tedicast Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 I am looking for a scope for my new 45/70 Encore barrel. The barrel is being shortened and a muzzle brake installed right now, and I want to order the scope so I will have it when the barrel comes back. I am definately getting a Nikon ProStaff, but am unsecided between the 2x7x32, or the 3x9x40. Being that the 45/70 is a short range gun, I'm thinking the 2x7x32 will be plenty of scope. But then on the other hand, will I gain that much more light with the 3x9x40? There is only $20 difference in price, so the $$$ isn't an issue. Just wondering what everyones thoughts on this are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilhunter1986 Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions umm for only 20 i would deffinitely but the 3-9X40. it will have a clearer view and let more light in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huntinsonovagun Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions I personally would go 3-9x40. More light, more magnification (if needed), and from my experience, you should be able to find anything in your scope, no matter the distance, with a 3x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTbowman Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions Get as big a front Obj as you can, everytime, without question. Nothing beats light gathering capabilities at last light IMHO. As far as the mag, 7x and 9x may not be that different but at longer ranges it can help. I know its not a long range set up but still nice to have it, if for anything, sighting in. JMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions [ QUOTE ] Get as big a front Obj as you can, everytime, without question. [/ QUOTE ] What???? I definately do not feel that is good advise. You reach a point where there is no better light transmission no matter how big the lenses are. The optics and coating quality mean more to light transmission than obj lens size does. Light gathering is really a bogus term. Light transmission is more accurate. Personally, I would go with a 3-9x40. That's about the minimum scope I would buy. Even on short range guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedicast Posted January 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions ok...thanks everyone.....3x9x40 it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ronin Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions I agree with AJ, 3X9X40. On the same note, the 45/70 isn't necessarily short range. It just shoots like a rainbow at long range! If you know where the bullet will drop, it's all good! Big 45/70's are beautiful things! I dropped a coyote at 284 yards while it was walking away from me. He wasn't running cause he thought he was safe at that distance, I guess! I took a buffalo at close to 200 yards and it dropped immediately. I am comfortable with my 45/70 out to 300 yards consistantly. But, I must admit, I have fallen in love with big magnums for things out past that 300 yard mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTbowman Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions [ QUOTE ] The optics and coating quality mean more to light transmission than obj lens size does. [/ QUOTE ] Correct me if I am wrong but is it not front obj. lense part of "the optics"? I realize coating is very important to clarity but is it not the quality and the design of the lense that transfers the light? The two factors give you what I like to call light gathering... But I conceed it is more accurate to say "light transmission". All I know is my very expensive Pentax 10x24 and my expensive Leupold 3.5-10x50 are like night and day. The 50mm is much brighter much longer into last light. Both are IMO super quality scopes but the larger of the 2 definately transmits more light. Will a few millimeters make a huge difference? Probably not but for the extra $20 I'd still go for the larger front objective everytime. JMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted January 21, 2006 Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions Actually,, Both AJ and GrnMntMan are correct... Objective Lens Size The second number in the formula (4x40) is the diameter of the objective or front lens. The larger the objective lens, the more light that enters the scope, and the brighter the image. Coated Optics Coatings on lens surfaces reduce light loss and glare due to reflection for a brighter, higher-contrast image with reduced eyestrain. Bushnell® riflescopes are coated with a microscopic film of magnesium fluoride. More coatings lead to better light transmission. TYPES OF COATING Coated - A single layer on at least one lens. Fully-Coated - A single layer on all air-to-glass surfaces. Multi-Coated - Multiple layers on at least one lens and all surfaces are coated at least once. Fully Multi-Coated - Multiple layers on all air-to-glass surfaces. Tedicast,, here's a great article that will cover all of your questions on choosing a scope, and the TERMINOLOGY behind what makes up a scope... http://www.opticsplanet.com/info/how_to_buy_riflescope.shtml Hope this helps ya out abit.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedicast Posted January 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions Thanks Luke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VermontHunter Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions You're welcome,, just hope some of the info helped ya, with some of your questions.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bronco_mudder Posted January 22, 2006 Report Share Posted January 22, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions I love shooting the 45/70, in any rifle design. I've haven't enjoyed the Encore yet, but have had a Ruger No. 1, and still have a Trap Door, Winchester 1886, and just recently accuired a P-14 bolt action rebarreled into the 45/70. The plans for this last rifle are to be my go to rifle for when I'm stand hunting in thick brush, which we have a lot of where I hunt. The scope I've decided to mount on it is a Burris Signature Select 1.5-6X40. I wanted to get a low magnification scope with a larger objective, not something that easy to find, around here anyway I didn't want to go with the 32 mil obejective if I didn't have to, I wanted as large a field of view as possible, and the low 1.5 power in the bush will be great when it's getting dusk for target accuisition in thick underbrush. As well since the 45/70 isn't an ideal long range hunting cartridge the top end of 6 power will be plenty for any range you'll shoot your rifle at game. Burris scopes are of great quality, but whatever you choose, spend as much on the scope as possible. There is nothing more important than good glass on your rifle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions Would go with the 3-9x40. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tedicast Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Re: Magnification Opinions [ QUOTE ] Would go with the 3-9x40. [/ QUOTE ] I did!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.