recall shooting a prairie dog at 300 yards with the 4 X scope. When Redfeild come out in the 60s with a 3-9 X scope I put it on the 270 rifle and its still on the rifle. I have Leupold 6.5-20 X scopes on a 220 Swift and 234 Winchester rifles. There are Leupold 6-18 X on my 223 Rem and 17 Fireball rifles. I got a Leupold 4-12 X on my new 17 Hornet rifle. Most all of my shooting is in wide open country where higher powered scopes are handy but if I did a lot of hunting in woodlands where a long shot was 150 Yds I d have a 1-4 X scope on a deer rifle.