Muzzleloader scope

[Versatile_Hunter 306]

Leupold advertises a muzzleloader scope. What are the spec differences between a muzzleloader scope versus a regular riflescope?

[Northcountryman 460]

Yeah, I was wondering that too.  You can get away with a riflscope on your muzzleloader; often, its just a matter of prefernce, I think. Here's a link to a discussion foum where its discussed:

https://www.modernmuzzleloader.com/threads/muzzleloader-vs-rifle-scope.33819/

 

[DoubleDose 269]

11 hours ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

Leupold advertises a muzzleloader scope. What are the spec differences between a muzzleloader scope versus a regular riflescope?

They used to be advertised as ML/Shotgun scopes.  I believe the primary difference (s) are parallax at 75 yds versus 100 (rifle) and adjustment clicks may be 1/2" @ 100 yrds versus 1/4".

[SportsmanNH 329]

15 hours ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

Leupold advertises a muzzleloader scope. What are the spec differences between a muzzleloader scope versus a regular riflescope?

If you look at the specs of the VX Freedom 3-9 Muzzleloader scope and the VX Freedom 3-9 rifle scope , they are identicle. The only thing thats different is the reticle . The rifle scope has the duplex and the muzzleloader has the circle reticle. I had a scope with the circle and hated it. Covered too much on the target. 

Even the the Leupold advertised as a having muzzle loader or shotgun scope , they really aren't and different that their rifle scopes. But some other brands did have scopes with specs designed for shotguns and muzzleloaders . The different specs were like as mentioned by DD , the parallax is set at 75 yards when most rifle scopes either have no parallax adjustment or its set at 100 yards . The big difference is scopes designed for shotgun and muzzleloader usually have a 5 inch eye relief . The thinking is you wont get wacked due to higher recoil . Sounds like a great idea but it comes at a cost to the FOV . The field of view is much smaller on a scope with a 5 inch eye relief than with a rifle scope of the same power with a 3.75 to 4 inch eye relief .  I really didn't care for the tunnel vision of the 5 inch eye relief .  I just keep it simple and have rifle scopes on everything. 

[phade 5309]

In addition to what is noted above the ballistic reticles are usually aligned with three 50 gr pellets of 777; newer ones allow for custom calculations. Can't say I like them nearly as much in the MZ as I do in the shotguns, which are hard to find now. Mostly because I use BH209. I also find that it doesn't matter at most MZ ranges. 

The popular shotgun ones are worth $$$, too. While looking for ammo at a local joint, I came across a NIB slughunter collecting dust in a glass case for $200 out the door. It flipped for more than $400 almost immediately on eBay and gave me a solid $200 to put into the slush fund.

[Daveboone 855]

For  a bunch of years I have used a standard Nikon prostaff 2-7 on a couple different inlines. I cant believe there is any practical difference esp. at typical northwoods ranges (i sight for fifty yards but good for same point of aim at 75 or so).

[Will_C 186]

I have a Leupold Rifleman 3-9x on my Encore and it has worked well. 

[Versatile_Hunter 306]

Great, thanks for all the input. I mounted a new VX-5HD on my rifle this summer. It’s a great scope. I also like the FOV on the low mag (2-10; 2-12) VX-5HD and VX-6HD but I’m not putting a scope worth 4 times the price of the gun on a muzzleloader. The VX-3HD seems nice and light. But I ask, if I’m going to go low end Leupold am I gaining much more than on a $200 Vortex? 

[onlybrowning 59]

VX-3i isn’t low end in my opinion. In fact it was Leupold’s flagship line for a long time. I can’t speak on Vortex, but I can tell you I’ve been very happy with all the Vari-X III, VX-III, VX3, and VX3i’s that I’ve had.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DoubleDose 269]

3 hours ago, onlybrowning said:

VX-3i isn’t low end in my opinion. In fact it was Leupold’s flagship line for a long time. I can’t speak on Vortex, but I can tell you I’ve been very happy with all the Vari-X III, VX-III, VX3, and VX3i’s that I’ve had.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Completely agree.  The Leupold V3 line is not low end in the scope world; it is a high quality scope.  IMO, when you are in the high quality scope market, the costs go up exponentially to the gain.  That is, it costs more and more for smaller and smaller gains. The law of diminishing returns. Also IMO, those small differences, in the high quality scope market, are not going to be discernable or make a material difference.

[Northcountryman 460]

How much of an issue is parallax, anyway?  Ive never noticed that using any of my scopes over the years.  Evidently, parallax is evident when,  peering through the scope, the reticle appears to "float" on its target; moreover, the floating worsens as the diatnt to target increases, yes? IDK, Maybe I've been lucky cuz I've never experienced this.  Is it more prevalent with cheaper scopes , perhaps, or independent of scope quality?

On 1/20/2021 at 12:26 PM, DoubleDose said:

They used to be advertised as ML/Shotgun scopes.  I believe the primary difference (s) are parallax at 75 yds versus 100 (rifle) and adjustment clicks may be 1/2" @ 100 yrds versus 1/4".

 

[DoubleDose 269]

19 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

How much of an issue is parallax, anyway?  Ive never noticed that using any of my scopes over the years.  Evidently, parallax is evident when,  peering through the scope, the reticle appears to "float" on its target; moreover, the floating worsens as the diatnt to target increases, yes? IDK, Maybe I've been lucky cuz I've never experienced this.  Is it more prevalent with cheaper scopes , perhaps, or independent of scope quality?

 

In practical terms, the parallax becomes a factor the longer the distance (beyond the scope parallax setting) and the smaller the target.  Hunting deer (large target) in the Northeast woods (shots typically less than 100 yards) it is a non-issue with parallax fixed scopes.  I don't think you have been lucky,  just not in conditions where it would be a factor.  Take that same rifle out west and hunt deer (or antelope which are smaller) on the open plains with shots 300+ yards and it may very well be an issue.  Shooting woodchucks at 200-600+ yards it is a real issue, hence those scopes have parallax adjustment.  Fundamentally, independent of scope quality since it is physics.

If you really want to go down a rabbit hole of long-distance shooting factors Google Coriolis effect on bullets.

[Northcountryman 460]

Gotcha , so I probably haven’t seen it cuz I haven’t been presented with shooting conditions Where it’s been an issue , correct ? Where is the parallax adjustment on a scope ? Is it same as the mag adjustment knob? 

[Northcountryman 460]

Coriolis effect on bullets ? Is that like an aim adjustment Due to earths rotation or something ?

[Versatile_Hunter 306]

I’ve pretty much narrowed it down to these 3. I’m leaning slightly towards the Leupold but the Diamondback price point is enticing. The Viper HS has a 4x mag and a huge FOV. Also very appealing.
 

Vortex VIPER HS 2.5-10X44 Dead-Hold BDC (MOA) Reticle

Weight: 16.5 oz

FOV: 47-10.9 ft

~$500

 

Leupold VX-3HD 2.5-8X36 CDS-ZL DUPLEX

Weight: 11.8 oz

FOV: 37.5-12.7 ft

~$500

 

Vortex DIAMONDBACK 3-9X40 V-Plex (MOA) Reticle

Weight: 14.4 oz

FOV: 44.6-14.8 ft

~$200

Edited February 7 by Versatile_Hunter

[DoubleDose 269]

1 hour ago, Northcountryman said:

Gotcha , so I probably haven’t seen it cuz I haven’t been presented with shooting conditions Where it’s been an issue , correct ? Where is the parallax adjustment on a scope ? Is it same as the mag adjustment knob? 

 

58 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

Coriolis effect on bullets ? Is that like an aim adjustment Due to earths rotation or something ?

Correct, you likely haven’t been presented with shooting conditions where it’s been an issue.  The parallax adjustment (which focuses the target to be in focus/same optical plane as the reticle) is either a twist ring on the objective lense or a twist knob on the reticle adjustment turrets opposite the windage.

Yes that is Coriolis effect, long distance snipers also need to factor in spin drift of the bullet itself too.  I am a shooting and ballistics junkie.

[DoubleDose 269]

2 hours ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

I’ve pretty much narrowed it down to these 3. I’m leaning slightly towards the Leupold but the Diamondback price point is enticing. The Viper HS has a 4x mag and a huge FOV. Also very appealing.
 

Vortex VIPER HS 2.5-10X44 Dead-Hold BDC (MOA) Reticle

Weight: 16.5 oz

FOV: 47-10.9 ft

~$500

 

Leupold VX-3HD 2.5-8X36 CDS-ZL DUPLEX

Weight: 11.8 oz

FOV: 37.5-12.7 ft

~$500

 

Vortex DIAMONDBACK 3-9X40 V-Plex (MOA) Reticle

Weight: 14.4 oz

FOV: 44.6-14.8 ft

~$200

FWIW, I own 10 scopes, all Leupold.  Forget the Diamondback, it is a budget lower quality scope.  The Viper and VX-3HD are not really comparable; due to the different objective lense size and top magnification.   The difference between 2.5-4X on the low power setting is not meaningful.  Based on the specs of these three, your budget, and knowing what else is out there, I would get this:

https://www.natchezss.com/leupold-vx-3i-rifle-scope-3-5-10x40mm-1-tube-sfp-cds-duplex-reticle-matte-black.html

Edited February 7 by DoubleDose
addition

[Versatile_Hunter 306]

1 hour ago, DoubleDose said:

FWIW, I own 10 scopes, all Leupold.  Forget the Diamondback, it is a budget lower quality scope.  The Viper and VX-3HD are not really comparable; due to the different objective lense size and top magnification.   The difference between 2.5-4X on the low power setting is not meaningful.  Based on the specs of these three, your budget, and knowing what else is out there, I would get this:

https://www.natchezss.com/leupold-vx-3i-rifle-scope-3-5-10x40mm-1-tube-sfp-cds-duplex-reticle-matte-black.html

Comparing the 3 series 2.5-8 x 36 and 3.5-10 x 40, what’s your thinking in preferring the second one? You don’t think 10 ft of FOV matters when walking or still hunting?   With a 40 vs 36, you’re getting more light I take it.  This makes a noticeable difference assuming glass quality is equal? 
 

I have the VX-5HD in 3-15x44. I wanted the VX-5HD 2-10x42 since you get an extra 20 ft FOV at low mag but it was out of stock. A larger FOV has to matter when jump shooting deer...

Edited February 7 by Versatile_Hunter

[DoubleDose 269]

58 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

Comparing the 3 series 2.5-8 x 36 and 3.5-10 x 40, what’s your thinking in preferring the second one? You don’t think 10 ft of FOV matters when walking or still hunting?   With a 40 vs 36, you’re getting more light I take it.  This makes a noticeable difference assuming glass quality is equal? 
 

I have the VX-5HD in 3-15x44. I wanted the VX-5HD 2-10x42 since you get an extra 20 ft FOV at low mag but it was out of stock. A larger FOV has to matter when jump shooting deer...

 Before variable power scopes were common, fixed 4x were the historical standard for an all around woods scope.  Based on that, I don't consider there to be any meaningful difference between low powers of 4x and down.  So, I will tend to look for and push the higher magnification, providing the low does not exceed 4x.  So higher power and larger objective is my thinking.   Jump shooting is interesting.  Your going to be at low power if/when jump shooting deer and at very close distance.  In that situation, you're shouldering the gun and swinging like a shotgun focused on the deer.  FOV is useful up to a point, then it is just extra FOV.  How much do you need to see to the left and right of the deer?  I've seen decisions made based on eye relief, objective diameter, variable range, reticle, etc, but not FOV.  I wouldn't put the V3 3.5-10x40 over the VX-5HD 2-10x42 though.

[bugsNbows 994]

I would urge all to go to a website called Optics Thoughts. Ilya Koshkin is a true expert in this field. He regularly tests scopes, spotters, binocs, etc. He tells it like it is. Also, he offers recommendations from alpha scopes down to lower end models. Some of my favorites are tweener scopes... not too big and not too small. 

Edited February 23 by bugsNbows
Spelling