Jump to content


Photo

Muzzy Scope


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2010 - 08:08 AM

I have been looking for a while for a new scope for my inline. Yes I know there are a bunch of dedicated scopes out there but none suit my fancy. I want a scope that either is parralax set at 50 or 75 yds or can be adjusted to that. I do not use the mag loads and most all my shots are at the 50 - 75 yd mark. I now have a TASCO 3-9 on the inline and parralax is a problem with it. Does anyone have any experience with the Bushnell Trophy XLT. I have an older model of the Trophy on my 7mm mag and really like it. Currently my plan is to get a Trophy XLT and put it on my 270. I will then take the Bushnell 3200 4-12 scope from the 270 and put it on my inline. The 3200 is AO so I can make the scope parralax free at whatever distance I want.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#2 cayugad

cayugad

    Hunting Resource

  • Moderators
  • 881 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2010 - 10:23 AM

I can well understand the reasons for you wanting such a scope as you describe. And with the ranges you describe, as we know.. large magnification is not necessary. A scope I think you might want to look into would be the Nikon Pro Staff 2-7x32mm Shotgun Scope. The scope has some of the best glass I have ever used. It is tough as nails, and a life time warranty. Also it has a 75 yard parallax. The thing I really like about this scope. Even though it has a 32mm Objective Diameter, I find it is perfect for hunting woods. When stalking I set it on 2x. When sitting in a blind 5x. When on the edge of a field 7x. It is a do it all scope. We do not take snap shots with a muzzleloader. A 32mm gives you more then enough field of view 33.4-9.5@75 yards depending on the power you use. Also this scope has better light gathering abilities then a 40mm lens. And because of the quality ranks very high in light filtering. It is fog proof, water proof, and has Nikon anti - reflective multicoating on the lens. Not to mention the Nikon life time guarantee. I have these on four different rifles. They are not all that expensive, but I would put them up against any other scope out there. Also Eye Relief (in): 3.9-3.8. Anyone that shoots muzzleloaders and wears glasses will appreciate that kind of eye relief. It was funny. I shop at a little gun shop near where I live. The owner of the shop is a competition target shooter. I took my White Ultra Mag up there, scope shopping. I wanted this muzzleloader "special" and told him I wanted a great scope for the rifle. What would he recommend. He smiled and said, I could sell you a lot of scopes. Some of them very expensive. But the scope I would put on that rifle is the Nikon Pro Staff. He then explained why (basically what I told you). As he said, I sell a lot of these scopes, but none of them ever come back for repair or resale. They are just that good of a scope. Look through one at a sporting goods store if you can. I think you will be impressed with the quality and the price.

Two other scopes I use are the Nikon Omega 3-9x40mm and the Bushnell 3200 2-7x32mm both of them are excellent as well. If you want a cheap scope and think you can break it, the Simmons Pro Diamond 4x32mm costs around $40.00 and have a 50 yard parallax. They are a shotgun scope. I have them on several rifles and even though they are inexpensive, I have not been able to break or shake one apart yet.
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, a total wreck with a big smile on your face."

#3 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:08 PM

I bought a nikon Pro Staff 22 lr scope a few months ago at Cabelas. I have to agree that the Nikon is a very clear scope. After I purchased the Nikon I told the clerk that I wanted a muzzloader scope and he grabbed several scopes but none of them were much different than the one I already have on the inline other than a few BDC wires or circles. I explained that they would not work for me as I do not shoot a 150 grain load nor am I interested in any distance shooting anyhow. I principally wanted a scope that would be parralax free at 50 yds or adjustable to that distance. Other than a very expensive shotgun scope they had nothing to offer. That was from about 3 cases full of scopes.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#4 Falcon

Falcon

    Moving Up

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts

Posted 13 December 2010 - 12:47 PM

For about 6 years years my CVA StagHorn wore a 4X Pro Staff scope. i assume it was made for use on a .22. That was a fine low light scope. It held up through at least 500 shots and thousands of miles banging around uncased in my old Toyota pickup over rough roads. Yep, it finally went bad.

It is unproductive to drive the roads hog hunting with a cased gun. :D

#5 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:04 PM

Cabelas would not sell me a 22 scope for my muzzleloader. I am partial to the higher power scopes. even when I am hunting in the brush I usually have my scope on 8 or 10 power. I actually can see those little twigs and limbs that I may not have seen with a lower power. I think that the Bushnell 3200 will serve me well on my inline. I am itching to put more power on my 270 anyhow. I do hunt at a farm where a shot at even 400 yds can happen as well as a 25 yd shot in the brush. The 6 - 18 on my 7mm works for me both places so I am planning on ordering the XLT and do the switch.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#6 cayugad

cayugad

    Hunting Resource

  • Moderators
  • 881 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 December 2010 - 03:48 PM

That 3200 is a good scope. I have a Bushnell 3200 on a White rifle. Excellent glass and clarity in that scope.
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, a total wreck with a big smile on your face."

#7 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 December 2010 - 07:48 PM

I like the 3200 4-12 that currently resides on my 270. It will suit my desires as well on the inline. Many times a scope that is set to be parralax free at 100 yds works pretty well at a shorter distance but this one at 25 and even 50 yds has it bad. I also will appreciate the moisture resisting lens coating too. My new 270 scope has already shipped so should be here in a few days. I kinda like Optics Planet no shipping charges and no sales tax and good prices.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.

#8 old fart

old fart

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 68 posts

Posted 03 January 2011 - 06:45 PM

i have a cabela's pine ridge 2.5-7x32 on my traditions yukon, its been on for almost a year now. its as clear as any i've looked thru, and the adjustment ring turns with ease.

#9 PA RIDGE RUNNER

PA RIDGE RUNNER

    Life Member

  • Authors
  • 5,702 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 January 2011 - 12:54 PM

I solved my parralax delima this week by purchasing a Bushnell Trophy XLT and placing it on my 270. The XLT is a 6-18 power scope with a 50 MM objective lense. It is a very clear scope and should do just fine on that rifle. I then took the Bushnell 3200 4-12 power scope and mounted it on my inline. It is more scope than is needed on that rifle but will do just fine on there. I may try the Tasco 3-9 that I had on the inline and put it on my 243 or I may not as it already has a redfield 2-7 on it. Now I must find some time to sight in the 270, the inline and the 243 as it has not been shot since I put the redfield on it.
If God had a refrigerator would your picture be on it.
Remember the Ark was built by amateurs, the titanic by professionals.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users