Tactical scopes for Dangerous Game and "boomers"

[jpr9954]

I have been wondering about the utility of these 1x6x24 or 1x8x24 type "tactical" scopes for use on dangerous games rifles. Virtually all are illuminated and they are all meant for quick target acquisition.

An example would be this Lucid Optics L7 1x6x24. One distinctive thing about this sight is that the illumination is blue and not red or green.

My primary fear is that these types scopes may not be designed to stand up to the recoil of anything above .308.

https://www.lucidoptics.com/rifle-scope/#L7

 

[Red Leg]

I have been wondering about the utility of these 1x6x24 or 1x8x24 type "tactical" scopes for use on dangerous games rifles. Virtually all are illuminated and they are all meant for quick target acquisition.

An example would be this Lucid Optics L7 1x6x24. One distinctive thing about this sight is that the illumination is blue and not red or green.

My primary fear is that these types scopes may not be designed to stand up to the recoil of anything above .308.

https://www.lucidoptics.com/rifle-scope/#L7

View attachment 442267

Let me be frank. I think these sorts of scope reticles are rather ridiculous. I have zero use for any reticle that can complicate the aiming process in any way at all - particularly on a dangerous game rifle (or an actual combat rifle for that matter). I am sure all those little indices look very cool to the wannabe crowd.

 

[nomspc]

I’m with RL on this one. The very last thing you want on a DG scope is a cluttered reticle. Don’t need holdovers for a target that close. Nothing more complicated than a German #4 with a central illuminated dot for me.

 

[Shootist43]

Dittos Red Leg and nomspc. Quality scopes in this configuration have stood up to larger bore rifles for quite a few years.

 

[USMA84DAB]

Leupold makes several Firedot reticles that are VERY fast to put onto the target. They stand up to .375 Ruger and .416 Ruger OK. I think this is the neatest thing in hunting optics since sliced bread!

My old VX-3 1-5x20 with the heavy duplex, stood up to .495 A-Square - that was in 1996, before tacticool was really raging.

Trijicon Accupoints (1-4x20) seem to do pretty well. They also make a 1-6X.

I am with RedLeg - clutter is bad. If we were talking designated marksman with an ACSS reticle - different animal. Or a GENUINE, TO&E assigned sniper - different story perhaps.

 

[ay2626]

Circle dot is the most complex reticle I would consider. Swaro Z8i is a good option as you can switch it between the plain dot and circle dot.

 

[ldmay375]

I have been wondering about the utility of these 1x6x24 or 1x8x24 type "tactical" scopes for use on dangerous games rifles. Virtually all are illuminated and they are all meant for quick target acquisition.

An example would be this Lucid Optics L7 1x6x24. One distinctive thing about this sight is that the illumination is blue and not red or green.

My primary fear is that these types scopes may not be designed to stand up to the recoil of anything above .308.

https://www.lucidoptics.com/rifle-scope/#L7

View attachment 442267

I am not familiar with that particular scope. I do not have even a guess to it’s durability.
I personally, do not care for non-capped turrets. The “busier” type reticles, I am still trying to get use to, for use on small caliber rifles. I am trying. I know many people that it is not an issue with.
My preference is clutter-less, single aiming point. Though these seem to be getting harder to find.

 

[revturbo9967]

That reticle isn’t all that bad, but I wouldn’t want it. The main reason I wouldn’t choose one of those over other scopes is the tiny object lens won’t gather light like other scopes .

 

[TMac]

I have that sort of reticle in 1-6x on an AR, it is deadly effective and surprisingly fast to use up close. Much like a red dot up close. But still allows enough precision for 200-300 yards. It does not have all the strata, but otherwise similar. I think it is best used to fend off a pack of wolves, horde of zombies, or the like.

As to DG uses, simpler may be better, but I have no experience there, save stopping one cougar at about 2 feet. Open sighted 30/30 used there and mostly pointed.

Like any scope, some will hold up some won’t. Buy quality and they are rugged.

 

[TMac]

That reticle isn’t all that bad, but I wouldn’t want it. The main reason I wouldn’t choose one of those over other scopes is the tiny object lens won’t gather light like other scopes .

At the lower power settings, say 1-3x, that small 24mm objective will provide more light than your eye can use. If you use it at 6x, different story.

 

[BeeMaa]

Keep it simple. Swaro, Zeiss, Leica, S&B, Kahles or Leupold. True 1x at the low end. High power ranging from 4-8x depending on what you want (or can afford). If you can find an illuminated reticle in your price range...do it.

Quick detachable rings are a plus.

This scope is a gimmick.

 

[chashardy]

I have the Leupold VX6 1-6X24 Firedot on my 416 Rigby and it works great, particularly on Cape Buffalo. The red dot against the black hide of the buffalo gives you instant target acquisition and it's durable and rugged to handle the recoil of the 416.

 

[Hogpatrol]

+1 on the previous posts. We are way beyond reticle overload and the one the OP listed would be the last scope I'd have on any rifle, let alone one to use on a DG hunt.
Years ago, it was the rifle companies racing to outdo each other. Today, it's the scope manufacturers trying to see which one can make the most useless reticle.

 

[ldmay375]

At the lower power settings, say 1-3x, that small 24mm objective will provide more light than your eye can use. If you use it at 6x, different story.

I have found that a that medium to higher quality 24mm objectives do quite well for me. I shoot closer distances, but have not had an issue.
I do acknowledge from my on use, given same quality lens / coatings the 42mm’s give me a bit more, and support more magnification.
I have 24mm objectives in straight tubes scopes of 1-4, 1-5, 1-6 types, the low ends vary from 1 to 1.1. To my eyes, about 4.5 is the maximum useful in the low light. This has been consistent with the 1-5’s and 1-6’s for my eye, including the higher dollar scopes.

I have never used a high end 20mm objective scope. The Kahles 1.1-4x24mm gave me an eye opening realization of 24mm objective. I now have high dollar ones, but those Kahles give up little to nothing when comparing them. I will say the same regarding the Kahles 1.5-6x42’s.

I will add it seems the Leupold HD5, 1-5x24 has pretty damn good glass also. No rounds fired with it. But quite a bit of comparisons.

 

[BeeMaa]

I forgot to mention in my previous post about being able to handle the recoil of a DG caliber rifle. These brands that keep being mentioned over and over (Swaro, Leica, Zeiss, S&B, Kahles & Leupold) all have an outstanding reputation for being able to withstand these forces with no problems.

I have personally owned (or still do) Swaro and Leupold scopes. The Leupold was a VX3 1.5-5x20 on a CZ550 375H&H that went to Africa and took 9 head of PG at ranges from 75 to 150 yards on 3x the whole time. It was mounted in Warne QD rings. Currently my wife and I both have Swaro Z8i scopes for our R8's with several hundred rounds sent down range. Again no problems. I never had to use the Leupold or Swaro warranty, but from what I've heard they are top notch and easy to deal with.

The Lucid scope you are looking at is most likely meant for installation on a AR style rifle firing .223/5.56mm or .308/7.62mm, not .375 caliber and up. This is reinforced by the type of reticle they are using, which IMO is overly cluttered and does nothing to help a DG hunter.

 

[375er]

I have to agree. That is not a hunting reticle. Give me a good old duplex reticle any day.

 

[WAB]

On the recoil question, I contacted Steiner regarding the recoil tolerance of their P4Xi tactical scope. They indicated that this scope was designed and tested to handle 50 BMG recoil.

Regarding the reticle, I am in total agreement with the comments above, German No 4. When it comes to DG; KISS.

 

[Challer]

That reticle is good for its intended use. Use a hunting scope for hunting and target scope for contests. There is no need for a “tactical scope” in real life, outside of military duty.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

If that is a reticle you practice extensively with, to include close range snap shooting, then go for it.

I would not however take anything but the highest proven reliable rifle scope on an expensive, perhaps dangerous African safari! Stick with Leupold, Trijicon, Nightforce, or better optics on Talley, Warner, or other quick release rings that hold a gun's zero.

 

[Hogpatrol]

Keying off of Red Leg's "frank" post, these Lucid scopes can be found on the discount sites and are what I consider "cheap" scopes. From one of many reviews:

"Upon initial inspection of the scope, one of the first thing we look for is an indicator of the country of manufacture, while this does not always tell the true quality of the scope, it can give a general idea of things to look for and what to expect. Unfortunately, directly under the turrets we found the markings “Made in China”.