Mendicant
Member
Good day friends.
I am planning to have my first road trip hunt, all the way up to the Last Frontier.
My first instinct was to get some big honking elephant rifle. But after doing my online research and looking at the kind of ground we will be covering (a week in tents and walking with a pack frame) it became clear that what I needed was something a bit more practical to carry. There is also the probability that I will be going elk hunting out west a few times in the coming years, so I will be doing a lot of scrambling up the side of a mountain. Most of my deer hunting happens in Frederick county so I already know how difficult it can be hauling the heavier rifles up a long hill when you are carrying a tree stand.
Rather than going the custom route, I selected what is basically the lightest hunting rifle off the shelf, the Kimber Mountain Ascent. Weighing in at a mere 4 bs 13 oz when chambered in .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor, those aren't exactly the most suitable calibers for knocking down a bull moose. So I made a slight sacrifice on 8 oz of weight and upped it to the .30-06 to give myself a nominal increase of KE and a heavier bullet to put a hurting where it needs to hurt. I could have gone all out with the .300 win mag, but I already own one of those in my 9 lb Ruger M77. Now I love my recoil as much as the next guy, but I have no need to sight that caliber in on a 6 lb gun. With weapon and ammo selected, I went straight to m̶y̶ ̶l̶o̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶g̶u̶n̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶p̶ Gunbroker and purchased one for 60% of MSRP. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/810882141
But now to the thrust of my post. A lightweight rifle needs lightweight optics. To that end, there are only a few players in town. The Swarovski Z3 3-9x36 is 12 oz and brings a lot to the table, including a big pricetag. The lightest scope of suitable quality is the Leupold FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm at only 6.5 oz. The problem with that one is that the aperture simply is too small to collect adequate light for hunting dawn and dusk, when moose are most active. The compromise I went with for weight, capability, and price was the Leupold VX-Freedom 2-7x33, at 11 oz. After buying one off Amazon, I saw they have a similar model with the same model designed for rimfire, which I also purchased. The main difference, aside from optimal eye relief distance, is the reticle window. Below is the standard to the left, and the rimfire to the right.
There is a possibility I could return one, but I don't see the great trouble in having an extra Leupold lying around. Never know when I might need one. The real question is which of these two should I install on my new Kimber? I like the idea of having the extra tic marks available for range adjustment, but I can see how they might provide an element of complication when I have a moose in front of me. Which would you go with?
I am planning to have my first road trip hunt, all the way up to the Last Frontier.
My first instinct was to get some big honking elephant rifle. But after doing my online research and looking at the kind of ground we will be covering (a week in tents and walking with a pack frame) it became clear that what I needed was something a bit more practical to carry. There is also the probability that I will be going elk hunting out west a few times in the coming years, so I will be doing a lot of scrambling up the side of a mountain. Most of my deer hunting happens in Frederick county so I already know how difficult it can be hauling the heavier rifles up a long hill when you are carrying a tree stand.
Rather than going the custom route, I selected what is basically the lightest hunting rifle off the shelf, the Kimber Mountain Ascent. Weighing in at a mere 4 bs 13 oz when chambered in .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor, those aren't exactly the most suitable calibers for knocking down a bull moose. So I made a slight sacrifice on 8 oz of weight and upped it to the .30-06 to give myself a nominal increase of KE and a heavier bullet to put a hurting where it needs to hurt. I could have gone all out with the .300 win mag, but I already own one of those in my 9 lb Ruger M77. Now I love my recoil as much as the next guy, but I have no need to sight that caliber in on a 6 lb gun. With weapon and ammo selected, I went straight to m̶y̶ ̶l̶o̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶g̶u̶n̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶p̶ Gunbroker and purchased one for 60% of MSRP. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/810882141
But now to the thrust of my post. A lightweight rifle needs lightweight optics. To that end, there are only a few players in town. The Swarovski Z3 3-9x36 is 12 oz and brings a lot to the table, including a big pricetag. The lightest scope of suitable quality is the Leupold FX-II Ultralight 2.5x20mm at only 6.5 oz. The problem with that one is that the aperture simply is too small to collect adequate light for hunting dawn and dusk, when moose are most active. The compromise I went with for weight, capability, and price was the Leupold VX-Freedom 2-7x33, at 11 oz. After buying one off Amazon, I saw they have a similar model with the same model designed for rimfire, which I also purchased. The main difference, aside from optimal eye relief distance, is the reticle window. Below is the standard to the left, and the rimfire to the right.
There is a possibility I could return one, but I don't see the great trouble in having an extra Leupold lying around. Never know when I might need one. The real question is which of these two should I install on my new Kimber? I like the idea of having the extra tic marks available for range adjustment, but I can see how they might provide an element of complication when I have a moose in front of me. Which would you go with?