New Scope

[RAT]

I recently purchased a new rifle I intend to use elk hunting. The gun is a remington .338 and I would like to put a nice scope on it and would like some help in choosing. My current deer rifle is a 7mm remington with a Leupold VX III 4 to 12 with 50mm. i really like the scope but want information on a good quality scope for the .338. Any info will be appreciated.

[DogZilla15]

Same brand but.... 1.5 X 5 or 1.75 X 6.

[Don Fischer]

+1

My 338's has 2 3/4x fixed on them. Never needed more.

[2Rotten]

Depends on how you hunt and where you hunt. I mounted a Leupold VX-3 2.5 x 8 on my 8MM Remington Magnum, and I feel it is about right. If the areas you hunt elk lend themselves to longer shots you might consider one of the turret scopes like the Leupold CDS scopes, that come with either a dial matched to your rifle/ballistics, or a MOA dial that enables you to fine tune your trajectory/adjustments to account for environmental conditions.

[DogZilla15]

I always try to keep weight and bulk to a minimum and at the same time, put some thought into how much is enough and how much is overkill. Deer and elk are big, we don't need rat shooting scopes on big game rifles. There seems to be a lot of grey area between want and need when buying glass.

[Hogwild]

Get a 3-9x40 in what ever flavor you like best.

[4th_Point]

I'd think about eye relief, especially on a hard kicking rifle that's relatively lightweight.

-Leupo fixed 4x has 4".

-Leupo fixed 6x has 4.4".

-Leupo variables like a 2-7x or 3-9x have 3.7 - 4.0".

Don't forget that shooting uphill or downhill can bring the scope closer to your eye. I chose the FX-3 6x for my lightweight 300 Win, but some people can't get past a fixed power scope.

[Bonecrusher 0.338]

Leupold VX-3 4.5 X 14 X 40, Boone and Crockett reticle. Perfect scope for the .338

[SeanD]

I tried the leupold 2-7 and it was fine, but i really cannot see a need for 2 or even 3x on the low end. And the tube is short whick makes it tough to mount on a long action. I much prefer the 3-9x40. The fixed are tougher and track better than the variables based on everything ive read, not that ive ever had a problem with a bad leupold variable. I really like the fixed 4 and 6x scopes. I run a fixed 6x42 heavy duplex with cds turret on my 35 whelen and i REALLY like it especially for close in timber hunting. My longer range fun gun has the new fx-3 6x42 with a M1 turret, wide duplex. That scope is really nice, if i had unlimited funds i would have it on all my rifles.

The higher magnification scopes have much greater parallax, and i prefer not to mess with AO on a hunting rifle but that just me.

[jp8102]

Vortex Viper HS 4-16X44 or 4-16X50. best hunting reticle...about 550 with lifetime warranty and compares to a VX-III. cant go wrong with them...putting them on all my rifles
JP

[Buckrodgers]

Originally Posted by jp8102

Vortex Viper HS 4-16X44 or 4-16X50. best hunting reticle...about 550 with lifetime warranty and compares to a VX-III. cant go wrong with them...putting them on all my rifles
JP

I second this one. I just bought 2 new ones. I actually think that the clarity blows most of the competitors in the same price range away.

[Hunt'nFish]

Originally Posted by RAT

I recently purchased a new rifle I intend to use elk hunting. The gun is a remington .338 and I would like to put a nice scope on it and would like some help in choosing. My current deer rifle is a 7mm remington with a Leupold VX III 4 to 12 with 50mm. i really like the scope but want information on a good quality scope for the .338. Any info will be appreciated.

.338Win mag or .338Ultra?
If it's an Ultramag, IMO it's hard to beat the 6.5-20x50 Leupold VXIII LRT w/ std fine duplex reticle.
Or maybe wait for the new 4-24x VX6

At 10x or 20x the Leupold "Fine Duplex" reticle is actually a range finding tool.
Adjust magnification such to bracket elk (back to brisket), read magnification power, divide by 2, and that is how many hundreds of yards it is to the elk. It's actually pretty straight forward & simple and a nice backup method for when you forgot the rangefinder back at camp or sitting at home. (like none of us have ever done that.

But most importantly, the reticle at 20x subtends ~13" at 500yd....so what you ask?
Well, what that means is for a 450yd shot you hold flush to back and for a 500yds shot you hold post flush to back.
No fancy dials or complicated whiz-bang B&C reticles or CDS dials needed.

Anyway, it has worked for me for years and infact I handload up my .338Ultra specifically to get ~24" drop at 500yds at typical altitude & temp for the area I hunt. I have yet to miss an animal with this setup and have killed many critters with it.
Anyway, something to consider. I vote for the KISS approach. (Keep It Simple Stupid)
Hunt'nFish

[Grantspastor]

For years in Alaska, I had a Leupold fixed 4 power scope thinking that if I ever encountered a big Bear on one of my kill sites I didn't want high magnification. A 1.5 to 4 power would have been perfect there

Here in Oregon I use a Leupold 3-9 with no issues

BTW I'm a huge fan of the .338 and I like 250 grain bullets in this caliber. They deliver a massive thump

[Accumark Man]

I have a 338 win mag with a Leupold 2.5-8x36 on it. I set this gun up for elk hunting in the timber. It sits is Leupolds quick release mounts. Lately I have gotten the itch to put a higher magnification scope on it. I have been thinking about a 4.5-14 Leupold or maybe one of the vortex vipers 4-16 and setting it up for long range. Then I would carry my bigger scope in my pack and use it as needed(wanted).

[RAT]

Thank you to everyone for the info. Greatly appresciated. There is so much out there its hard to pick the right direction. Simple seems to be the way to go.

[Bonecrusher 0.338]

Don't buy into the hype that a low power scope will be good enough for your .338, just because it will anchor large Bears and Moose with ease, it is also extremely flat shooting, and makes an excellent long range peformer. I would highly recommend a scope that has an upper magnification of 14 power, excellent for long range shots at game animals where only small parts of the target are exposed. Congratulations on your .338, you won't be sorry.

[SwellRider]

For me that would be the same thing, being able to bring in the target closer just seems you could get a better shot placement then you could with a fixed power scope, not saying it can't be done because I know it does, I just like being able to zoom in to thread the needle to the kill spot.

[DogZilla15]

.....and just how big is the kill zone on an elk? We aren't trying to shoot a 1 inch group on and eight inch kill zone at 250 yards. Yes, we should try but is it necessary? Having a 14 power scope is a poor excuse for not trying to get closer. Seems everyone out there thinks of themselves as a competent long range shooter just because their scope is more than half the length of their rifle's barrel. Some of you are but the truth is, most aren't. Let's get real here.

Like I said before, "a lot of grey area between what's practical and what is overkill."

[Bonecrusher 0.338]

Originally Posted by DogZilla15

.....and just how big is the kill zone on an elk? We aren't trying to shoot a 1 inch group on and eight inch kill zone at 250 yards. Yes, we should try but is it necessary? Having a 14 power scope is a poor excuse for not trying to get closer. Seems everyone out there thinks of themselves as a competent long range shooter just because their scope is more than half the length of their rifle's barrel. Some of you are but the truth is, most aren't. Let's get real here.

Like I said before, "a lot of grey area between what's practical and what is overkill."

Trust me, the closer the better in my book, on the other hand, hunting public land, it is easier said than done, I won't pass up a three hundred yard shot on a bull, and I have killed several in their tracks, at that range with one shot. My eyesight isn't what it used to be, and I am in no way promoting long range shooting, however after hunting Elk for over 35 years, I know you do not want to be under-scoped. @ 4.5 power you are not even close to being over-scoped, and having the higher magnification is nice when you have to thread the needle.

[DogZilla15]

BC .338:

Well put, gotta agree. Must understand, I'm a Coast Range hunter and gettin' close is never a problem. Apples to oranges. Threading the needle at 300+ yards, can't be done at 4X. Threading the needle at 15 yards, can't be done at 6X.

[oregoncritters12]

Nightforce! buy once and never regret it!

[SeanD]

Dogzilla, thats what i thought too, until i tried it. I have one on my brush gun now because its better for me than the 2-7.

The 6 does it all close or far (hunting far, say 600 or so).

[Steelheader]

I just put a Vortex Razor HD on my .338 Lapua mag and love it.

[outdooraddict]

I have a Leupold VXII 2-7 on my .338. Swapped out the VXIII 1-4, becuase we hunt open canyon country.

Until recently, I've always used Leupold M8 4X's. Shot my .270 Winchester Model 70 w/Leupold M8 4X over the weekend. Hit targets at 200, 300, 400 with 3 shots. Hit the 600 yard target on my 3rd try.

The point being, if you know your rifle and the ballistics of the ammo, a fancy scope is more window dressing than anything. My variables are nice, but we've harvested a lot more animals with 4X's than vari's.

My $.02

[DAB]

Which ever scope you get make sure when you put the rifle to your shoulder you get a full view through the scope with out moving your head around to get a full view.

DAB

[waterbobber]

I figure when I'm shooting elk I don't need the magnification necessary to shoot a tick off its ear.