Just got a new Scope

[Taggure]

While at the Nations gun show this last Sunday I was looking around for a nice hunting scope for my new Savage .308 that I got recently and found a really clear medium range scope. I picked up a Leapers UTG 30mm AccuShot 4-16x44 IE Rifle scope and looked through it to the other side of the showroom and was really surprised at the clarity at the lowest to highest magnification of this scope. I also liked the fact that it had what they call Zero Lockable and Zero Resettable Target Turrets so I can quickly reset it back to my zero even if I make adjustments or it gets bumped in the woods (like that will ever happen ). I have yet to mount it but will take a couple of pic's once I get it mounted and get out to the range with it and see how it does.

Has anyone else used the Leepers scopes? All the reviews I have seen on line say they are pretty good value scopes for <$200

[kanata67]

I've been looking for a good 308 scope myself so post pics and tell how good it is. I've been looking at around and have seen a nikon 3x9x50. I know I need the 50 but how does the higher middle number affect sighting?

[meak99]

Higher middle number means more zoom... 4-16 = 4x magnification at lowest setting, 16x at highest setting. so 3-9 just means lower power magnification... the x50 means 50mm objective lens. Why do you say you need the 50?

Zero shouldn't be affected by your zoom level, but your holdover could be different if your basing it on the reticle and not the size of the target.

[kanata67]

I figure bigger lens bigger view. A spotting scope would be nice but then again so would a buddy who was spotting. Trying to dial in on 500yrds with a scope big enough for me to have a chance at 1000yrds+. 308 SASS. I have a 30.06 than can hit 1000 reliably but the scope came with the rifle and I am a firm believer in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[papasan]

bigger lens lets more light in, the higher the magnification the less light gets in. at 16x i bet the 50mm objective lens helps a bit making the image brighter. saves a few $$ on a smaller objective lens with better coatings.

[jdonovan]

bigger lens lets more light in, the higher the magnification the less light gets in.

I think you meant, at higher magnifications less light gets out.

The other big plus on larger objective lenses, they generally have a larger exit pupil. This means your eye can be a little less exactly in line with the center of the scope and still see a clear image.

Ever use a high mag. scope that you had to be in just the right place to see the image? Thats what a small exit pupil will cause.

[ShotgunBlast]

Can you see me now?

[kanata67]

so for 1000yrds a 4x16x50 would be better? I've learned a lot about the firearms I have from you guys but this will be the first piece of optics I have bought that didn't come with the firearm when I acquired it. I was informed after getting the sass that my wife is expecting so I'm trying to be real cheap about this. I still have another 19 rounds I need to send through the barrel cleaning between each shot according to the directions for breaking in the barrel. After 25 it's only every 10 shots till I hit 100 rnds through the barrel so I think then is when it would be optimum to sight in a new scope. wallmart had a nikon 3x9x50 for $210 that seemed ok. I prefer lighted red+green like the scope that came with my 15 provides as I'm used to it. I also need to figure out a riser+ring combination that will let me use my pop-up sights under the scope.through the ring gaps. The guy who does my transfers had a nice looking scope made in china with nice lights and reticule. Unfortunately when I picked up my sass he was happy enough to make the transfer and sell me a crate of british 308 rounds but was more interested in the nascar race going on than playing with risers and rings. Seeing as I paid for the crate in $.50 cent pieces and $2 dollar bills I can't really complain.

[jdonovan]

so for 1000yrds a 4x16x50 would be better?
I'm trying to be real cheap about this.
wallmart had a nikon 3x9x50 for $210 that seemed ok

*shudder* a $200 walmart 3x9 is not going to be a viable 1000 yd scope. Could you see the targets, sure, clearly, doubtful. Just had this same discussion with a friend. IMO if you can't come up with $1000 for a variable, then get a fixed 10x for longer range work. If you want a general purpose hunting scope the $200 Walmart special will probably be fine.

However, if it were my $200 to spend, I'd give serious consideration to a Redfield. I've heard nothing but good things about them, they are now all USA made and the company is now owned by Leupold. Leupold is using the Redfield brand to be their USA made, price-point brand. Sure, its not a $800 Leupold, but the ones I've looked through have been serviceable hunting scopes.

[kanata67]

thanks for the tip jdonovan. I know a scope should cost at least half what the firearm cost but I had to save two years to get the firearm and with a kid on the way I find my budget quite limited. Not that I won't get a good scope in the future... I just need a workable stopgap to last a year or two.