less bulky rifle scopes for my Ruger American Ranch 5.56 (and other non-AR rifles)

[shootist26]

Looking for some recommendations for smaller, lighter, and less bulky scopes. Primary use case is nothing but recreational shooting from all positions from 25-300m with my Ruger American Ranch 5.56mm. Alternative use case may be to put it on my CZ527 7.62x39 and use it for hog/deer hunting

The Leupold 1.5-4x with the illuminated reticle looks interesting but it's $700. What do people think about low power fixed scopes these days? Would prefer an illuminated reticle too

[HeavyDuty]

Would you consider one of the Primary Arms prism scopes? A fixed 3x would probably be suitable.

[Suvorov]

I have a Leupold 1.5-4X Patrol which I have been extremely happy with. Not sure but I suspect it is the same basic internals as the scope you are looking at. It would work very well for your purposes.

[BobM]

I have an old Burris 2-7 Compact on one of mine.

. 98971

I have a Leupold 2-7 Rimfire on an American Rimfire in 22 mag, I believe they offer the same scope (except for the parallax setting) in the center fire line.

[gato naranja]

Looking for some recommendations for smaller, lighter, and less bulky scopes.

With Nikon exiting the scope market, we lost a few good choices... and Leupold dropping some models didn't help. The tactical market has become so dominant that a lot of outfits no longer bother with scopes aimed (!) at muzzleloaders and turkey hunters and such.

Anyway... it isn't the world's best LPVO, but a Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6X is not a bad all-around "smaller" (by today's standards) scope if you can find a good deal on one.

[jlw]

Looking for some recommendations for smaller, lighter, and less bulky scopes. Primary use case is nothing but recreational shooting from all positions from 25-300m with my Ruger American Ranch 5.56mm. Alternative use case may be to put it on my CZ527 7.62x39 and use it for hog/deer hunting

The Leupold 1.5-4x with the illuminated reticle looks interesting but it's $700. What do people think about low power fixed scopes these days? Would prefer an illuminated reticle too

I have the Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8 on my American Ranch in 6.5 Grendel. The hogs don't seem to like it.

[Caballoflaco]

The SWFA 2.5-10 might be worth checking out if you don’t mind a 1” tube and don’t need illumination.

[03RN]

I've got a couple 4x Leupold Scopes and really feel that they are ideal for hunting inside 300 yards

[gato naranja]

What do people think about low power fixed scopes these days?

I sort of blew past this subject yesterday, but I and a surprising number of fellow geezers tend to buy a variable scope only to eventually set it at a certain power and leave it there. We have had discussions and a few laughs recalling how we laughed at people clinging to 4X, 6X and 8X scopes as the world went variable, yet here we are essentially using our variables as fixed powers. Humans remain weird.

I used to have a liking for 2/2.5X scopes because they were still useable fairly quickly, and I didn't really need the magnification as much as I needed clear crosshairs out on the same plane as the target. I eventually got sucked into the light gathering, optics version of "magnumitis" until I had objective lenses WAY larger than I needed for a given power and the scopes were becoming oversized. Something like a Leupold FX-II 2.5x20 still delivers an exit pupil of 8, and unless a person is gifted or lucky, they can't even use that much light after they hit a certain age. Despite my eye issues, I can still squeeze an awful lot from a good fixed 2/2.5 or 4X scope, but I have not bought a new one in ages.

I think a nice, slim, 2.5 X on top of that CZ would still be appropriate if you want to keep the weight and bulk down.

[zaitcev]

I fondled one of those Primary Arms 3X prisms at a gun show. It's amazing how small it is. The glass has some weird distortions around the edge, but obviously you only see them when you violate the eye box. The only thing that kind of bothers me is that the reticle is only visible if the sight has power (as I understand - maybe I am wrong). So it's basically a magnified red dot with a fancy horseshoe+chevron+BDC reticle.

For those who want a scope, PA make a prism that is between LPVO and a microprism, it's called "ACCS":
https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-slx-3x32mm-gen-iii-prism-scope-with-acss-556-cqb-m2-reticle

It's a bit of a mall ninja device but what the heck, who's going to know in the woods? Certainly not the trash panda on the other side of it.

[HeavyDuty]

I fondled one of those Primary Arms 3X prisms at a gun show. It's amazing how small it is. The glass has some weird distortions around the edge, but obviously you only see them when you violate the eye box. The only thing that kind of bothers me is that the reticle is only visible if the sight has power (as I understand - maybe I am wrong). So it's basically a magnified red dot with a fancy horseshoe+chevron+BDC reticle.

For those who want a scope, PA make a prism that is between LPVO and a microprism, it's called "ACCS":
https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-slx-3x32mm-gen-iii-prism-scope-with-acss-556-cqb-m2-reticle

It's a bit of a mall ninja device but what the heck, who's going to know in the woods? Certainly not the trash panda on the other side of it.

It’s an etched reticle (or at least mine are - maybe earlier generations aren’t?)

This is the one I have: https://www.primaryarms.com/primary-arms-slx-3x-microprism-with-red-illuminated-acss-raptor-556-308-reticle-yard

[Shoresy]

I sort of blew past this subject yesterday, but I and a surprising number of fellow geezers tend to buy a variable scope only to eventually set it at a certain power and leave it there. We have had discussions and a few laughs recalling how we laughed at people clinging to 4X, 6X and 8X scopes as the world went variable, yet here we are essentially using our variables as fixed powers. Humans remain weird.

I don’t mind having my scopes on a fixed setting - I get to pick where it’s fixed. JM2C. If you know where that fixed point will be and it’s available on the market, then by all means go right there.

[Paul D]

An option to try is the Leatherwood Hi-Lux CMR1. It is available at SWFA for $252 (https://www.swfa.com/leatherwood-1-4x24-cmr1-30mm-rifle-scope.html). It has a 30 mm tube, weighs 16 oz and has a MOA reticle. The illumination is decent but not daylight 1X red-dot bright. It dials pretty nice and consistently. The glass is clear in the center but does not have edge to edge crystal clarity. I can see and hit 300 yd steel silhouettes well on my PTR G3. It struggles from 400 yds and beyond.

https://i.imgur.com/Izxz7hD.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/pYM796k.jpg

[shootist26]

How important is an illuminated dot or reticle to you for a close range hunting/target shooting scope? Personally, I'm pretty sure I want it, but seems like many of these lower power scopes don't have this option. Leupold only offers the Firedot illuminated reticle on some of their 1.5-4x and 2-7x models, and none on the lightweight 2.5x scopes. Seems like the market has not reflected a customer want for this, but then again I'm not familiar at all with this topic.

[HCM]

With Nikon exiting the scope market, we lost a few good choices... and Leupold dropping some models didn't help. The tactical market has become so dominant that a lot of outfits no longer bother with scopes aimed (!) at muzzleloaders and turkey hunters and such.

Anyway... it isn't the world's best LPVO, but a Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6X is not a bad all-around "smaller" (by today's standards) scope if you can find a good deal on one.

Like rimfire scopes mist turkey / muzzle loader scopes have parallax set at shorter ranges (50-75 yards) vs the 100 yards standard for most center fire fixed parallax rifle scopes.

For 5.56 or 7.62x39 I would want a real center fire rifle scope. Leupold, Burris and others make compact 2-7 / 2-8 center fire scopes.

The current gen strike eagle and equivalent PA scopes are fine for 5.56. PA makes one with a dedicated .300 BO / 7.62x39 reticle.

PA also offers their LPVOs with a non caliber specific MIL reticle. They also have a 1-6 with the ACSS KISS reticle (just an illuminated Chevron) and a 1-4 with a simple duplex and illuminated center dot.

[gato naranja]

Like rimfire scopes mist turkey / muzzle loader scopes have parallax set at shorter ranges (50-75 yards) vs the 100 yards standard for most center fire fixed parallax rifle scopes.

For 5.56 or 7.62x39 I would want a real center fire rifle scope. Leupold, Burris and others make compact 2-7 / 2-8 center fire scopes.

Slap me upside the head, I did space off the parallax setting issue. It is not always a deal-breaker (depending on the sum of the parts, so to speak), but it is a concern. Leupold used to be very good about adjusting parallax for longer (or shorter) ranges on their scopes, and I have had that done to a couple of them.

Back in the 1980's, Burris used to make a very nice little low-powered scope which had an adjustable objective that was not much greater in diameter than the body of the main tube, but it has been out of their catalog for a long time. I stupidly let one stay on an early Beeman R7 that I traded away, and I now wish I had kept it. The thing had a too-glossy finish for today's tastes and the eye relief on it was a bit more critical than I liked, but it was otherwise a great scope for a small, light gun. If there is a modern LPVO equivalent out there, I have not seen it.

[Caballoflaco]

How important is an illuminated dot or reticle to you for a close range hunting/target shooting scope? Personally, I'm pretty sure I want it, but seems like many of these lower power scopes don't have this option. Leupold only offers the Firedot illuminated reticle on some of their 1.5-4x and 2-7x models, and none on the lightweight 2.5x scopes. Seems like the market has not reflected a customer want for this, but then again I'm not familiar at all with this topic.

Don’t judge what the market wants based on Leupold’s products offerings. I used to think that Leupold was just running 10-15 years behind what the market wants starting around the mid 2000’s but now I’m pretty sure they’ve completely left the course and gotten stuck in a bog of mediocrity and lack of innovation. The only reason they’re still selling scopes is name recognition with Boomers.

[HCM]

Slap me upside the head, I did space off the parallax setting issue. It is not always a deal-breaker (depending on the sum of the parts, so to speak), but it is a concern. Leupold used to be very good about adjusting parallax for longer (or shorter) ranges on their scopes, and I have had that done to a couple of them.

Back in the 1980's, Burris used to make a very nice little low-powered scope which had an adjustable objective that was not much greater in diameter than the body of the main tube, but it has been out of their catalog for a long time. I stupidly let one stay on an early Beeman R7 that I traded away, and I now wish I had kept it. The thing had a too-glossy finish for today's tastes and the eye relief on it was a bit more critical than I liked, but it was otherwise a great scope for a small, light gun. If there is a modern LPVO equivalent out there, I have not seen it.

Burris, Vortex and Leupold still make compact 2-7x center fire scopes.

https://www.burrisoptics.com/scopes/fullfield-ii-riflescopes-series/fullfield-ii-riflescope-2-7x35mm

[Lost River]

I have an old Burris 2-7 Compact on one of mine.

. 98971

I have a Leupold 2-7 Rimfire on an American Rimfire in 22 mag, I believe they offer the same scope (except for the parallax setting) in the center fire line.

Those older, American made Burris compact scopes were/are very well made scopes. I used a few for quite a number of years. In fact the personally owned optic I used, before I purchased a VXIII 1.5-5 for my M4 was a Burris 2-7. At first it was on an M4 for a short bit. Later I mounted it on a piece of Picatinny rail and then got hold of an extra dust cover for an M240B (which is a 7.62 mg). I mounted the rail and optic on the dustcover.

We had been getting rocketed and mortared from outside the effective range of the MGs. Plus there was bad mirage from heat and a river. Often you could see flash and smoke from where they were launching from but not anything else. With the Burris mounted on the 240 we rainbowed some rounds into where they had been launching from and they stopped launching from there anymore. Whether I/we hit anything, who knows, but it worked and that little scope did a very good job.

Took a few boat rides with Brit SBS too.

https://i.imgur.com/n2gIeYU.jpg

[BobM]

Those older, American made Burris compact scopes were/are very well made scopes. I used a few for quite a number of years. In fact the personally owned optic I used, before I purchased a VXIII 1.5-5 for my M4 was a Burris 2-7. At first it was on an M4 for a short bit. Later I mounted it on a piece of Picatinny rail and then got hold of an extra dust cover for an M240B (which is a 7.62 mg). I mounted the rail and optic on the dustcover.

We had been getting rocketed and mortared from outside the effective range of the MGs. Plus there was bad mirage from heat and a river. Often you could see flash and smoke from where they were launching from but not anything else. With the Burris mounted on the 240 we rainbowed some rounds into where they had been launching from and they stopped launching from there anymore. Whether I/we hit anything, who knows, but it worked and that little scope did a very good job.

Took a few boat rides with Brit SBS too.

https://i.imgur.com/n2gIeYU.jpg

I also have an old compact Burris 4-12, currently on a heavy barrel 10/22. It made several trips to Montana atop a Sako 221 Fireball that my grandpa had stocked to resemble a Winchester Featherweight. I shot a lot of prairie dogs with that combo.

Now that I have two Ruger Ranch rifles I’d like to see more compact options in smaller quality scopes. Everyone seems to want a 6-20 on their deer rifle.

[NH Shooter]

Not illuminated but at only 6.5 ounces, worth a look IMO - https://www.leupold.com/fx-ii-ultralight-25x20-wide-duplex-riflescope

I ran one on a lightweight AR and found it to offer good performance and value vs. its weight and size.

[BobM]

By the time I decided I wanted a 2-7 VX/R with illuminated reticle they had been discontinued.
I want more magnification than 2.5. I have a VX/R 1-4 “Hog Hunter “ on an AR and sometimes I’d like more than 4x.

[gato naranja]

Those older, American made Burris compact scopes were/are very well made scopes.

I want to say the one I had the longest was a Burris Mini Compact AO... I can't recall if it was 4X or 6X, but the OD of the objective end was relatively small because the lens was probably no bigger in diameter than the main tube. Unlike some other scopes of the day, it held up to the two-way "snap" of a springer air rifle as well as a couple rimfires and a centerfire.

I thought very highly of it at the time, and within a few years I regretted not keeping it.

[shootist26]

Not illuminated but at only 6.5 ounces, worth a look IMO - https://www.leupold.com/fx-ii-ultralight-25x20-wide-duplex-riflescope

I ran one on a lightweight AR and found it to offer good performance and value vs. its weight and size.

I just bought one to try

[spyderco monkey]

An amusing compact scope setup from the Ukraine War.

PU 3.5x from a WW2 Mosin, mounted on a SCAR 17

https://i.imgur.com/h1hkW6P.jpg

[Le Français]

An amusing compact scope setup from the Ukraine War.

PU 3.5x from a WW2 Mosin, mounted on a SCAR 17

Of all the rifles on which you could mount an antique scope, maybe don't pick the one that beats the hell out of scopes!

[HCM]

Of all the rifles on which you could mount an antique scope, maybe don't pick the one that beats the hell out of scopes!

Apparently not an antique scope, an air gun scope made to look like the PU.

Plus the whole “beat the hell out of scopes thing” with SCARs is overblown.

It’s more of an electronics issue with lasers, etc. than conventional optics.

[Pistol Pete 10]

Looking for some recommendations for smaller, lighter, and less bulky scopes. Primary use case is nothing but recreational shooting from all positions from 25-300m with my Ruger American Ranch 5.56mm. Alternative use case may be to put it on my CZ527 7.62x39 and use it for hog/deer hunting

The Leupold 1.5-4x with the illuminated reticle looks interesting but it's $700. What do people think about low power fixed scopes these days? Would prefer an illuminated reticle too

Larger isn''t always better. Quality of lenses and coatings make more difference than a 50mm front lens. You can also set it at a lower power to improve light gathering qualities.
.

[Tannhauser]

By the time I decided I wanted a 2-7 VX/R with illuminated reticle they had been discontinued.
I want more magnification than 2.5. I have a VX/R 1-4 “Hog Hunter “ on an AR and sometimes I’d like more than 4x.

When the VX-Rs were common, I simply didn't have the spare cash to afford one. Now that mine and my wife's financial situation has significantly approved, where I can afford to spend the money the VX-Rs are gone. I did score a crazy good deal on a VX-R 3-9 at the end, but 2-7s were hen's teeth at that point.

I like the glass and love the illumination in my 3-9, and I feel confident a VX-R 2-7 would be a perfect scope on my RAR 7.62x39.

[Tannhauser]

I currently have a Burris MTAC 1.5-6 scope mounted on my RAR. While I like the magnification range of 1.5 to 6 on a hunting rifle along with the larger objective of the MTAC, I don't particularly like the reticle or the size. The tiny reticle with holdovers is fine for shooting at high visibility targets on the range, but it's quickly lost looking at brown fur in the brown woods. The illumination helps, but still nowhere near a good hunting reticle.

I'd love a relatively compact scope, with 1.Xish on the low end and 6ish to 8ish on the high end, with a German #4 reticle and a bright little dot right at the center of the reticle. Something as bright as a VX-R or a PST Gen II.

Here's the MTAC currently mounted:

99598

[shootist26]

I currently have a Burris MTAC 1.5-6 scope mounted on my RAR. While I like the magnification range of 1.5 to 6 on a hunting rifle along with the larger objective of the MTAC, I don't particularly like the reticle or the size. The tiny reticle with holdovers is fine for shooting at high visibility targets on the range, but it's quickly lost looking at brown fur in the brown woods. The illumination helps, but still nowhere near a good hunting reticle.

I'd love a relatively compact scope, with 1.Xish on the low end and 6ish to 8ish on the high end, with a German #4 reticle and a bright little dot right at the center of the reticle. Something as bright as a VX-R or a PST Gen II.

Here's the MTAC currently mounted:

99598

What magazines are those? I used to have a burris MTAC, was always very lukewarm to it and sold it

[Tannhauser]

What magazines are those? I used to have a burris MTAC, was always very lukewarm to it and sold it

Those are all 5 round Mini-30 magazines. The 7.62x39 RAR uses a Mini-30 magazine well instead of a STANAG mag well.

It's possible to swap the Mini-30 mag well for a STANAG mag well and use 7.62x39 AR magazines in a RAR. Ruger will sell you a mag well if you call them, and while Ruger will not guarantee compatibility, I've read multiple accounts that it works.

At first I thought I'd go this route, but I don't mind the Mini mags. They have been completely reliable as long as I download them from 5 to 4. Full loaded I find I have to push the bolt home very energetically to insure the first round strips. Download by 1 round to reduce the spring pressure and everything works just fine. Since this is strictly a hunting rifle, I'm fine with 4 round detachable mags.

Also, while my rifle shipped with one mag the others were a gift from Ruger. Something was screwed up with my first RAR, the bolt had difficulty closing on every ammo I tried, and when it went back Ruger said it was so screwed up it had to be replaced. I waited almost 5 months for a replacement, then I had to pay a second transfer on the new rifle with a new serial #. I complained enough Ruger sent me three mags gratis to make me go away.

[Chuck Whitlock]

I currently have a Burris MTAC 1.5-6 scope mounted on my RAR. While I like the magnification range of 1.5 to 6 on a hunting rifle along with the larger objective of the MTAC, I don't particularly like the reticle or the size. The tiny reticle with holdovers is fine for shooting at high visibility targets on the range, but it's quickly lost looking at brown fur in the brown woods. The illumination helps, but still nowhere near a good hunting reticle.

I'd love a relatively compact scope, with 1.Xish on the low end and 6ish to 8ish on the high end, with a German #4 reticle and a bright little dot right at the center of the reticle. Something as bright as a VX-R or a PST Gen II.

Here's the MTAC currently mounted:

99598

I've thought that the RT6 might pair up with the American Ranch.

https://www.burrisoptics.com/scopes/rt-6-riflescopes-series/rt-6-riflescope-1-6x24mm

[CSW]

About 2019 ish I purchased a Mossberg patrol MVP in 5.56.
At first, I mounted and used a Vortex Optics 1-4x. While it was a good combination, I always felt that 4x was 'limiting' at distance, with my aging eyes.

99619


With that said, I had a new Leupold Rifleman series that I had purchased a few years before. 2-7x with a simple 'plex reticle, it's been on the little gun since, and does everything it should, and nothing more on the MVP.

99620

[Trukinjp13]

Credo 3-9x has illuminated mil dot reticle, great glass and weighs 17oz.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230106/47b999de8a64b691eb836f3ff185fe39.jpg

[HeavyDuty]

Old thread, but on point for my question.

I have two Ruger Americans - a 16” 5.56 Ranch and a 18” .308 Predator. I restocked both in MagPul Hunter stocks to gain the more vertical grip my messed up wrist prefers and have been building these up to be simple generalist field rifles.

The 5.56 wears a Primary Arms 3x prism, and it has worked out very well. Now it’s time to figure out the .308. Given that my goal is moderate ranges, I’m seriously considering one of the PA 5x prisms. I’m trying to avoid variables on these.

Does the old 1x per 100 yards rule of thumb still hold? These aren’t intended to be precision or varmint rifles, I have others for that purpose.

[HCM]

Old thread, but on point for my question.

I have two Ruger Americans - a 16” 5.56 Ranch and a 18” .308 Predator. I restocked both in MagPul Hunter stocks to gain the more vertical grip my messed up wrist prefers and have been building these up to be simple generalist field rifles.

The 5.56 wears a Primary Arms 3x prism, and it has worked out very well. Now it’s time to figure out the .308. Given that my goal is moderate ranges, I’m seriously considering one of the PA 5x prisms. I’m trying to avoid variables on these.

Does the old 1x per 100 yards rule of thumb still hold? These aren’t intended to be precision or varmint rifles, I have others for that purpose.

1x per hundred works for hitting clearly defined targets such as on a range. For practical uses you need at least 2x (or 3x) per hundred to positively identify targets.

Why are you trying to avoid variables on theses - weight ?

[Clusterfrack]

Old thread, but on point for my question.

I have two Ruger Americans - a 16” 5.56 Ranch and a 18” .308 Predator. I restocked both in MagPul Hunter stocks to gain the more vertical grip my messed up wrist prefers and have been building these up to be simple generalist field rifles.

The 5.56 wears a Primary Arms 3x prism, and it has worked out very well. Now it’s time to figure out the .308. Given that my goal is moderate ranges, I’m seriously considering one of the PA 5x prisms. I’m trying to avoid variables on these.

Does the old 1x per 100 yards rule of thumb still hold? These aren’t intended to be precision or varmint rifles, I have others for that purpose.

What's your budget?

The new Leupold Mk4 2.5-10 looks interesting.
https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-2-5-10x42-m5c3-ffp-illum-tmr

[HeavyDuty]

Why are you trying to avoid variables on theses - weight ?

Weight, durability, cost.

[HeavyDuty]

What's your budget?

The new Leupold Mk4 2.5-10 looks interesting.
https://www.leupold.com/mark-4hd-2-5-10x42-m5c3-ffp-illum-tmr

Those look great, but well beyond my modest budget for these.

[CSW]

Ken;

Don't know what your budget is, but I've always had great success with Meopta scopes.

Super sharp glass.

[HCM]

Weight, durability, cost.

Weight - yes. No variable optic will match the weight of the PA micro prisms.

But durability and cost … not so much.

I’m old too. So I remember the conventional wisdom 40 or more years ago that variable optics were fragile and problematic. It was true back then. But that was 30 (or more) years ago.

The cost of a primary Arms 1-6 or 1-8 is comparable to the prism. An Althon Helos 2-12x is not much more.

How is the form factor of the prism on a bolt gun ? Even in the lowest configuration I’m assuming you need a cheek riser ?

[HeavyDuty]

Weight - yes. No variable optic will match the weight of the PA micro prisms.

But durability and cost … not so much.

I’m old too. So I remember the conventional wisdom 40 or more years ago that variable optics were fragile and problematic. It was true back then. But that was 30 (or more) years ago.

The cost of a primary Arms 1-6 or 1-8 is comparable to the prism. An Althon Helos 2-12x is not much more.

How is the form factor of the prism on a bolt gun ? Even in the lowest configuration I’m assuming you need a cheek riser ?

It’s workable on the bolt, but I’m not overly sensitive to positioning.

That said… I think I’m going to look at variables again. I have an unused Steiner P4Xi 1-4 here which would be a good match for the 5.56.