Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
12/6/2019 7:27:02 PM
Posted: 9/27/2014 10:01:16 PM EST
I just bought this used Savage 110 in .300 win mag for $350 OTD at a pawn shop. This will be my first year deer hunting (on public land so not expecting much) and I'm not sure how to set it up. I plan to get a padded sling and I'm not sure what scope to put on it. I'd like to stay under $250 for a decent scope that will perform in low light, preferably with illuminated reticle. I had a cheap optisan mamba on an AR at one point and was fine with it. What power and what type of reticle should I be looking for? Am I correct in assuming this is a pre accu trigger model?
Link Posted: 9/27/2014 10:06:23 PM EST
Look at a Leupold Gold Ring. great scopes and great warranty.
Link Posted: 9/27/2014 11:51:05 PM EST
Buy the best optic you can afford.

There is no such thing as a cheap scope that preforms well in low light.

Most scopes look pretty much the same mid afternoon in the gun shop. Where you separate good from crap is at twilight in the woods, Cheap scopes are dim, don't transmit much light and 'shut down' earlier. A good scope has a fair bit of money tied up in better glass and antireflective coatings that help transmit light when there is little of it left. Look for "Fully, multicoated lenses". Not just fully. Not just multi. But rather both.

Do not get a scope more than 3-9x. 3-9 is good for all reasonable distances. When you go to 4-12x or more, field of view gets smaller, and the rifle starts seeming very twitchy on target in most field conditions. I use 1.6-6x for most, 2.5-8x for longer ranges. A smaller magnification means wider field of view at short ranges, which is often more important than more magnification at long ranges.

It's hard to find a really good scope for $250. Some that are close and are good for the money are Weaver's Grandslam, and Super slam (look for sales at www.natchezss.com). Leupold's cheaper scopes (rifleman, VX-1) aren't great deals. These are 'made to price point' scopes, intended to trade on the leupold name while offering lower quality. Vx2 are good. VX3's are better. I've heard some good things about Sightron II, and their 3-9x would work well for you. so would a bushnell elite 3-9x 40.

An illuminated reticle is an added complication and expense that will not serve you well at the $250 price point. At $250 you aren't quite into the 'good' scope category. You can either get a fair scope with a traditional reticle for $250, or you can get what amounts to a $150 scope to which they added some cheapo electronics. You'll see the reticle, but not the deer in low light.

That does look like a pre accutrigger model. Trigger pull may be a bear. It's adjustable. If the trigger isn't good, take it to a real gunsmith and have it adjusted. It will be $30 well spent.

Fro
Link Posted: 9/27/2014 11:51:05 PM EST
Buy the best optic you can afford.

There is no such thing as a cheap scope that preforms well in low light.

Most scopes look pretty much the same mid afternoon in the gun shop. Where you separate good from crap is at twilight in the woods, Cheap scopes are dim, don't transmit much light and 'shut down' earlier. A good scope has a fair bit of money tied up in better glass and antireflective coatings that help transmit light when there is little of it left. Look for "Fully, multicoated lenses". Not just fully. Not just multi. But rather both.

Do not get a scope more than 3-9x. 3-9 is good for all reasonable distances. When you go to 4-12x or more, field of view gets smaller, and the rifle starts seeming very twitchy on target in most field conditions. I use 1.6-6x for most, 2.5-8x for longer ranges. A smaller magnification means wider field of view at short ranges, which is often more important than more magnification at long ranges.

It's hard to find a really good scope for $250. Some that are close and are good for the money are Weaver's Grandslam, and Super slam (look for sales at www.natchezss.com). Leupold's cheaper scopes (rifleman, VX-1) aren't great deals. These are 'made to price point' scopes, intended to trade on the leupold name while offering lower quality. Vx2 are good. VX3's are better. I've heard some good things about Sightron II, and their 3-9x would work well for you. so would a bushnell elite 3-9x 40.

An illuminated reticle is an added complication and expense that will not serve you well at the $250 price point. At $250 you aren't quite into the 'good' scope category. You can either get a fair scope with a traditional reticle for $250, or you can get what amounts to a $150 scope to which they added some cheapo electronics. You'll see the reticle, but not the deer in low light.

That does look like a pre accutrigger model. Trigger pull may be a bear. It's adjustable. If the trigger isn't good, take it to a real gunsmith and have it adjusted. It will be $30 well spent.

Fro
Link Posted: 9/28/2014 9:02:25 AM EST
Well I think you bought enough gun.

The newer leupold VX-1 scopes are the same as the older VX-II. I just picked up another 3x9 VX1 the other day on sale for $159

Made in the USA, hold zero well, lifetime warranty and decent glass and is good enough for me. They also hold their value well if you want to sell.


God luck this year
Link Posted: 9/28/2014 9:37:27 AM EST
Go HERE for quality refurbished scopes a great prices.
Link Posted: 9/28/2014 12:51:32 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2014 3:10:54 PM EST by reyloxdm40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By frozenny:
Buy the best optic you can afford.

There is no such thing as a cheap scope that preforms well in low light.

Most scopes look pretty much the same mid afternoon in the gun shop. Where you separate good from crap is at twilight in the woods, Cheap scopes are dim, don't transmit much light and 'shut down' earlier. A good scope has a fair bit of money tied up in better glass and antireflective coatings that help transmit light when there is little of it left. Look for "Fully, multicoated lenses". Not just fully. Not just multi. But rather both.

Do not get a scope more than 3-9x. 3-9 is good for all reasonable distances. When you go to 4-12x or more, field of view gets smaller, and the rifle starts seeming very twitchy on target in most field conditions. I use 1.6-6x for most, 2.5-8x for longer ranges. A smaller magnification means wider field of view at short ranges, which is often more important than more magnification at long ranges.

It's hard to find a really good scope for $250. Some that are close and are good for the money are Weaver's Grandslam, and Super slam (look for sales at www.natchezss.com). Leupold's cheaper scopes (rifleman, VX-1) aren't great deals. These are 'made to price point' scopes, intended to trade on the leupold name while offering lower quality. Vx2 are good. VX3's are better. I've heard some good things about Sightron II, and their 3-9x would work well for you. so would a bushnell elite 3-9x 40.

An illuminated reticle is an added complication and expense that will not serve you well at the $250 price point. At $250 you aren't quite into the 'good' scope category. You can either get a fair scope with a traditional reticle for $250, or you can get what amounts to a $150 scope to which they added some cheapo electronics. You'll see the reticle, but not the deer in low light.

That does look like a pre accutrigger model. Trigger pull may be a bear. It's adjustable. If the trigger isn't good, take it to a real gunsmith and have it adjusted. It will be $30 well spent.

Fro
View Quote

This is some great info, thanks. I'm considering the Leupold VX-2, it sounds like it's a decent scope that won't break the bank. What kind of trigger pull should I be looking for on this rifle? Right now it's a very crisp 5-6 pounds.
ETA- NVm I was able to adjust the trigger myself to 3-4 pounds. Thanks again for the info.
Link Posted: 9/28/2014 4:27:32 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2014 4:30:43 PM EST by MS556]
Put a 3-9x40mm VX-2 on that rifle. Duplex reticle helps in low light. Use the lowest rings you can get away with, probably "medium".

With the trajectory of that bullet, you do not need any fancy bullet drop reticle unless you intend to take shots at or beyond 400 yards. I Iike to sight with a zero that keeps the bullet no more than 3" above the line of sight. With the 300 Win Mag that would probably be a 250-275 yard zero, depending on bullet weight, and give you point blank range of close to 350 yards before being concerned about having to hold over. That would also probably be about 2.3-2.5" high at 100 yards.
Link Posted: 9/28/2014 8:40:12 PM EST
Get a limb saver kick pad. You can get a nice Bushnell Legend HD, Nikon Prostaff or Prostaff 5, or VX1 Leupold for your price range easily. I wouldn't get anything with over a 10x power if you're hunting like the rest or us and shooting under 200 yards. I got a Prostaff 5 2.5-10x40mm and put it on a 7mm mag just got a few weeks ago. The scope is clear as any I have looked through. It was 199.99 from Cabela's with free shipping. Like others have said buy what you can afford. For your price though you should be able to find a nice scope.
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 9:29:49 AM EST
Here is a great scope for under $250.

Vortex Diamondback
Link Posted: 10/3/2014 9:58:01 AM EST
With a .300 Win Mag, you'll need one of these recoil pads. I put one on my 110 in .06, wooden stock made in late 1960s, and the fit was perfect.

FWIW.... the same pad designed for Savage 110s, is also a very good fit on a Browning BPS 12ga., as Limbsaver doesn't make a specific pad for the BPS.
Top Top