boomer68
Handloader
- Oct 23, 2006
- 856
- 56
Just added a nice custom M70 in .264 to my collection and looking for advice on what scope to put on it.
Scope advice
- Thread starter boomer68
- Start date
- Nov 4, 2004
- 24,539
- 7,016
Take a look at the Leupold VX 3 4.5x14x40mm or the Mark 4 4.5x14x40mm with a 30mm tube. Its the perfect power range for the 264 Win Mag.
JD338
JD338
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,036
- 5,339
Leupold VX-3 3.5-10X40 or VX-3L 3.5-10X56 would work just fine on your rifle. The Zeiss Conquest 3-9X40 is also quite nice. You can go with more power, but this will give you plenty I should think.
Divernhunter
Handloader
- Apr 1, 2009
- 797
- 154
+1 for the Leupold 3.5X10X40. "I" will only use Leupold scopes on my serious hunting rifles. Never had a scope problem that way.
cloverleaf
Handloader
- Sep 10, 2006
- 4,344
- 949
Long years of frustration with cheaper scopes brought me to a "Luey". CL
- Thread starter
- #6
boomer68
Handloader
- Oct 23, 2006
- 856
- 56
I have a nice Leupold VXIII 3-9x40 silver, or a Weaver Grandslam 3.5-10x40. Might be ok?
Teknys
Handloader
- Jan 14, 2008
- 799
- 244
+1 JD338 on the Leupold VX 3 4.5x14x40mm, I have one on my Sako 75 270WSM. It is a good fit. I own 3.5x10s also but for poking out a little farther like the 264 can, the 4.5x14 would be nice.
Divernhunter
Handloader
- Apr 1, 2009
- 797
- 154
If you already have a Leupold 3.5X10 just mount it and go for it. I think you will find it will work out nicely. That is unless you want to spend money to buy another scope then I still suggest a Leupold.
- Thread starter
- #9
boomer68
Handloader
- Oct 23, 2006
- 856
- 56
I will try my Weaver and see how it performs.
Desert Fox
Handloader
- Aug 14, 2006
- 1,965
- 3
boomer68":lf14f967 said:
Weavers are great scopes. I used to have the V-16 mounted on my 300 Win-Mag Model 70. The only problem with Weaver is the their short eye relief, especially at higher magnification. I learned it the hard way when my 300 whacked me in the eye.
I bought a pre 64 model 70 in 264 in Feb, and just got a Sightron SII Big Sky 3-12x42 with the hunter hold over reticle. It leaves my Leupold (VX2), both Nikon Monarchs, Pentax Lightseeker, and Burris Fullfields in a cloud of dust choking. My hunting partner hunts only with Meopta and Zeiss scopes, and was so impressed with the Sightron, he plans to get one.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,138
- 2,732
Divernhunter":2tdh5i4m said:
That or the 4.5x14. I had the 3.5x10x40mm on my 264 and no problems out to 500 yards.
Here is some general advice:
Get the very best scope that you can afford. And, make a decision about the max distance that you want to shoot. generally, I like to practice out to 600 yds, but limit my shooting to 400 yds. So, if I am to see the target at 600 yds, I need a fairly high magnification. Most of my scopes are 3x12 or 4x12. I do have a gun that I only shoot to 300 yds that has a zeiss 3x9. Finally, make a decision on when you will be shooting and under what light conditions. In bright light, a lower cost scope will do very nicely, just like its high cost brother. But, wait until the sun goes down, and the better glass will give you more time to shoot. On a moonlit night, it can be very significant.
I have done a lot of side by side testing with scopes for light, clarity, sharpness etc... I really like the Ziess Diavari, and the Swarovskis. No scopes that I have tested are as good, but the nightforce is very close.
Personally, I am willing spend as much or more on optics as I do on the gun. Most of my guns are either custom or high end, so I am spending $2000 - $4500 on a rifle, and even on a $800 rifle, i used a $1500 scope.
Hardpan
Get the very best scope that you can afford. And, make a decision about the max distance that you want to shoot. generally, I like to practice out to 600 yds, but limit my shooting to 400 yds. So, if I am to see the target at 600 yds, I need a fairly high magnification. Most of my scopes are 3x12 or 4x12. I do have a gun that I only shoot to 300 yds that has a zeiss 3x9. Finally, make a decision on when you will be shooting and under what light conditions. In bright light, a lower cost scope will do very nicely, just like its high cost brother. But, wait until the sun goes down, and the better glass will give you more time to shoot. On a moonlit night, it can be very significant.
I have done a lot of side by side testing with scopes for light, clarity, sharpness etc... I really like the Ziess Diavari, and the Swarovskis. No scopes that I have tested are as good, but the nightforce is very close.
Personally, I am willing spend as much or more on optics as I do on the gun. Most of my guns are either custom or high end, so I am spending $2000 - $4500 on a rifle, and even on a $800 rifle, i used a $1500 scope.
Hardpan
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,036
- 5,339
Excellent advice, Hardpan. Well written and clear. Thanks for succinctly describing what many of us practise.
I am with you hardpan: I have tried and compared a lot of scopes side by side also and I have discovered that there is very little difference between the Meopta Meostar 3-12X56mm and the Zeiss Diavari 3-12X56mm except around $800.00 on the price of the Zeiss. I bought a Meopta Meostar 3-12X56 for a little under $800.00 shipped and put it on my newly acquired Rem. 700 Shilen barreled 264 Win mag. I have a Zeiss Diavari 3.12X56mm on my Rem 700 Shilen barreled 25-06. When it comes to late evening and very early morning hunting they leave any Leupold VXII or VXIII I have ever tried in the dust.
wheelgunner
Beginner
- Nov 12, 2009
- 14
- 0
1Shot":2qo2e4mu said:
That's the same when i compare my Swaro 2,5-10x56 with the Leup.VXIII
... but now i would like to buy another scope (for my Remmy 22-250), and don't want to spend much money ... my indecision is:
- Zeiss Conquest 4,5-14x50
- Leup. VX3-L 4,5-14x56 LR
.... i heard a lot of good words about the VX3-L lens ... and i really "hate" the 1" main-tube of the Conquest .... don't know which scope buy .. :?
Hi there,
Its that "not much money" that gets you every time. Not sure what advice to give that is not already on this forum. The Nikon is an ok scope, the leupold is ok as well. Just keep your expectations in line with what you are spending. IE, not so good low light performance, and likely less clarity than a high end Zeiss. I had a conquest, and gave it away. SWFA had a swaro for around $900. But it is an 1 inch tube, and not quite as good as the 30mm from either Zeiss or Swaro. But I own a couple of the 4x12 american hunters from swaro (1 inch tubes) and they outperform any 1 inch scope that i have seen from any other vendor... With the possible exception from an old Zeiss 3x9 that I have.
We get a lot of scopes and guns in the lodge, but so far, I will stick by swaro and zeiss. BTW, you can save some money if a 3x9 will work. They are quite bright and the swaro is around $750.
I read before, i think in the rifle section, to take a 20 year look at the difference in money and judge if the decision still makes sense. I have never regretted the higher priced scope, and have always regretted buying down.
Hardpan
Its that "not much money" that gets you every time. Not sure what advice to give that is not already on this forum. The Nikon is an ok scope, the leupold is ok as well. Just keep your expectations in line with what you are spending. IE, not so good low light performance, and likely less clarity than a high end Zeiss. I had a conquest, and gave it away. SWFA had a swaro for around $900. But it is an 1 inch tube, and not quite as good as the 30mm from either Zeiss or Swaro. But I own a couple of the 4x12 american hunters from swaro (1 inch tubes) and they outperform any 1 inch scope that i have seen from any other vendor... With the possible exception from an old Zeiss 3x9 that I have.
We get a lot of scopes and guns in the lodge, but so far, I will stick by swaro and zeiss. BTW, you can save some money if a 3x9 will work. They are quite bright and the swaro is around $750.
I read before, i think in the rifle section, to take a 20 year look at the difference in money and judge if the decision still makes sense. I have never regretted the higher priced scope, and have always regretted buying down.
Hardpan
I know that I am coming in a little late but a pretty good working mans scope is the 6500 Elite.
I have 4 Leupolds and 3 Elites, 2 of them are 4200 and 1 is the 6500.
I had a 4200 on my 375 H & H for as long as I owned the rifle over 10 years and it is now on my CDL and it is still working fine.
I have 4 Leupolds and 3 Elites, 2 of them are 4200 and 1 is the 6500.
I had a 4200 on my 375 H & H for as long as I owned the rifle over 10 years and it is now on my CDL and it is still working fine.
Similar threads
