Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Scope for .338 Ultra?

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    9

    Default Scope for .338 Ultra?

    I have a really good shooting .338 RUM I'm looking for a new scope for. I really want a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10x42 but can't afford another 2k piece of glass. I just happened on a Zeiss 1.8-5.5x38 Conquest for under $300. Does anyone here have any experience with this scope? Magnification seems a little low for the top end but given the size critters I intend to shoot with it and the ranges I'll shoot them it'll probably be about right. What do you guys think?

    Pete

  2. #2

    Default

    for the 2K range I would be looking at a schmidt bender zentih....with that said, I have a 2.5-8x32 conquest on a 338 federal mountian gun. Good optics but not great... If i could got back I probably would have bought a 3-9X36 swaro... teh 3-10X42 for about1000.00 would be great for your rifle.
    375 Ruger Hawkeye...Mice to Moose, Impala to Buffalo....1 GUN.....WORLDS PURSUIT

  3. #3

    Default Ziess Scope

    I have that very scope on my CZ550 Safari Magnum-.375 H&H. Works like a charm. However most of my shots have been less than 200yds. I have taken bear/moose/bison and have put about 10 boxes of ammo thru it with "NO" issues. I have used Talley Q/D rings to mount it. Good hunitng you've chosen really good optics!

  4. #4

    Default Nightforce

    IMO, absolutley the best scope there is for the $$$

    NSX 2 /12 x 10 x 33 - $1291
    NSX 3 1/2 x 15 x 50 (or 56) - $1483
    NSX 5 1/2 x 22 x 50 (or 56) - $1632

    These scopes will do well on a 338 RUM and allow you to get the most out of that rifle and cartridge.

  5. #5

    Default

    Look around for a deal on a Trijicon Accupoint. Amazing scope, tough as nales and as clear as anything on the market. Oh and American Made.

  6. #6
    Member bigswede358's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    St. Maries, Idaho
    Posts
    518

    Default Just...

    get a Leupold and be done with it.
    LIVE TO HUNT....HUNT TO LIVE!!!!

  7. #7
    Member lawdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Syracuse, New York, Wasilla, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    193

    Default I'm with Bigs...

    Leupold is the only way to go for scopes. I put a 2.5 x 8 x 36 on my .338 Ultra. I regret it and I'm putting on a 3.5 x 10 x 40 vx3 instead. That gun has great distance. No sense shorting yourself if you need it.

  8. #8
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    I have an accurate rifle in the ballistically-similar .340 and am looking at getting a new scope for bear first and everything else later. Aside from cost, what would you guys prefer: (i) Swarovski Z6 2-12X50; (ii) Swarovski Z6 2.5-15X50;(iii) Zeiss Victory 2.5-10x50; (iv) Zeiss Victory 3-12x56; or (v) something else?

  9. #9

    Smile shot distance...

    In the last 2 years over 40 forum members responded when I asked them what their distance to the animal was when their 1st shot was fired. It was well under 200 yards and included every big game animal Alaska has to offer. That mirrors my 43 years of hunting experience in Alaska. If that is a reasomable sampling of shot distances then we probably don't need a scope over 2X power, given the size of our animals. But, their is no way we will limit our selves to something like that. I have used a Leupold 2.5 x 8 on a .338 Win. Mag. since they first came out. My next favorite scope is their 1.75 x 6. They are good big game hunting scopes that are compact compared to most other brands and offer great eye relief. It seems like most hunters want a scope that will cover the 1,000 yard shot instead of the scope that is best for the average shot we will most often take. Just my thoughts.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    I've been shooting a burris fullfield 1.75 by 5 (?I'll have to check the closet on the mag...but this is close) and it's stood up to lots of roughboat time on a 338 wm....using detach rings etc etc etc, and it's been a great piece of glass. Took a caribou at 200 yards last fall with it and never felt the need for more magnification,and it's obviously great and fast at the shorter stuff...no need to count hairs at 60 yards.

    I'm intrigued by the top end glass that some folks use but personally I just don't know if I could maximize what those offer, and the last thing I would want to do is baby my gun on an alaskan bush slog for swamp donkeys....but, if ya got the cash, tear it up.

  11. #11

    Default

    CDNN Sports has a half price sale on Kahles scopes. They have 3-9x42, 3-10x50, and 4-12x52 for $699.99. Great scopes at a awesome price. They are every bit as clear as my Swarovski. I believe Kahles is owned by them.

  12. #12
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    FWIW, I'm back to leaving my Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5-16x50 on the 340 Wby rifle for the time being. I asked the quesiton above because I thought I would be sending my 2-month-old 6500 back to Bushnell because I was having a problem with the turret knob. But now that I have resolved that, I will just stick with it.

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    9

    Default No low?

    So for Alaska hunting most of you don't value low magnification? Well maybe I'll put the Vari-x III back on and shoot it @ 6x out to 500 to see what I can do. Maybe I don't need less than 3x IDK. I'll have a clearer Idea of what I want to do then. Thanks for the replies.

    Pete

  14. #14
    Member AK Wonderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    717

    Default Zeiss Conquest!

    Whitetails,

    You're already headed in the right direction with the Zeiss. It's the best scope on the market for the money. The only category in which a Leupold can top it is in weight. The Zeiss typically runs a couple ounces more compared to a Leupold in the same magnification.

    Everyone will argue that Leupold has better customer service and they probably are a little better, but if you never have to use it then what's the difference. If you buy a Leupold because it has better customer service for warranty work that means you are counting on it breaking so you shouldn't be considering it as an option anyway.

    If the 1.8-5.5 fits your needs then grab one and don't look back. It will do great at under 200 yds and even over if need be.

    It's no Swaro but will serve you well and won't leave you in the doghouse with the misses.

  15. #15
    Member danattherock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,608

    Default Burris...

    Take a look at Burris Signature Series and Black Diamond. I have had the signature on a 300 Weatherby for 8 years and it is a great scope. Keeps zero and is very bright. I have the Black Diamond on an Armalite AR-50 (bmg) and it performs perfectly as well. "Burris Forever" warranty is nice to have, but I have had no issues at all with my Burris scopes.
    The two loudest sounds known to man: a gun that goes bang when it is supposed to go click and a gun that goes click when it is supposed to go bang.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    712

    Default

    If your rifle sees raft or backpack duty, get something small. Nothing says "screw up a hunt" more loudly than a gigantic objective lens, hanging out in the breeze to bang on things.

    I like the smaller leupolds. I've hunted with a 1.5x5, a fixed 4x, a fixed 6x, a 2x7, a 2.5x8, and a 3x9. I've sent the 2.5x8 and the 3x9 down the road. I like the 1.5x5 and the fixed 6x in particular.

    If you're of the opinion that you practice enough to make field shots on game at ranges greater than 500 yards, then maybe you can justify big glass. I don't care what you're shooting - when things get longer than 350 yards or so, you need a rangefinder. Out past 400, you'd better know exactly what the wind is doing. Under 500, if you know the range and you can't hit it with a fixed 4x, then you need some marksmanship work.

    Bottom line, keep it small. By small, I mean objective lens size less than 36mm. I like leupold's straight tube scopes.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •