• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes How much scope to put on a .270 Win rifle

S

supermo26

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Oct 28, 2013
28
4
I got my first rifle and I'm not sure how much scope to put on it.
It is a Sako A7 in 270 Win. 24 inch barrel at 7 pounds. I plan on hunting Antelope, Deer and Elk at 300 yards max. I'd like to be able to shoot targets or toys further out. So I'm not sure how much magnification I should be considering. 12,14,16 or 18 power at max?

I kinda been looking at Vortex, Nikon and Super Snipers.
I do like to keep the scope diameter under 45mm. I don't want a spotting scope bolted to my gun. :)
 
Congratulations on your first rifle! ...a nice rifle choice at that. I just completed a similarly purposed rifle build in .308. She wears a 2.5-10x42 Nikon Monarch (a great hunting scope, though admittedly she gets a NF, USO, Swarovski when budget allows). In my honest opinion, with your max hunting range of 300 yards, you'll never need nor want more than 10x magnification. If in the future you decide that you'd like more magnification, a different tube size, etc., you won't lose much resale value. Make sure you get good rings, I opted for seekins rings as they come highly recommended (I now know why). ...hope this helps,

Adam
 
Nice rifle! Sako's are great, and .270 is one of the best overall choices for hunting under 300 yards as you said. There are tons of great scopes out there these days. Are you looking for a tactical type scope that also could be flexed into a hunting role, or a hunting scope to flex occasionally into a more tactical type shooting setup? Only reason I say that is if you don't really need a mil-reticle and don't plan of dialing much, you can maximize the lightweight-ness and crystal clear clarity of a hunting scope (like a Swarovski) or other great hunting-oriented scope. I think you'd be fine with a max power between 9x and 12x. If your budget is between $600-$900 here are some good ones to look at:


Swarovski 3-9x36 Z3 Riflescope
Steiner 2.5-10x42 Predator Extreme 30mm Rifle Scope
Zeiss 2-10x42 Conquest HD5 Rifle Scope

If you want an exposed turret mil-based compact scope, the Vortex 2.5-10x32 would be an awesome choice:
Vortex 2.5-10x32 Viper PST 30mm Rifle Scope
And the HS-T would be good too: Vortex 4-16x44 Viper HS-T 30mm Rifle Scope

With a little more weight and bulk, the SWFA 3-9x42 and 3-15x42 are both excellent scopes for the price
 
Crosshair makes some good points and gives some good recommendations. I didn't ask your budget, but (perhaps incorrectly) assumed you wanted an inexpensive (yet high quality) hunting scope to cut your teeth on. The Monarch I recommended can be found for 381.50 (free shipping) on amazon (mil reticle, 1/4" capped turret adjustments). If you are comfortable sharing your budget, I am happy to make more recommendations that what has already been listed. Best of luck with your decision...

Edit: whether you intend to dial adjustments is important as I would never recommend an optic with reticle and adjustment value that don't match (like the Monarch I am recommending). If you are a set it and forget it type of guy, the recommendation I gave will serve you well.
 
Last edited:
For a hunting scope you are probably better off with a SFP rather than a FFP scope. If you get a chance look through all the scopes within the price range you plan on spending. I probably wouldn't go beyond a 15 power since most of the time you will be at the lower magnification ranges. Pay particular attention to the clarity as well as the ability to gather light and check out the different reticles options. Mils or MOA based scopes will work and pick the one you are most comfortable with. Good rifles deserve good glass.

The 270 is a great cartridge for most North American game. A few weeks ago I guided my friend on an elk hunt in SW New Mexico. He was shooting a Tikka T3 in 270 with hand loads loaded with 150 gr. Berger VLD's I mounted my Nightforce 3.5-15 x 50 scope with an MOAR reticle on his rifle for the hunt. He harvested a nice 5x5 bull at 521 yards with a single shot. Hit the bull right behind the shoulder and it was DRT.
 
Minute of Antelope, Deer and Elk at 300 yards max does not require more than 9X or 10X in my opinion. I think a lot of folks here just like to up the magnification just because they can. It's nice to get attention at the range I suppose?

I also like the idea of having a lower magnification on the low end. You never know what may pop up closer to you especially if you keep into the wind and the terrain can hide some critters.

And dialing at that range? That's pretty much point blank for a .270. Why not keep it simple? Of course you may loose a little with your targets and toys further out but that's just a good excuse to get another rifle! Another option is a BDC reticle and just go with that.

Keeping to a lighter and handier scope on a hunting rig is a good way to go.

I like your rifle choice. I got an A5 in .270 (much like yours) and it's a nice rifle.
 
Last edited:
supermo26 said:
I got my first rifle and I'm not sure how much scope to put on it.
It is a Sako A7 in 270 Win. 24 inch barrel at 7 pounds. I plan on hunting Antelope, Deer and Elk at 300 yards max. I'd like to be able to shoot targets or toys further out. So I'm not sure how much magnification I should be considering. 12,14,16 or 18 power at max?

I kinda been looking at Vortex, Nikon and Super Snipers.
I do like to keep the scope diameter under 45mm. I don't want a spotting scope bolted to my gun. :)
Click to expand...

3.5-10x Leupold VX-3 will be ideal.
 
I meant to include a budget. I could charge $1000 or so but I'd really like to keep the price low while still getting a quality scope. I know they say spend the same or more on the glass as the rifle, and that is why my budget max is a grand. Hopefully I'll find a black Friday or Cyber Monday sale and get a deal. :)

I like the Vortex warranty because I will not have funds to repair or replace a scope if something should go wrong. I still need to look at their recticles and see if I like them. Online pictures don't always do a scope justice.
I like the open eleation turret and capped windage on the Viper HS Long Range 4x16-44. $649. The don't understand how a BDC would work if it is not specific to the shooters rifle and ammo. What if your not shooting on flat ground? (My range finder has a true ballistic range to account for that but what if I don't have it or dont have time to use it?)

I like the Viper HS-T 4x16-44. $659. Both elevation and windage are uncapped, and it has the VMR-1 MOA or Mil recticle. Uncapped windage is just another thing to go wrong and I wont be dialing wind for a long time. If the turret is firm it shouldn't be a problem (As previously stated, I have a range finder so I don't need to range with the scope but I'd like to learn, so it is a plus.) To me I think the VMR recticle would be more of a benifet than the BDC for an unknown cartrage and shooting angle.

A friend has a Savage Trophy Hunter XP that came with a Nikon 3x9x40. I have heard it was a 2012 modle. It looks good to my untrained eye. I'd want a little more power than 9X and a little more quality of scope to compliment my rifle. I see some Buckmaster's, Monarch, and Monarc X that all fall within the above specs. What is confusing is how one scope may be an older modle but the price is more than a newer modle in a different line ect. Example is Buckmaster or Prostaff 5 can be found for more than the old Monarch. The Monarch X is often on sale for a little more than the other 3. Therer are also a bunch of Monarch X that the price jumps into the $1000. + mark. I'm confused. At what point do I pay more for a scope with better numbers in a lower line, or berrter line with better or lesser numbers? It's hard to know whats a better deal when I don't know much about the Nikons. :) I have more research to do on Nikon's. Nikon would be my budget option if I didn't want to spend more for the SWFA SS or Vortex.

SWFA SS 3x15-42 for $699. Looks good, has soild reviews. Price is more than than the Vortex but it is FFP with More magnification, more eye relief, more elevation adjustment, but no mention of a zero stop. (paint dot can be added for visual stop. :). I like the "Mil quad" recticle online but not never seen it it person. I sent an e-mail asking about the warranty and it is not as good as the Vortex. Limited Lifetime warranty. He said don't deliberaty brake it. I just haven't seen anything in writing on the warranty. It is around 4 oz heavier than Vortex.

Is 3x15-42 or 4x16-44 too much power?
 
I like the look and specs on the Vortex 2.5x10-32 FFP but at $799, I don't see it as being a good deal compaird to the 2.5x10-44 for $599. or the SS 3x15 for $699.

I don't shoot at a range so I don't care about cool factor. I don't mind a little more weight as it will tame the recoil for the wife. I'll pack it around while hunting. At 8.5 lbs total I can go a few miles without concern.

I can't justify spending the extra cash for Swarovski or Leupold. Atleast without seeing the glass in person and deciding that the clarity out weights the features and price of another brand of less quality glass.

I guess I started looking at the 15 and 16 power because of the price and features. The 2.5x10-44 is $599. for 41-51 dollars more you get the higher power. For $799 you get 2.5x10-32 in FFP. I'm thinking the SS for $699 is a better deal. The vortex are a little less expensive but lack FFP that I'm not even sure if I need it. :)
 
You dont "need" FFP on a hunting rifle imo. Like said above, i'd either save a bit longer or try stretch the budget and buy a Swaro, they're worth it on a hunting rig.
 
No point in more then 10x on the high end for hunting out to 300 yds, but don't go any higher then 4x on the low end. Hunted with a Mk4 6.5-20 x 50 once on a 308 Remmy 5R Milspec and it was way too much when the deer walked under the stand.

OFG
 
Ok. So tomorrow I'll start looking at scopes with 2.5-4.0 X 12 and under.
 
Congratulations on your first rifle purchase! That's a great rifle/caliber combo. To answer your question about how much scope you need; it is somewhat surprising at just how little magnification is really "needed" to hit a target at 300 yards. Something in the 3-9x range is plenty of scope for 300 yards. In reality, a 4x could get the job done for most of your hunting needs. However, for shooting targets or just "playing" at the range and pushing the limits of your gun, something in the higher power range would probably make you happier. Perhaps something in the 14-16x range. And IMO, I would sacrifice some additional magnification for better glass. Again, congratulations on your new rifle!
 
Also, I agree with Infinity, get good rings and bases. If your scope is moving around, you will never be consistent. There are a lot of really good ring/base setups out there, and as long as you get a quality set, you can't go wrong. I personally really like Talley rings/bases.
 
I'm in the same situation. I am probably going to go with the Leupy VX3 3.5-10. However if I can manage to pull the trigger on a VX 6, 2-12 I think that would be ideal. But you are right at or just under the 1k mark. I personally think leupolds glass is better than vortex's.
 
Total agreement. 10x is about perfect.though don't overlook a good 12x if it has good glass.

I find that having a solid low magnification is equally important for closer shots.

The nikon recomendation is also a solid choice.
 
I just got a Leupold VX6 x 44 from Scott at Liberty Optics for just a shade over a grand. 3 to 18 power plex reticle with a firedot. I think I'm going to really like it when the power ring loosens a little. Good glass, light weight and the price is middle of the road. Really like that it goes down to 3 for quick sighting and up to 18 to get the good look at horns. Leupold's lifetime warranty is as good as any.
 
I spent a good 4 hours writing down notes from all the Nikon scopes with 14 power and less. On paper the new Prostaf 5 is as good as the older Monarch scopes. Prices are sometimes very close.

I have been looking at the SWFA Super Snipers. Not so much the HD's cause the price really jumps. The 10X at $299 and $399 for the side focus looks good. The 3-15X42 or what ever looks pretty good at 5 or 6 hundred. I'm kind of burnt out on all the numbers.
I can't afford a US Optics or Schmidt and Binder. As far as USO, the 1.8-10 power and 1-8 power kind of cover the hunting ranges but they are not perfect. At $2000 and up, I want the perfect for my applications and enought lens to gather light in low light conditions when game is no the move. The 3-17 may be too much scope at $2300. I was kind of expecting a little more eye relief from them as well. :(
So I saw a video of a 270 taking a goat at 721 yards with a NF NXS 3.5-15 X 50. pretty interesting.
 
My tikka .270 will have the Bushnell 6500 2.5-16 in mildot next year. Best of both worlds great low end for a nice wide field of view and enough top end to shoot long plus capped turrets. I hunted the with same rifle and a 6.5-24 viper pst this year and missed an opportunity on a big buck I bumped because I couldnt find him in the scope. It was like looking through a straw, never again I want the most field of view possible. Plus pulling my rifle out of my eberlestock backpack would sometimes move the turrets something you have to constantly have to check if you have exposed turrets.
 
I have a Tikka T3 270 WSM, it is a solid caliber and a solid rifle. Your Sako in 270 win will be a damn solid performer.

I run a Vortex PST 2.5-10x44 on my T3. I just got back from west river South Dakota for a mule deer hunt.

I was looking at critters at 1000 yards with it, the glass is very sharp. When I took the shot, the deer was at 265 yards. I brought the magnification from 10x down to about 5x as the deer got closer. I dialed my turret to my 200 yard dope, the shot went where I intended it to.

Go with a 2.5-10 or a 3-10, in my opinion anything over that is overkill. Also messing with a parallax when your heart is pumping is the last thing I would want to be messing with!
 
I have really been eyeballing the 2.5-10X32 PST. It's FFP. The 2.5-10X44 would gather more light but is not FFP. The 4-16X50 is FFP and will gather the most light but it is also a little more bell than I wanted. My concern was mounting height. I kind of wish the 2.5-10X44 was FFP or the 4-16X50 was only a 44.

Has anyone compaired the 2.5-10X32 to the 2.5-10X44 and 4-16X50? Im wondering if the 32 bell will have less light gathering than the other 2. For targets in the afternoon I'm sure 32 would be fine. I'm worried about first and last light in hunting situations.

I'm kind of leaning to the non FFP to get the 44 bell. I would just need to make sure the magnification is set to a specific power to range using the recticle.

If any of this is in correct, please let me know. thanks
 
supermo26 said:
I have really been eyeballing the 2.5-10X32 PST. It's FFP. The 2.5-10X44 would gather more light but is not FFP. The 4-16X50 is FFP and will gather the most light but it is also a little more bell than I wanted. My concern was mounting height. I kind of wish the 2.5-10X44 was FFP or the 4-16X50 was only a 44.

Has anyone compaired the 2.5-10X32 to the 2.5-10X44 and 4-16X50? Im wondering if the 32 bell will have less light gathering than the other 2. For targets in the afternoon I'm sure 32 would be fine. I'm worried about first and last light in hunting situations.

I'm kind of leaning to the non FFP to get the 44 bell. I would just need to make sure the magnification is set to a specific power to range using the recticle.

If any of this is in correct, please let me know. thanks
Click to expand...

I'd like to point out that low light performance isn't just a factor of objective size, there is more to it. Coatings make a HUGE difference as well as other factors (number of lenses, glass quality, overall optimization). What you are looking for for best lowlight performance is an exit pupil of around 6mm-7mm. This can be roughly calculated by dividing the objective diameter by the magnification.
So, to maintain a 6mm exit pupil, a 32mm scope needs be on about 5.3x, a 44mm scope at 7.3x, and a 50mm scope at 8.3x. You see, you gain the ability to have the same lowlight performance among all of them, but with the ability to be at a higher magnification setting with the larger objectives. Under 5x, there will be no practical difference in lowlight performance, all things being equal. But, as in the Newer 32mm PST, with the better optics than the 44mm version, I'm guessing it will outperform its bigger sibling in lowlight, maybe even clear up to 10x.
For instance, a 56mm scope with mediocre glass and coatings will be utterly trounced in lowlight by a 32mm scope with great glass and coatings when both are at 6x and under.

My guess is you most likely wouldn't need to be above 6x during a twilight hunt, so mostly ignore objective size and focus on getting the best glass with the best coatings for your money. If you think you'd be spending more time in twilight above 6x, I suggest saving more money and moving up a tier in scopes, IMO.
 
I dont shoot a 270, but I do have a VX6 2-12 that I got for just under 1g.......I like very much on my hunting rig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Rifle Scopes Optic recommendations for hunting and back country
Replies
30
Views
1K
Zhdrix
Z
B
Need scope suggestions
Replies
2
Views
174
BamaSE
BamaSE
L
Looking for a better hunting scope for my rifle
Replies
71
Views
5K
Darayavaus
Darayavaus
CaptNemo
Rifle Scopes Scope for a classic hunting rifle
Replies
32
Views
1K
BamaSE
BamaSE
Cmelde01
Need help with scope selection
Replies
0
Views
61
Cmelde01
Cmelde01
Top Bottom
Back