A few questions about scopes

[Robert_Lavin]

Morning,

I'm starting to question why I have variable magnification scopes on my rifles. I have 3-9 and 4-12 and rarely use them on anything other than 9 or 12. Which begs the question of why I don't just get fixed magnification scopes. Surely the optical quality should be better for the same price. Any thoughts? What do most of you use, variable or fixed, and why?

Less technical (and perhaps a bit frivolous), how do you match a scope to a rifle from an aesthetic perspective? I often see pictures on the sales forum that make me think "those work well together". How do you achieve that? And the supplementary question: What works on a HW 77 and a HW 90?

Thanks,

Rob.

[saifbsk]

I use a variable focus one but only on one setting like yourself.
I would happily buy one that has one focal length for 10x and as you say it will have a better optical properties.

However many scopes are used for hunting purpose where having a variable magnification is useful, maybe the scope manufacturers are trying to appeal to multiple users by adding in as much feature as possible (whether they are useful or not on all scope is another story)

[barrel]

I can fully see your point and in most instances I tend to leave a variable scope on the same magnification. This said its always nice to go down to lower magnifications for an increased field of view. I certainly have had fixed magnification scopes but don't know if I would if I only had one rifle.

Kindest regards

Barrel

[angrybear]

With a variable mag you can turn it down when scanning trees & fields for a potential target, also far easier to spot an impact when first setting zero & at close range you only need min mag.

But as with any other aspect it's your choice what you use & how you use it.

[Muskett]

One huge problem is with air rifle ranges being 10m to 60m with any real magnification. Parallax is now used to give focus at all ranges and fixed scopes have in the past not often been given side or front parallax adjustment just to keep them as simple and cost effective as can be done. All parts fixed makes a very robust scope. A 4x40 fixed with parallax set at 25m would give a good picture from 10 to 60m; a 10x40 fixed would only be crisp at the set parallax 25m (most are set at 50m or even 100m) and very poor at 10m.

If there are moving lens parts then making a variable with parallax really is just as easy/difficult. Never going to be as bomb proof as a fixed.

Its true a lot of us end up at x8, x10 or x12 in the field and only use the highest magnification for zeroing and group testing. Or very high mag (x24 or x40 even) range finding with parallax.

My FWB Sport 124 has a 4x40 fixed scope reparallaxed to 25, great for all farmyard ranges.
My HW95 a 6x40 fixed scope reparallaxed to 25, great for all farmyard ranges.
My Park 91/93's have 4-16x40 variable with front parallax, great to 40m.
My Venom 77 has 6-24x40 variable front parallax, great to 40m plus.

Many 3-9x40 non parallax scopes can't be reparallaxed to 25m only to 40m so only crisp if used at lower magnification like x6. Some can, some can't. Reparallaxing means moving the front lens outwards; its scary.
The higher the mag the more parallax needy a scope is. We are asking a lot from the lenses to focus at close and far ranges. The better scopes are more forgiving but there is a limit.

[bezzer]

I've had loads of different variable mag scopes over the years, fixed and adjustable parallax but I've come to the conclusion that the K.I.S.S principle is best and all I want is a fixed mag AO one. Got a 6x40 and a 6x42 that do everything I really need. Clear as a bell from 10-50 yards or more when set at 30yards parallax and good enough to use in the field or on an HFT course, that's ranging by eye which I've always done none of this by bracketting or out of focus stuff a lot do with their all singing all dancing scopes.

[Muskett]

For all the hype front parallax scopes are difficult to build well enough to keep zero. They all say they can but its not true. Side parallax isn't quite so bad. The more moving parts the more to get wrong.

At one point there were loads of all the toys scopes being sold cheaply; they failed miserably. Even some more expensive ones weren't delivering solid zero throughout their range of adjustment. Thankfully things are getting better. Any scope really does need testing that its holding zero when mag and parallax are shifted. Measure your clicks too and ensure they move as stated and for he next shot not the one after a jault (I tap all my scopes after a dial, even my expensive ones).

KISS in the field rules. Find a setting you like and leave it. Sadly, no one makes the "perfect" scope.
The S&B 8X56 or even Meopta 7x50 fixed are robust and popular, but seem to change hands often. There always seem to be S&B 8x56 for sale, part of that is there are a lot out there; its a great scope. Truth is they don't have the flexibility that all the toys scopes give. All the toys scopes are also far more N/V add on compatible.
Lastly, for deer shooting it doesn't require much magnification; but fox/varmint shooting at range does. If you like shooting then vermin will give you more trigger time.

[keithy]

For hunting variable mag is needed eg 3 x for close range and 10-12 for anything else . But if you shoot targets in .177 a higher mag scope is better so you can see the pellet holes in the target at 35yds plus. I have 6-24x 50 for both, 10 x hunting, 20 x for targets. For a hw77 or HW90 a LIGHT WIEGHT scope.

[Gunfun]

I use my variable magnification SFP scopes at different magnifications, I just remember the holdover at say x10 magnification, then at x5 I use half the holdover and at x2.5 use quarter of the holdover compared to the x10 magnification. You do need a Mildot/MOA reticle with equally spaced stadia on the 6 o clock crosshair so it doesn't work on BDC reticles.
I have a Bushnel 2.5-16x42 which I can use at x2.5, x5, x10 and x15. At x2.5 it's great for close range hunting or fast fire plinking, x5 gives me great low light performance for off hand shooting, x10 for supported/bipod shots with x15 for bench rested target shooting and pellet testing, which means one combo for most of my air rifle needs.
I think when you choose the right scope for your rifle and type of shooting it always looks right. I don't know what type of scope you should put on your HW's it all really depends on what and when you use your rifle for, say targets, hunting, aiming style, shooting distances, light conditions, weight/balance all play a part in choosing the right specification of scope.

[Geezer]

A lot of us grew up using things like a 4x40 for almost everything. Not saying there aren't better choices now, but we were pretty handy with 1980s springers out to 30 yards or so.

A more useful comment. You would indeed think you get more bang for your buck with fixed over variable. But what do manufacturers sell most of? So what do they invest their R and D and QC in? What do they price most keenly to succeed in the market? Got it, variables.

Myself, I like both, though for general shooting I have never felt a need for much over 12 power max mag on a legal limit air rifle. FT, bench rest comp, or serious "bunny sniping" off a bipod with a PCP I would have a different view.

They are unfashionable, but at typical airgun ranges, 2-7x is a very useful power range.

[Muskett]

Same too for .22LR where x6 will do practically 90% you need in the field.
.17HMR then x14 can be utilised but then parallax is required. No other toys necessary.
Both the above only require a couple of hold over/under points and away you go.

Nothing nicer than carrying a sporting weight rifle around the field with a bright low powered scop; just shoot to their limitations... stalk a bit closer. No huffing puffing, twiddling with knobs required.

[Robert_Lavin]

I don't know what type of scope you should put on your HW's it all really depends on what and when you use your rifle for, say targets, hunting, aiming style, shooting distances, light conditions, weight/balance all play a part in choosing the right specification of scope.

This was a purely aesthetic, and slightly indulgent, question...

[Gunfun]

This was a purely aesthetic, and slightly indulgent, question...

I had the same problem recently weighing up buying a very small Weaver scope for my Prosport, would it look balanced and right ?

I web searched for AA Prosport 'images' and saved a few images with very small scopes to compare to my existing combo with 10x42 scope, and the smaller scopes look just as balanced and make the good looking rifle more conspicuous, now just to justify the money.

[MartynB]

A lot of us grew up using things like a 4x40 for almost everything. Not saying there aren't better choices now, but we were pretty handy with 1980s springers out to 30 yards or so.

A more useful comment. You would indeed think you get more bang for your buck with fixed over variable. But what do manufacturers sell most of? So what do they invest their R and D and QC in? What do they price most keenly to succeed in the market? Got it, variables.

Myself, I like both, though for general shooting I have never felt a need for much over 12 power max mag on a legal limit air rifle. FT, bench rest comp, or serious "bunny sniping" off a bipod with a PCP I would have a different view.

They are unfashionable, but at typical airgun ranges, 2-7x is a very useful power range.

I bought, and still have, a Sworovski Habicht Nova 4x32 in the mid 1980's, cost me the princely sum of £240 which was lot of money on those days

Been on virtually every rifle I've had through the years - springer, pump up and PCP and currently sits on my Spartan. I had it serviced a number of years back including parallax adjusted to 30 yards just because of it's age but it's still working perfectly

Actually, I have more scopes than I do guns to put them on

[angrybear]

This was a purely aesthetic, and slightly indulgent, question...

I had the same problem recently weighing up buying a very small Weaver scope for my Prosport, would it look balanced and right ?

I web searched for AA Prosport 'images' and saved a few images with very small scopes to compare to my existing combo with 10x42 scope, and the smaller scopes look just as balanced and make the good looking rifle more conspicuous, now just to justify the money.

Looks don't put pellets accurately in targets.