T/C Encore needs a new scope

[tcmaenle]

I need a new scope for my Encore. The scope I have is a BSA and it is not the best. I am looking for a good quality scope like the Nikon Omega with BDC or Nikoplex Reticle. Does anyone have one on there Encore and what do you think of it? I shoot 100 grains of 777 and 260 grain Dead Center bullet. Most of my shoots are under 150 yards. Which one would be the best? Is their a better scope for the Encore other than this one for the same price? Every sporting store I go to says Nikon Omega is the best because it has the 5" eye relief and because of the warranty.

[30-06man]

With the omega you are suppose to use a 250grain 50cal bullet and 150 grains of powder. I would look into the buckmasters if you don't want to change your load.

[sportsman223]

 I mounted one for a friend the scope was very clear he said the scope worked, with 120g T7 and 250g shockwave @ 100 and 150 has not shot it at 200 yet.
 I am to much of a Leupold fan to buy one ,but the Nikon is still a nice scope

[30-06man]

120 grains of loose powder is the equivalent of 3 50 grain pellets. Both are a magnum charge.

[tn_junk]

I have a Nikon 3x9 and a Pentax 6x.
The Pentax was half the price and is, in my opinion, just as good as the Nikon.

alan

[BobT]

I use an older Leupold Vari-X II 2-7 on my Encore and have no problems at all. I have tried a few other scopes and keep coming back to this one.

Bob

[kyelkhunter3006]

You can use the BDC on any brand of scope with any load.  You just have to shoot it at the ranges to see where it's going to hit.  Most loads with pointed bullets are within inches of each other at different ranges anyway, so it will be easy to do.  I had two of the Nikon's and they were great scopes.  Perfect size and weight, with great glass.  The 5" of eye relied is nice too. 

Old habits are hard to break, and I would never use the BDC, so I went back to the regular duplex in my scopes.  I have also found that I seem to lose the circles/hash marks of scopes with a BDC reticle against background clutter, unlike a regular x-hair.  Everywhere I hunt is wooded areas, even if there are fields, so I can't benefit from a reticle like that.  If you are never going to shoot more than 150yds, I wouldn't even bother with the BDC.  Look hard on the web, you can find good deals on the Omega, usually a lot cheaper than in a retail store front.

I'd look at Weaver and Sightron too.   Two of my favorite scopes are made by them.  I'll put them up against any scope, any time.

[30-06man]

250 grain 50cal bullet and a magnum charge was one of the selling points of the Omega. Also they also claimed you needed a 28inch barrel and 1 and 28 twist when they first came out. I don't think they have changed that. I also see no use for one. Too complicated.

[kyelkhunter3006]

That's one of the selling points of the scope because of it's affiliation with T/C Omega rifle, which has a 28" barrel.  Do you think that Nikon would have been able to name the scope the Omega without including T/C in it somehow?  I don't think so.  The extra 2" of length over the guns with 26" or 27" barrels doesn't get you squat, because with the QLA on the Omega, you lose an inch of the usable barrel length anyway.  The BDC in any scope will work with any load or round.   You will have to shoot it pretty extensively to find out where the marks intersect with the trajectory of your load.  The difference in most loads of 100gr vs loads of 150gr isn't but a couple of inches at most out to 200 yds.  Burris's Ballistic Plex will get you out to 300 yds with a 250gr slug and 150gr of powder, and that's not using a spire point bullet. That's why the Burris scopes come with a package of decals denoting most popular loads and where they actually hit a target in relation to the hash marks.  What the scope makers need to tell everyone upfront is that all of these scopes have to be either on their highest power or at a specific power to have the hash marks work correctly, in relation to the load.  Using the BDC of a scope at different power will change the impact points.  You wouldn't believe how many people think that the marks are the same, at 3x or 9x.

[30-06man]

I wouldn't buy one after I bought my latest Bushnell. I would say it is the best scope in the $200 range. It doesn't compare to the Nikon's. I know what your saying about the Omega and stuff and knew it all along. But they did say it would work better with a 150 grain charge due to the little bit of extra velocity that you can get although you cannot have a long enough barrel to burn all 150 grains. I tend to stay away from the magnum due to the little impact of it but it does have some.

[7magfan]

It truly depends on the amount of money you want to spend. I have a Pro-Hunter topped off with a 1.75 x 4 Bushnell Trophy and it works great out to 200 yds. I have not used the Nikon BDC but I did look at one at the KTP on a gun and was turned off immediately with the fit and field of view..But that's just me. Picking out a scope is like picking out a rifle, don't necessarily buy on brand buy on fit. Go to a shop and pull them up and look at 'em. From there you will know what will be the best choice for you.  Just don't get sucked into the hype that you need a 3 x 9 power on any muzzleloader or 200-250 yd gun. 7-9 Power is overkill. Good luck

[kyelkhunter3006]

I like scopes that are 1.5-4x, 1.5-5x, 1.5-4.5x, etc, or a fixed 4x for most of my deer/big game hunting.  In the field, I've had lots of opportunities to make quick shots using the low range of scopes, where the wider field of view was an asset.  I have not taken any shot at a deer that could not have been made with a 4x scope, whether it was a muzzleloader or a centerfire rifle.  So many times, I've been with a guy who cranked his scope up to 12x or 14x to shoot at 150 yds, takes the shot, and with the smaller field of view, can't follow the animal if it doesn't drop.  Then they turn and say, "where'd it go"?  With a lower magnification and a better field of view, they would have been able to follow the deer and know what happened.  What would they have done if there wasn't someone else there to see which way the deer went?  Just assumed that they missed?  Who knows?

I am the first to admit that a higher magnification will let you me more precise and shoot tighter groups at the range.  Tight groups at the range with a 15x scope don't put meat in the freezer any better than average groups with a 4x scope at ranges under 200 yds.  If an Army sniper can take and make an 800 yd shot with a 10x scope, then a 200 yd shot with a 4x scope  should be no problem at all.  And it usually isn't.

If I were you, I'd go to the Natchez Shooters Supply website and get a Weaver Classic Shotgun 4x scope for $78.  It's been discontinued, and used to retail in the $150-$175 range.  It's a hell of a deal for a good scope.  It's small, light, decent eye relief and field of view, fully multicoated lenses, with a lifetime warranty.  Designed for slug guns, it will take any pounding you can dish out.  As a matter of fact, I'm going to buy three or four of them to use and just have around.

[30-06man]

I have no scopes bigger than a 3-9 and they all stay on 3 or 4. I took a 220yard shot on 4power one time and put the cross hairs right on the doe and she fell in her tracks. Ohh yeah it was a .308 and it was sighted in dead on at 100. I agree with what kyelkhunter3006 said. Look into a Nikon buckmasters 4x40.

[Varmint Hunter]

I have no problem with a 2-7 or 3-9 power scope even on a muzzleloader. While I always leave the magnification set on the lowest power white hunting, I always have it set on the highest power while working up loads (or just shooting) at the range. Quite frankly, I probably shoot 100 rounds at the range for every round that I fire at game. This is the reason that I am a strong proponent of variable power scopes and prefer a 9X at the upper end for rifles that are always set @ 2x or 3x when hunting. I shoot my rifles alot, but most of that shooting is done at the rifle range.

I bought an Nikon Omega 3-9x for my ProHunter ML. The only thing that I really didn't like about the BDC reticle is the stupid little circles that Nikon used instead of the regular hash marks. Hash marks would have been much better IMO. We'll see how they work out soon.