My Take on Dangerous Game Scopes

[Forrest Halley]

I don't know what the big deal is about the scopes costing $3k or more.

I also cannot figure out the big deal. I guess it is a because I can thing at that point. It I had something like that it would definitely be getting passed around to the rifle I was shooting at the time. I couldn't abide seeing that kind of investment sitting still on an idle rifle.

 

[0002S]

I don’t want to put words in Phil’s mouth, but I think the point was, don’t limit yourself to 1-4x, or something similar, for a dangerous game rifles. There are other options that can add to a rifle/round‘s ability to ethically harvest non dangerous game at greater distances.

Another scope I’d recommend as an alternative to the Z8i, is the Zeiss V8 1.8-14x50. A little piggy compared to the Swaro, but not such a bad thing on a DG rifl.

Here is the Z8i 1.7-13.3x42 P on a 300 PRC at various ranges. I was getting the dope on this round for the rifle. This rifle/scope combo is a hammer for pretty much any nail past any distance I’d attempt a shot on an animal at.

 

[Rafiki]

I also cannot figure out the big deal. I guess it is a because I can thing at that point. It I had something like that it would definitely be getting passed around to the rifle I was shooting at the time. I couldn't abide seeing that kind of investment sitting still on an idle rifle.

It's seems to be more like measuring dicks.

 

[Forrest Halley]

It's seems to be more like measuring dicks.

I knew a guy that had a swaro on a Remington 7400. Made no sense to me at all. Leupold is very nice to me and Nikon does what I need. The only thing I really see as attractive in the 1 and change to 12 variables is the ability to spot and stalk or shoot distance. Perfectly versatile scope for a rifle that has close knockdown power and distance accuracy. I might be Happy for a full ten minutes with something like that.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

Serious question.

Why do the US special forces use these same optics Philip mentioned in CQCB? There is no greater dangerous game than that. Why don’t they use open sites only?

Because the “dangerous game scopes” have been proven over and over with people’s lives. They hold up on SCAR 17’s through thousands of rounds (way way harder on optics than 12 shots on sticks practicing for Africa hunt).

The things people use as reasons make no sense to me. The puddle jumper and truck on terrible roads is so so so so so much more dangerous than an optic failing you during a buffalo rush. The quick target acquisition of modern optics, proven with thousands of tests in military trials, shows the safety of these systems, and my hunch is actually much safer than trusting 1880’s era irons during a charge.

Carry on.

Not sure which scopes you're referencing that @Philip Glass referred to in his video, but very few within SOCOM, if any are running a Leupold VX6 1-6, VX6 2-12, or Swaro Z8 1.7-13 ... especially on a SCAR-17 (not really favored). If you're referring to a LVPO (low power variable optic), Philip is suggesting not running these, and is in favor of something with both a slightly higher low end and top end magnification range.

Part of the reason you see LVPO's in use more regularly (in recent years) is because Afghanistan was a different terrain/environment than Iraq, which lead to a different style of warfare/engagement. If you're talking CQB, 1x Red Dots are still extremely common within SOCOM either as a primary optic or run as an offset with an LVPO. I've been out of the military for a few years now, so maybe you know something I don't.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

I have no doubt you can make that shot! I just can’t. I use as much magnification as I can.

I’m 43. Maybe it’s an age thing because I grew up always using scopes. It’s probably made me a worse shot for it.

I will say at 250 or 300 yards you are generally not where the animal can see you well. So you can set up on sticks or prone. So a snap shot is not the case at that distance.

As @Red Leg mentioned the more magnification the more perceived movement. 1x per 100yds is a very common rule and many competitive long range shooters and military snipers don't dial their scopes all the way even when shooting at 1000+ yards. The mirage and movement really get amplified, especially on the smaller targets.

 

[Philip Glass]

I suspect you do as I do. I shoot both eyes open regardless of magnification. The brain just switches off, in my case, the left eye.

Yes. I am so right eye dominant that on a quick shot my left eye will be open. It is only when I am really trying to focus on something, usually far away, that I close my left eye. Again everyone's eyes are different and that is actually a very good part of this discussion to keep in mind.

 

[Philip Glass]

Yes, and I do it often with much less magnification. I have always thought that optical clarity, a sharply defined reticle and the skill of the shooter in holding the rifle steady are the real keys to accuracy.

Most of us on this forum understand the need for quality glass and we will spend money to get it. What I think is much less common is the desire to spend money on proper training or practice. Be honest with yourself, when was the last time you went to a rifle shooting course, or paid for professional instruction?

This last summer I attended an Appleseed Shoot, and it amazes me how many people there had never shot standing, kneeling sitting or prone. This is rifle shooting 101, and it seems like most shooters skip right over it.

I agree and this is why I often relate the stories of me going to SAAM shooting school (3X). It is very expensive but so are multiple safaris not to mention lost game!

 

[Philip Glass]

Quick and dirty answer to that question is yes.

Reality is there are a lot of variables, in that shot, that would have me not taking it, with a 4x scope. First and foremost my rest. I could go down a list of other variable that would also not have me taking that shot with a 4x.

But given a solid rest, known distance, constant atmospheric conditions and accurate rifle/round. That is not a hard shot. (for me). Now having all those variables lined up all at once.....lol.

But more magnification wouldn't make up enough, for those variables either. Especially a solid rest and accurate round/rifle. Having more magnification, at my disposal, is always a welcomed thing.

One of the reason I like the red triangle on the Trijicon scopes is the point of the triangle allows me a much more precise aim point than an illuminated dot. The dot eventually covers the vitals and you're not really sure of the exact aim point.

Please don't think I'm advocating long range hunting or low magnification scopes for long range shots. There is a time and place for everything and a range that everything will work in. Having the knowledge and actual skill to push the boundaries has to be learned through practice and in the field. Having the common sense to know when to say no is often the hardest lesson to learn.

I think you may be forgetting that all of the red dots I mention are fully adjustable down to a tiny faint dot. Maybe not all on the market are as adjustable as Leupold VX6 and Swaro?

 

[Philip Glass]

for my leopard i want and have a Swaro illuminated scope which i think is critical for leopard

Yea baby! Finally taking my advice on something.

 

[Philip Glass]

I would consider something like the Z6i 1.7-10x.

Not near enough magnification for the leopard. You want to zoom in and take everything out of your sight and mind. Then find the rosette and squeeze!

 

[Philip Glass]

I don’t want to put words in Phil’s mouth, but I think the point was, don’t limit yourself to 1-4x, or something similar, for a dangerous game rifles. There are other options that can add to a rifle/round‘s ability to ethically harvest non dangerous game at greater distances.

Another scope I’d recommend as an alternative to the Z8i, is the Zeiss V8 1.8-14x50. A little piggy compared to the Swaro, but not such a bad thing on a DG rifl.

Here is the Z8i 1.7-13.3x42 P on a 300 PRC at various ranges. I was getting the dope on this round for the rifle. This rifle/scope combo is a hammer for pretty much any nail past any distance I’d attempt a shot on an animal at.

Cool

 

[Philip Glass]

It's seems to be more like measuring dicks.

As I've said, unless you have looked through a Z8 at dusk you do NOT know what you are missing!

 

[Philip Glass]

As @Red Leg mentioned the more magnification the more perceived movement. 1x per 100yds is a very common rule and many competitive long range shooters and military snipers don't dial their scopes all the way even when shooting at 1000+ yards. The mirage and movement really get amplified, especially on the smaller targets.

Sure but in a hunting scenario you never know what you will be facing. The terrain, the animals, the non-target animals, and being able to determine wind at distance are all variables and reasons for more magnification.

 

[0002S]

I think you may be forgetting that all of the red dots I mention are fully adjustable down to a tiny faint dot. Maybe not all on the market are as adjustable as Leupold VX6 and Swaro?

Not the brightness, but the MOA of the dot.

 

[WAB]

Not near enough magnification for the leopard. You want to zoom in and take everything out of your sight and mind. Then find the rosette and squeeze!

I can see your point and I am certain it works. I like to see the entire animal, visualize the top of the heart, and put my bullet there. My belief, possibly incorrect, is that I will be in a much better position to adjust the shot if the animal shifts with this approach.

However, I have zero experience shooting at leopard over bait, so I defer to your experience. I have no problem with it, it is just not a hunt that appeals to me. Even when living in Alaska, I hunted bear strictly by spot and stalk.

 

[Philip Glass]

I can see your point and I am certain it works. I like to see the entire animal, visualize the top of the heart, and put my bullet there. My belief, possibly incorrect, is that I will be in a much better position to adjust the shot if the animal shifts with this approach.

However, I have zero experience shooting at leopard over bait, so I defer to your experience. I have no problem with it, it is just not a hunt that appeals to me. Even when living in Alaska, I hunted bear strictly by spot and stalk.

Actually no, you will not in most cases change anything on the shot. You will wait until he is feeding and has stopped perfectly broadside on the branch you want him on. I don't mean to zoom in too far. I shot my last one from 100 yards so I was glad to have the VERSATILITY to be able to zoom in a bit more than a normal shot.
Like many hunts around the world, you just don't know until you do it! It is grueling yet exhilarating at the same time.

 

[Red Leg]

I can see your point and I am certain it works. I like to see the entire animal, visualize the top of the heart, and put my bullet there. My belief, possibly incorrect, is that I will be in a much better position to adjust the shot if the animal shifts with this approach.

However, I have zero experience shooting at leopard over bait, so I defer to your experience. I have no problem with it, it is just not a hunt that appeals to me. Even when living in Alaska, I hunted bear strictly by spot and stalk.

I used the approach you describe on my leopard and would not change anything. The range was sixty or seventy yards or so, the scope was set at 4x. I had quick target acquisition and maximum light gathering potential. The result was a quickly killed leopard.

 

[Rafiki]

As I've said, unless you have looked through a Z8 at dusk you do NOT know what you are missing!

Maybe, probably, I'll take your word for that. Personally I wouldn't put myself in a situation where it's insufficiently light that any possible difference in the 2 scopes is a concern, just not my style.

 

[Red Leg]

Maybe, probably, I'll take your word for that. Personally I wouldn't put myself in a situation where it's insufficiently light that any possible difference in the 2 scopes is a concern, just not my style.

There is a dramatic difference in scope quality at twilight. That difference has been important to me on a number of late afternoon and early morning hunts. With respect to this topic, It would appear your "style" won't permit you to ever hunt a leopard?