lundy
8 Pointer
Posts: 182
|
Post by lundy on Jan 30, 2012 8:01:36 GMT -5
I'm just not sure I want to go with a 50mm objective lens on my 700 build.
I assume you have to use high rings for the 50mm?
There are still some great deals on the Weaver Super Slam (silver) and I'm trying to decide which one to purchase, 2x10x42 or 3x15x50.
I got lucky and purchased a SS 700ML 45 cal at a gun auction yesterday. So now I can move forward with this 700 build
Which would you go with?
Thanks
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2012 8:07:09 GMT -5
Medium 30mm rings will work for sure and I know that the DNZ medium mounts will work with a 50 objective with a 30mm tube. Not 100% sure with a 1" tube tho.
|
|
|
Post by jims on Jan 30, 2012 20:58:21 GMT -5
I am a poor one to talk since I have some 50 and 56 mm scopes but I actually prefer the smaller 40 or 42 mm scopes since I do not have to lift my face off the stock or at least I get a better cheek weld. The smaller scopes tend to be a bit lighter also if that is a consideration.
|
|
|
Post by fishhawk on Jan 30, 2012 21:39:43 GMT -5
Member timinators gun in the build section has a Super Slam with a 50mm on it. He used high Burris sig zees to get clearance. On a lower power scope such as 10 power max, large objectives don't help near as much as on higher power scopes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2012 21:56:12 GMT -5
If you go with a Ken Farrel base with LOW rings a 50mm fits just right, I had a 4.5x14x44 zeiss conquest to begin with but it had a defect so after sending it in I picked up a leupold 3.5x10x50 at a local pawnshop there is about 1/4 inch or less clearance to the barrel. The farrel base is highly recommended by Hill Bill ,who built my 700 , Luke stocks them also, give him a call and I'm sure he could give you more details about it. Greenhorn
|
|
|
Post by wayles on Feb 2, 2012 0:37:10 GMT -5
Another reference point for you: A 4.5x14 x42 Burris required high rings on a one piece leopold base and rings. Had about 1/8 clearance on the bell. bell touched barrel with medium rings . A 50 mm may require extra high rings. This is on a rem-pac-nor. I took my gun into the sporting goods shop to find what I wanted, 50 mile drive to the shop both ways wayles
|
|
|
Post by ratsnakeboogy on Feb 2, 2012 8:49:10 GMT -5
Another reference, I put a 44mm objective in DNZ LOW rings and still had 2mm clearance or so.
If thinking about DNZ, their MEDIUM will work with a 50mm no problem.
I am like you though, I just can't get into having a rolling pin on top of my rifle. I don't even like the 44mm, it just doesn't look or feel like a "deer rifle" to me.
Don
|
|
|
Post by edwardamason on Feb 10, 2012 22:41:42 GMT -5
Another reference, I put a 44mm objective in DNZ LOW rings and still had 2mm clearance or so. If thinking about DNZ, their MEDIUM will work with a 50mm no problem. I am like you though, I just can't get into having a rolling pin on top of my rifle. I don't even like the 44mm, it just doesn't look or feel like a "deer rifle" to me. Don This!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by edwardamason on Feb 10, 2012 22:42:47 GMT -5
I am a poor one to talk since I have some 50 and 56 mm scopes but I actually prefer the smaller 40 or 42 mm scopes since I do not have to lift my face off the stock or at least I get a better cheek weld. The smaller scopes tend to be a bit lighter also if that is a consideration. And this!!!!
|
|
|
Post by edwardamason on Feb 10, 2012 22:48:25 GMT -5
I'm just not sure I want to go with a 50mm objective lens on my 700 build. I assume you have to use high rings for the 50mm? There are still some great deals on the Weaver Super Slam (silver) and I'm trying to decide which one to purchase, 2x10x42 or 3x15x50. I got lucky and purchased a SS 700ML 45 cal at a gun auction yesterday. So now I can move forward with this 700 build Which would you go with? Thanks I look at some of these builds and question to myself how in the world are they going to get a decent cheek weld or practice any basic marksmanship skills with their head above the stock. Then some of the scopes are mounted so far above the bores axis I cannot fantom how these guns will shoot decently at long range. But then again I am not flipping the bill so to each his own.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2012 23:17:10 GMT -5
well ED, i use 50mm scopes on most all my rifles and they shoot great, short or long range. I use high comb stocks so cheek weld is no problem. I dont have a problem getting the back of my truck bloody or my targets with holes in the bullseye either, short or long range..
|
|
|
Post by hayman on Feb 11, 2012 0:16:50 GMT -5
well ED, i use 50mm scopes on most all my rifles and they shoot great, short or long range. I use high comb stocks so cheek weld is no problem. I dont have a problem getting the back of my truck bloody or my targets with holes in the bullseye either, short or long range.. This !!!!
|
|
|
Post by cuda on Feb 11, 2012 4:13:34 GMT -5
They make all kind of cheek rest pads that can be added to your stock to get right where you want it. I have to do it that way I have fused bones in my neck and I just can not get down on the stock any more. But that is just me. But I am sure that there are more people with neck problems that are the same way. I want to put the adjustable cheek rest on my next gun. So I would get the scope that fit what you are going to shoot . I like a scope you can see in low light as I hunt sunup and sunset. And a 3-9x50 is not that big the more light the clearer the target is.
|
|
|
Post by edwardamason on Feb 11, 2012 10:40:15 GMT -5
well ED, i use 50mm scopes on most all my rifles and they shoot great, short or long range. I use high comb stocks so cheek weld is no problem. I dont have a problem getting the back of my truck bloody or my targets with holes in the bullseye either, short or long range.. Totally agree that if your going to use one of those scopes you need a high comb. Its the guys that are mounting the bowling pins that use a standard stock I scratch my head about. Anything above 1.8 inch clearance above the bores axis and you are mixing a recipe for wild groups at long range. This is pretty much a undisputed fact in the shooting community. Some of the clearances I have seen have enough room to throw a cat between. It bugs the heck out of me when I see this. Especially when people are spending good money on quality stuff and not paying attention to details. But then again I am not flipping the bill for the builds so to each his own.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2012 11:12:20 GMT -5
point taken Ed, how many long range or tactical shooters out there use 40-44 mm scopes? very very few. I would say at least 80% use 50s if not more.. If a man wants to use a 50 or 56, by all means buy it. One can make it work and work well, short or long range..just the facts man...
|
|
|
Post by edwardamason on Feb 12, 2012 6:29:07 GMT -5
Man I know a lot of cats that shoot bench rest competivly and some long range guys too that shoot 50 bmg. With those seasoned guys it's usually matching up the right optic for the job. Most of the guys I know like fixed scopes for the most part. 10x seems to be the one I see the most of with 6x coming in a close second. Competitive bench shooters that only shoot on the bench like fixed 24 and fixed 36x. I do see some guys with high power variables but they are generally on 12lb bean field rifles or heavy sniper tactical rigs.
On a conventional 6 to 7 lb sportier big game rifle the bowling pin scopes just make the gun unbalanced and take away a lot of its natural pointing characteristics. I made the mistake of mounting a 50 mm scope once on a conventional rifle. It was unbalanced and my cheek weld was so high that it made the gun almost impossible to use practically. Never again.
When it comes to power settings and low light even the largest of scope bells and bodies struggle with anything when set over 6 x. Unless conditions are absolutely clear u will not be cranking up the power past there.
Then there is the matter of power and having a solid rest to shoot from. Anything over 10x and u better have a very solid rest to shoot from if u are one of the lucky ones and have a shoot house built I could see where u could take advantage of higher magnification. Most conventional tree stands don't have satisfactory shooting rails for really high powere scopes settings. Too much wobble there to get a fine aiming point and holding it steady.
90 percent of all my shooting in the field on big game the last 30 plus years has been done with the scope set on 4x or 6x. I've taken several head at ranges from 300 to 500 yards and at most the setting was at 10x. The longest poke I ever made on a big game animal was 608 yards on a antelope. Power was 10x 40mm. DRT. I use high power thin cross hairs for working up loads on the bench so I am not handicapped by field practical reticles. Others milage may vary.
|
|