Pair them up

[wisconsinteacher]

Say you have 3 rifles and 3 scopes sitting on the table. How would you pair them up?

Rifles
Winchester 70 .338WM
Browning Medallion .270 Win
Browning X-Bolt .243 Win

Scopes
Nikon Monarch 2-8
Minox 3-9
Leupold VXIII-3.5-10

Thanks

 

[tddeangelo]

What are the intended uses for each rifle? What reticles in the scopes?

 

[HeathSexton]

The 338 would get the Leupold for eye relief, the 243 would get the Minox and since I don't like 270's or Nikons they would get traded.

 

[wisconsinteacher]

The intent of the rifles are to set up for hunting. Maybe set the 243 up for more of a yote gun or youth/woman's deer rifle.

 

[tddeangelo]

OK, without knowing terrain, game pursued, etc, since you're name has "wisconsin" in it, I'll presume eastern stand hunting for whitetails and work from that assumption.

Short of varmints, the 338 can really "do it all" (and it can hunt varmints, though you won't find much after the fact! lol). Stand hunting whitetails often puts a premium on low light performance. Of those scopes, the Minox stands out to me as probably the best low-light optic, so I'd put that on the 338. That makes the 338 the "go to" rifle for anything.

The 3.5-10 goes on the 243 for paper and small critters.

The 2-8 goes on the 270 and makes it a 2nd string rifle, behind the 338.

 

[wisconsinteacher]

tddeangelo, most of the hunting will be from stands unless I am able to someday sneak out west. I did have the Minox on the .338 before and it did shake it loose so I sent it back to get fixes. Now I have to set them up and get loading and shooting!!!!

 

[RiverRider]

I generally use higher magnification on rifles intended for smaller targets, but I'd take eye relief into account also, like Heath suggests IF I had a real boomer. Locale is not such a factor for me so I don't worry about a gun to be used in thick cover, but I do have a 94 which will remain unscoped---in part because of top ejection. If I get ambitious and decide to go crawling around in the mesquite thickets on my lease, that .30-30 should be a good choice.

 

[SJB358]

3.5x10 on the 338, Nikon 2-8 on the 243 and Minox 3x9 on the 270. No real logic just my idea if they were my 3. I like the 3.5x10's. Good scopes and should work well on the 338. The other two are sorta 2nd stringers compared to the 338. Again, that's Scotty logic it has no basis in common sense or taste.

 

[tddeangelo]

I actually flip-flopped on the 3.5-10 or the Minox for the 338. I eventually nodded to the Minox for the excellent glass in those scopes, which I feel give a small margin of performance over the older VXIII...if it's a VX3, then it'd be so close, I think I'd err toward the ruggedness of the Leupold on the 338.

 

[FOTIS]

Say you have 3 rifles and 3 scopes sitting on the table. How would you pair them up?

Rifles
Winchester 70 .338WM
Browning Medallion .270 Win
Browning X-Bolt .243 Win

Scopes
Nikon Monarch 2-8
Minox 3-9
Leupold VXIII-3.5-10

Thanks

as you have them listed......respectively

 

[wisconsinteacher]

Wow, I was expecting all the different combos. Keep them coming.

 

[JD338]

Say you have 3 rifles and 3 scopes sitting on the table. How would you pair them up?

Rifles
Winchester 70 .338WM
Browning Medallion .270 Win
Browning X-Bolt .243 Win

Scopes
Nikon Monarch 2-8
Minox 3-9
Leupold VXIII-3.5-10

Thanks

as you have them listed......respectively

+1 to what Fotis said.

JD338

 

[RiverRider]

Fotis & JD, I'd like to know WHY you see it as you do. I didn't spell it out myself, but I'd match 'em up the same as both of you. Just wondering why you'd do it that way.

 

[Dwh7271]

Agree with Fotis and JD.
My reasoning:
338- bigger critters, easier to see, need less power to find them, probably not going to shoot 400 plus with the 338 (not making anyone mad intentionally because I know it could, just I wouldn't)
270- medium critters near and far, medium magnification, may stretch it out depending on accuracy
243- smaller critter maybe out a ways, more magnification and need sharp image

Just my opinion. :grin:

 

[FOTIS]

Agree with Fotis and JD.
My reasoning:
338- bigger critters, easier to see, need less power to find them, probably not going to shoot 400 plus with the 338 (not making anyone mad intentionally because I know it could, just I wouldn't)
270- medium critters near and far, medium magnification, may stretch it out depending on accuracy
243- smaller critter maybe out a ways, more magnification and need sharp image

Just my opinion. :grin:

Bingo!

 

[tddeangelo]

My only reasoning for switching the Minox and the Nikon is that I believe light transmission will be at a premium for stand-hunting whitetails in eastern woods type of terrain.

I believe the Minox is superior to the Nikon for that, and then further assumed that the 338 would be more likely used as the "go to" rifle than the 270. In that case, the main rifle should get best optics.

If the 270 is mostly used for deer, then I'd flip-flop my positioning of the Nikon/Minox. Basically, I'd put the 3.5-10 on the 243. From there, pick the rifle that'll go into thicker/closer cover the most, and give that one the Minox. That would be my pick.

 

[baltz526]

Say you have 3 rifles and 3 scopes sitting on the table. How would you pair them up?

Rifles
Winchester 70 .338WM Nikon Monarch 2-8
Browning Medallion .270 Win Leupold VXIII-3.5-10
Browning X-Bolt .243 Win Minox 3-9

Scopes
Nikon Monarch 2-8
Minox 3-9
Leupold VXIII-3.5-10

Thanks

 

[sask boy]

Yup that works for me as well!!

Blessings,
Dan

 

[Rem Jim]

In the EXACT order you have them for me too ! RJ

 

[wisconsinteacher]

Well, I had a little time tonight so I paired them up. Not the way that some replied but I have a future plan. The .338 got the VXIII, the 270 got the Z3 Minox and the .243 got the 2-8 Nikon. The plan is to replace the Nikon with a 4-12 or something like that and the 2-8 will go on a future 35 Whelen pump action.

Thanks for the help guys. I will post some results soon. (I hope)