Which variable scope do you all prefer....
4-12x40 or 6-18x40???
Just looking for opinions. Thanks!
4-12x40 or 6-18x40???
Just looking for opinions. Thanks!
scope for western hunting
- Thread starter prhunter
- Start date
Either works. Really depends on your practile max range and terrain you plan to hunt. I could have done all my hunting to date with a fixed 4x scope. I have a safe full of variables that have been set on 5x for 20+ years in some cases. But the last scope I bought was 4-16x44, for shots to 600, I like it and it has been set on 5x ish most of the time for it's 3 seasons. While I can make lethal hits at 400-600 with 6-8x power, it's easier with more power IMO. Only taken one shot at game over 400, was 415ish with a 3-9x40 set at 5x, so that's my bias.
So I'd go with the 4-12 given those two as my only choices, for the low power option. My 2-7x33's/2.5-8.5x36's are my favorite scopes. If you have to chase a critter in the woods, up close and personal, you'll appreciate a lower power option, and 12x is enough for the rare, in my hunting, shot over 375 or so. If all your hunting is open country, the 6-18x40 has appeal, just know that is not optimal in low light. There are some 4.5 - 5.5 low range scopes that go up to 14-20x that are very versatile if you want higher power for some LR shots.
So I'd go with the 4-12 given those two as my only choices, for the low power option. My 2-7x33's/2.5-8.5x36's are my favorite scopes. If you have to chase a critter in the woods, up close and personal, you'll appreciate a lower power option, and 12x is enough for the rare, in my hunting, shot over 375 or so. If all your hunting is open country, the 6-18x40 has appeal, just know that is not optimal in low light. There are some 4.5 - 5.5 low range scopes that go up to 14-20x that are very versatile if you want higher power for some LR shots.
JimP
Administrator
I myself prefer either a 3x9 or a 3.5x10. If you can't get it done with 9 or 10 power then perhaps you need to get a little bit closer. Now after saying that I'll admit that I have a 4.5x14 on my .25-06 just because of the ranges that I was having to shoot it at 400+ yards were the closest That I have taken with that rifle. But then I am capable of shooting a 500 yard shot with my 3.5x10 and have made that shot.
Hilltop
Veteran member
4X12 is the better option for big game. As mentioned above, 4 power is nice for close range shots and 12 is plenty for longer range shooting on big game. I use a 4.5x14 Leupold with the BDC reticle and love it. Best of both IMO. I shot a doe whitetail yesterday at 488 yards. At 14.5 power she looked close in the scope.
Slugz
Veteran member
Colorado Cowboy
Super Moderator
I own both. I bought the 6x18 first as I thought it would be great for antelope hunting. Got to say that anything over 10 or so picks up heat waves and the eye relief is more critical. Took it off and replaced it with a 4x14 which I love. It is on a .25-06 and really does the job. I leave it on 6 most of the time. I did shoot a buck antelope at 417 yards with it set on 14 , with me in prone position. Worked great....one shot, dead.
I took the 6x16 and put it on a new custom .220 Ackley Improved I shoot prairie dogs with. Does a great job there.
I took the 6x16 and put it on a new custom .220 Ackley Improved I shoot prairie dogs with. Does a great job there.
LCH
Very Active Member
I like a good 3x9.. nothing worse than having a critter at close range, and not being able to find them in the scope (been there). A 4x12 wouldn't really be giving up a lot though over the 3x9.
shootbrownelk
Veteran member
I do most of my hunting with a 3x scope, it's a 3x9 Leupold but I can't remember ever turning up the magnification. It works for me. I've seen guys come out here with huge scopes with objectives that look like coffee cans, and then not be able to pick up a jumped buck because they had the power turned up to it's highest setting. 3x9 is just about right, a 2x7 may even suit me better.
Timberstalker
Veteran member
I use a 3x9 Leupold on my 25-06 I usually have it on 5-6
I have a 4x12 Leupold on my new rifle In 280AI I haven't got to shoot it yet, I'm hoping this set up will get me to 600 I'm sure it will.
I have a 4x12 Leupold on my new rifle In 280AI I haven't got to shoot it yet, I'm hoping this set up will get me to 600 I'm sure it will.
gonhunting247
Veteran member
- Jan 21, 2014
- 1,207
- 772
I use a 3x9 Leupold on my 30.06 and my .300 RUM. I use it in the brush here at home and the open country trips out east, as well as, hunts up in AK. They do everything I need them to do from 1-400 yards and beyond. I'm not a long range shooter though! I don't really think I turn it below 4power much, so the 4-12 is probably a great option too. I mostly love the quality and eye relief for the cost, as I only have Vari X-1 and Rifleman scopes. They cost right at $200 and hold up to a ton of abuse.
4-12x40 has my vote. I grew up with 3-9x40 and then put a 4-12x40 on a rifle and I like having the extra power on the top end, but don't notice much difference on the low end. My latest scope is a 3-18 and I am excited to try it out, but in your case, I recommend the 4-12.
Guess I'm gonna be the one to 'break rank' and say I would prefer the higher magnification. I've got a Leupold 4-14 X 50 VX3 LR that I like a lot and it is an outstanding scope. It was on my 7mm mag for a few years, now it is on my varmint AR15.
I now have a Leupold MK4 6.5-20 X 50mm on my 7mm mag and wouldn't trade it for anything. For the terrain that I hunt in WY, I really like having the higher magnification. I always keep my scopes on minimum power, regardless what or where I'm hunting. If the shot opportunity, time, and conditions allow me to increase the magnification, then I will increase the power to the appropriate setting. That being said, the past two years both mule deer that I harvested were about 100 yards away shot offhand on minimum power, so go figure. With both deer, I saw each about 1/2 second before they saw me, so both were pretty quick shots. I had no problem finding them in the scope, getting the cross hairs on target, and getting the shot off accurately on 6.5X.
I really find the higher magnification helps me a lot practicing, especially at extended distances. I am able to see/aim more precisely with the higher magnification, which allows me to shoot with more precision at extended distances.
Good Luck on your choice.
I now have a Leupold MK4 6.5-20 X 50mm on my 7mm mag and wouldn't trade it for anything. For the terrain that I hunt in WY, I really like having the higher magnification. I always keep my scopes on minimum power, regardless what or where I'm hunting. If the shot opportunity, time, and conditions allow me to increase the magnification, then I will increase the power to the appropriate setting. That being said, the past two years both mule deer that I harvested were about 100 yards away shot offhand on minimum power, so go figure. With both deer, I saw each about 1/2 second before they saw me, so both were pretty quick shots. I had no problem finding them in the scope, getting the cross hairs on target, and getting the shot off accurately on 6.5X.
I really find the higher magnification helps me a lot practicing, especially at extended distances. I am able to see/aim more precisely with the higher magnification, which allows me to shoot with more precision at extended distances.
Good Luck on your choice.
I shoot enough off the bench working up loads and checking zero on the guns I bounce around in the trucks I appreciate magnification and a finer reticle. I do a lot of coyote hunting too, and like the finer crosshairs not covering as much of them. It's probably not necessary in a big game scope, but it's what I'm used to and what I like to stick with. I am more confident taking my big game rifles hunting when I know the handload I worked up shoots tiny little groups on 18x from my rifle. I know what my rifle is capable of when I don't screw it up, but that doesn't replace field practice from actual hunting positions instead of the bench. Once the bench work is perfected I go shoot steel targets from hunting positions. The confidence I build doing all this shooting is probably more important than what scope I have, but it works for me.
I'll probably never buy another scope that isn't at least a 4-16x. I check the field of view, SWFA's site is a good place to compare them. It's not the same between manufacturers and I want to know what the actual 100yd field of view is on the scope's lowest power. I have shot a lot of Leupold 4.5-14x scopes over the years on my rifles. They only have a 19.9ft FOV at 100yds on 4.5x. That hasn't ever cost me a big game animal, but there have been times calling coyotes I had to shoot at fur, not at a whole coyote. The Vortex 4-16x44 I have has a 30ft FOV and it seems huge when used to the Leupold 4.5-14x. I now run a couple Swaro Z5 3.5-18x44 that also have 30ft, and a couple Leupold VX-6 3-18x50 with 38ft. I two of each scope, one of each on my main predator rifles and one of each on my main hunting rifles. The Swaros are lighter and on my lighter rifles, the Leupolds on the heavier guns. With todays technology you don't have to give up high magnification or good field of view. Other companies like Bushnell and Minox offer the big zooms cheaper. The 4.514x Leupolds are now on the guns I carry in my ranch trucks. They are good scopes, some are 20 years old and good tough scopes. I don't get close enough shots on coyotes or other varmints from the truck to make FOV an issue.
Another thing I like a lot is an MOA reticle. The Swaros have a 4W, the Leupolds a TMOA. I have to remember when shooting them that the Swaros have 2MOA hash marks, the Leupolds 1 MOA, but other than that the systems are the same. I have turrets matched to my loads for elevation adjustment but use the hash marks for windage. I have a pocket wind meter and a rangefinder built into my binos so if I have time I can make use of them.
I seldom use them on game, I'm not a long range hunter looking for long shots. I do use them practicing a lot. It builds confidence for the time they are needed and makes for some fun long distance shooting. I think I've taken 5 big game animals past 300yds where being able to dial the exact range was nice. I've used the wind holds on one of those. I've used both on some long coyotes that I saw while driving or that hung up and wouldn't come in to the call. They can be nice to have if you will learn to use them. I think to many people short-cut the process and use the ballistics written on a box of ammo for their turret, stuff like that and don't make them accurate. They are a waste of money if you don't make them with accurate information. They just overcomplicate things too if they aren't going to be used, better off with a plain reticle.
I'll probably never buy another scope that isn't at least a 4-16x. I check the field of view, SWFA's site is a good place to compare them. It's not the same between manufacturers and I want to know what the actual 100yd field of view is on the scope's lowest power. I have shot a lot of Leupold 4.5-14x scopes over the years on my rifles. They only have a 19.9ft FOV at 100yds on 4.5x. That hasn't ever cost me a big game animal, but there have been times calling coyotes I had to shoot at fur, not at a whole coyote. The Vortex 4-16x44 I have has a 30ft FOV and it seems huge when used to the Leupold 4.5-14x. I now run a couple Swaro Z5 3.5-18x44 that also have 30ft, and a couple Leupold VX-6 3-18x50 with 38ft. I two of each scope, one of each on my main predator rifles and one of each on my main hunting rifles. The Swaros are lighter and on my lighter rifles, the Leupolds on the heavier guns. With todays technology you don't have to give up high magnification or good field of view. Other companies like Bushnell and Minox offer the big zooms cheaper. The 4.514x Leupolds are now on the guns I carry in my ranch trucks. They are good scopes, some are 20 years old and good tough scopes. I don't get close enough shots on coyotes or other varmints from the truck to make FOV an issue.
Another thing I like a lot is an MOA reticle. The Swaros have a 4W, the Leupolds a TMOA. I have to remember when shooting them that the Swaros have 2MOA hash marks, the Leupolds 1 MOA, but other than that the systems are the same. I have turrets matched to my loads for elevation adjustment but use the hash marks for windage. I have a pocket wind meter and a rangefinder built into my binos so if I have time I can make use of them.
I seldom use them on game, I'm not a long range hunter looking for long shots. I do use them practicing a lot. It builds confidence for the time they are needed and makes for some fun long distance shooting. I think I've taken 5 big game animals past 300yds where being able to dial the exact range was nice. I've used the wind holds on one of those. I've used both on some long coyotes that I saw while driving or that hung up and wouldn't come in to the call. They can be nice to have if you will learn to use them. I think to many people short-cut the process and use the ballistics written on a box of ammo for their turret, stuff like that and don't make them accurate. They are a waste of money if you don't make them with accurate information. They just overcomplicate things too if they aren't going to be used, better off with a plain reticle.
Last edited:
WapitiBob
Veteran member
5.5 - 22 x 56mm is what I use. Haven't turned it off 22x since it came out of the box. I thought 14 was OK till I looked thru this one.
Umpqua Hunter
Veteran member
I think it is more important to have a manageable low end range on low power than it is to maximize the higher end of the power range. If you need to make a quick, close shot you don't want to mess around finding the animal in the scope. I personally would not go over 4 or maybe 4.5 on the low power setting.
6mm Remington
Very Active Member
xtreme
Very Active Member
One thing not mentioned is weight. I think my VX 7l weighs 30 oz. My Z5 is much lighter. Lighter yet is the 3-9 Vari x 2. I use the Leupold VX-7 more in low light. Most shots at game are in low light.
Good thead, I think more attention should be applied to scopes. Most any old gun will work for me, but I will have a good scope on it. I bought some nikon and don't reall like them. One of the Nikon is on a Savage 22-250. I am thinking about putting the Z-5 on it. One reason is the fine cross hairs for coyote shooting.
Good thead, I think more attention should be applied to scopes. Most any old gun will work for me, but I will have a good scope on it. I bought some nikon and don't reall like them. One of the Nikon is on a Savage 22-250. I am thinking about putting the Z-5 on it. One reason is the fine cross hairs for coyote shooting.
Colorado Cowboy
Super Moderator
Leupold VXIII 6x18 mounted on my custom .220 Ackley Improved Swift. This is the scope I mention in an earlier post that started out mounted on a Ruger M77 25-06, my go to rifle for deer and antelope (no has a VXIII 4x14 40mm on it).
I initially thought the 6x18 would be great for antelope, especially at longer ranges. I thought I might be able to quit hauling around binos....wrong! Left it on 18x after glassing with it and as I was sneaking a little closer the goats started moving as they saw me. Missed a nice buck because it was still set on 18x! The scope is now used for prairie dogs and other varmints and is awesome in that use.