Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: in brush country is following scope better or worse

  1. #1

    Default in brush country is following scope better or worse

    Red dot scope or Low fixed power scope for big game hunting in deep forrest woods ..

    My basic question is this ..in the short ranges that the Alaska forrest haves is better to use a low power scope mounted on your rifle or a aimpoint red dot scope -x2.power on the rifle for close range shooting in the bush for shots less than 100 yards for large big game hunting..

  2. #2
    Member icb12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    1,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by henry2 View Post
    Red dot scope or Low fixed power scope for big game hunting in deep forrest woods ..

    My basic question is this ..in the short ranges that the Alaska forrest haves is better to use a low power scope mounted on your rifle or a aimpoint red dot scope -x2.power on the rifle for close range shooting in the bush for shots less than 100 yards for large big game hunting..
    Iron Sights

  3. #3

    Default

    the reason i why i ask was i need glass for basic everyday wear now and i really want somthing that would help me in a fast moveing shot if i have to take a second shot on the animal

  4. #4
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    I have tried other setups for sighting a rifle and continue to prefer scopes in most situations (driving rain being a notable exception). So long as the scope has the ability to turn to 4X or lower I have no trouble using it in close cover situations. IMO this is not a right or wrong question. It is somewhat like asking which is prettier, blue or brown eyes, blond or brunette?

    I'd select whatever you are most comfortable shooting (irons, scope, or red dot) and practice for the scenarios you expect.

  5. #5
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default My 2cents...

    I agree with 1Cor, you have to be the one that likes your set up.
    I have nothing against red dot scopes, however I have always stayed with conventional scopes when hunting.
    Maybe black bear hunting over bait in a dark woods then a red dot would be supurb. However, I have shot more than one behind the ear over bait with standard scope - no tracking or second shot needed!
    I have had many reasons to turn the power to max on the scopes I use to view something and then turn it back to the lowest setting while I hunt. It is a handy option to have, with that said I really like 2 x 7 x 33 or 3 x 9 x 40 scopes.

  6. #6
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    I go with peep sights everytime

  7. #7
    Moderator Daveinthebush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    4,402

    Default Brush

    I used to do a lot of deer hunting back East in heavy cover. A low powered scope, 1 - 2.5X always worked best. They do gather some light.

    Anything with a battery, no.....

    Vietnam - June 70 - Feb. 72
    Cancer from Agent Orange - Aug. 25th 2012
    Cancer Survivor - Dec. 14th 2012

  8. #8

    Default

    Much as I love my peep sights, I'm quick to admit that I like the Leupold 1.5x5 scope just as much. When it rains though, the scope stays home and I take a rifle with a peep. When I'm on remote hunts, I always carry a spare rifle into camp as a "backup" for the party. It's got a peep sight because in fact, I have it along so I can switch away from the scope if the weather sours. Sure we have a backup in camp, but I get first dibs on which of my two rifles is the backup on which day.

  9. #9

    Default

    thank you for info there ..i just wondering for my girl friend dad email me a picture of him and her in the brush and she was standing next to the tree and 10 ft back it was like night in the middle of the day ..that why i was asking about the diff style of sights for the deep woods ..

  10. #10
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Iron sights aren't great for some of the low light conditions that one can encounter in heavily wooded areas. If iron was a must I'd look at fiber optic/tritium sights. Red dots are fine I guess. Illuminated would show up well in a dark environment. My choice would be a low power variable. 1-4, 1.5-6, or 2-7. Keep the scope on the lowest setting at all times. Then you still have the "higher" power if a situation calls for it. My experience has been if you need the higher power you usually have time to crank it up. The reverse is not usually so. 2 cents.

    Brett

  11. #11
    Supporting Member Amigo Will's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wrangell
    Posts
    7,600

    Default

    Brett you going to replace a fine moon beam front with fiber optics

  12. #12
    Member Big Al's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Palmer,Alaska
    Posts
    1,737

    Default

    I find that there is no disadvantage to having both on the same rifle. I do know how to peal off the 1.5-5 scopes on my rifles and use the factory iron sights, so far I haven't had to do that yet, but I can. Yes you can do anything you desire to make your iron sights into anything that works for you and still have a scope.
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tryants." (Thomas Jefferson

  13. #13
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amigo Will View Post
    Brett you going to replace a fine moon beam front with fiber optics
    For someone serious about hunting in a low light area like dense forrests with open sights it might be a practical solution. Sacrolidgious, but practical. The only two rifles I own with iron sights are a .375 and 500/450 NE. Both are dangerous game rifles and both have traditional express sights.

    Brett

  14. #14
    Member Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Posts
    3,334

    Default Dark!

    Henry,
    You think it looks dark in the picture just wait till your knee deep in the bush and the sun sets - can be a real "gut check" for newbies!
    Staying calm and being 100% sure of your target cannot be overstated - whatever you do DON'T shoot at anything otta fear of the unknown....

  15. #15
    Member c04hoosier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Hmmm...for what you are talking about I would take a serious look at the Trijicon scopes in the 1-4X range. They have a lighted reticle but do not require batteries, and the triangle reticle seems like it would be really fast in close cover. I am leery of anything battery powered. And iron sights, IMO, are the worst for low light, especially a peep. And I personally believe irons are actually slower to use than a scope, contrary to popular opinion, because you have to worry about lining 3 things up (target, front sight, rear sight) versus simply lining up scope crosshairs and target which are essentially in the same plane.

    My two pennies...

  16. #16

    Default

    I've got an EOTech XPS sight with a flip-away 3X multiplier. I know batteries aren't always a good idea, but I've had no issues and if the military uses them...

    I've used the set-up on a few different guns with all good results. Getting in a Howa in .375 Ruger and thinking of trying it on that.


    www.outwriteoutdoors.com

  17. #17

    Default

    I would also second the Trijicon advice. They are Awesome scopes.


    www.outwriteoutdoors.com

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Skagway
    Posts
    29

    Default agree

    [QUOTE=c04hoosier;739215 I am leery of anything battery powered. And iron sights, IMO, are the worst for low light, especially a peep. And I personally believe irons are actually slower to use than a scope, contrary to popular opinion, because you have to worry about lining 3 things up (target, front sight, rear sight) versus simply lining up scope crosshairs and target which are essentially in the same plane.
    :[/QUOTE]

    Hi Henry, I agree with these comments. I've done a lot of cowboy action shooting back east, which all open sights, BUT, I hunt with a scope. After practicing plenty you will find the target is right there with a scope. As they said, "low power." Also, the light gathering really helps in dense areas. Relying on a battery operated system probably is fine, but what if....?

  19. #19
    Member c04hoosier's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    572

    Default

    I know batteries aren't always a good idea, but I've had no issues and if the military uses them...
    True, the Aimpoints are battery powered, but to a soldier/sailor/airman/marine, they all have backup irons, just in case.

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
  •