This post has not been an easy one to write for a few reasons:
1. The number of options available
2. Price range
3. Not wanting my readers to feel they may have made a bad selection
The reason for the last one is only because some of the rifle optic manufactures have made some options look a little more appealing than they actually are (imagine that).
Rifle scopes can make or break a hunt quickly! This is not the place to cut corners! But it’s also not an item we all need to go broke over either. As far as price range goes, only you know how much you can afford. I have always been the kind of person that tried to make it hurt when buying rifle scopes; I believe in quality optics.
The market has a lot of options for under $200.00 but I truly don’t believe you’re getting more than a tube that magnifies a target and has crosshairs; that’s about it. Most of the companies that offer a scope in this price range will give you a lifetime warranty on their products. But how satisfying is that guarantee when you’ve been sitting in the same stand hunting a particular buck all season and on the last day he walks out and you can’t find him in the scope? Truthfully, I’m not the one to review this type of scope - I’ve just never trusted them to one of my hunts. So moving on…
Now today’s market
does offer a lot of good options in the $250 to $300 range. Some of the brands I really like for both quality and trustability are (in alphabetical order):
Burris,
Hawke,
Konus,
Leatherwood, and
Nikon. If you can go above $350 to around $600, then add
Leupold to the list. Leupold does have some lower priced options, but the one I really like is around $500 - $550. However, the others I listed are very serviceable scopes and should be considered – I would trust them to any hunt in North America.
Before going any further, you have to know a little something about the scopes I’ve chosen to write about. First, all are of one piece tube construction. All are also known as second focal plane scopes vs scopes on the first focal plane. Second focal scopes seem to be what the American market has accepted. The difference between the two is easy to recognize: the retical in the second focal plane scopes stays the same size when the power is changed and only the target changes. Scopes in the first focal plane design show the reticule growing in size with the target as the power is changed. Almost all scopes offered to American hunters are 2nd focal plane scopes.

The second focal plane design has a lot to do with the type of reticule we choose, but usually only when choosing BDC-type reticles. As far as what the reticule actually looks like is up to you, and what is available in the model of scope you’re looking at buying.
I’ve always just opted for the good ol’ duplex, thick to thin. For hunting and getting on game, sometimes quickly, I just don’t prefer a lot going on or too much to look at in my scopes. I really don’t care for the circle-type reticles in scopes such as the
Nikon Omega. They do not provide a precise aiming point for zeroing and practicing with the rifle and cover up a lot of the vital area on big game. As far as Mil Dot reticles, I don’t find much use for them in hunting scopes, especially with the affordability of modern-day rangefinders.
All of this brings me to what I had asked you to research in my last post about what it was that all the manufacturers I had picked had in common. Well, the answer is: They all have True Point-of-Aim, Point-of-Impact capability. That’s right, as fast as you can read a range finder, you can adjust your scope as to where your bullet will impact the target at the same place your crosshairs have come to rest. The problem that most hunters have with the scopes needed to make this happen is that the turrets are too tall. In most cases I would agree that they are tall, but they come with true point-of-aim, point-of-impact results and to me are worth the extra height. The most compact version I’ve found in this type of scope is Leupold’s VX-3 CDS scope. Once you have the turrets on this scope engraved to your ballistics, it’s as simple as this:
1. Range the target
2. Turn the turret to the appropriate range
(example: if the target is 250 yards, turn the turrent from 0 to 2.5)
3. Aim & Fire
That is it.

The other scopes, Burris, Hawke, Konus & Leatherwood, also have this simple of a solution to the bullet drop problem inherent to muzzleloaders, just in a little taller package. I tested all of the above scopes to date, with the exception of Hawke, and that is on the way. I will have a future post as to how to get each of the others to do the same as Leupolds and just as easy at a later time. My instructions will be easy to understand.
Another option we have, and I’ve used for years, is simply good ol’ Kentucky windage or hold-over. Nothing special, just know what your bullet drop is out to any given range, know the range, lift the crosshairs up “bout” that much and fire. This is my second most favorite pick or option.
My last pick, if you haven’t noticed by now, is the second focal plane BDC reticule-type scopes. Here’s the reason (and I’ll give you the links to check behind me): First of all, keep in mind that the main crosshair will maintain the same impact no matter what the power of the scope is set on. i.e.; if your rifle is zeroed at 100 yards it will be good at any power setting within the scopes’ magnification range. Other than that main crosshair, the yardage hashmarks for the different ranges are only valid if the scopes are set on a specific power. Most are set-up to only work with your ballistics with the scope set on maximum power. Some of Leupolds’ scopes, such as the
Ultimate Slam, do have different power ranges that fall within different ballistics ranges, but again, the bullet drop compensation (BDC) values are only valid at that power. If you read the links on Burris and Leopold web sites, they will tell you this. To get an idea as to how much lowering the power changes the bullet impact, go to
Nikon Hunting Spot On. Spot On is an easy ballistic program to use and it allows you to see how much changing the power effects your impact (and it’s FREE!). Here’s an example according to Spot On:
1. Scope 3x9x40 Omega BDC 250
2. 250 gr. Shockwave at 1850 fps
3. Zero at 100 yards
4. First circle under main crosshair on 9x is 135 yards
5. Change the power to 3x, first circle zero is now 193 yards

Another point about these scopes is that they are designed to use 150 grains of pellets. The best accuracy from any manufacturers’ rifle is NEVER at it’s best with pellets, much less 150 grains!
The BDC reticle and concept sounds good and has been around a long time, but the truth be known: it wasn’t excepted back then and if you do your homework, you should make sure it’s what you really want now. Not to beat a dead horse, but there are just too many lines in those scopes. With the right deer walking out, you could get confused about which hash-mark to use real quick on maximum power unless you practice a lot.
Tube diameter is another option we need to look at. I prefer a 30 mm tube scope for three reasons:
1. It is more durable because it’s a bigger diameter,
2. They have a few more clicks of elevation or windage in them if needed,
3. I just believe the bigger tube lets more light get from the lens to eye.
But still, most of my scopes are 1 inch tubes.
Here is my normal speech about objective diameter since 50mm objective lens started getting popular: In most cases, you have to use higher mounts. The higher the mounts, the higher you have to lift your cheek off the stock. This destroys what is known in marksmanship skill terms as “stock weld”. The better the stockweld, the better control you have over the rifle. Also, with a 50 mm scope, people say that because it is larger it gathers more light. Well, the truth is a lens only transmits light, it does not gather it. In my opinion, it’s just not worth the trade-off. You will also hear that you get a better field-of-view from a 50mm. Again, not true. You actually get a few feet less. Here’s an example:
1. Burris FullField II 3x9x40mm – 1 inch tube, 33 ft on 3x and 13 ft on 9x at 100 yards
2. Burris FullField II 3x9x50mm – 30 ft on 3x and 11 ft on 9x at 100 yards
One option we’ve had for a long time that has always been a great one is the variable power scope. By far the most popular is the good ol’ 3x9 and on a muzzleloader, I believe it’s all we need. Or if you’re only hunting close cover, a good 2x7 power scope will serve you well and I own a few of these myself.
Remember a few things when picking a muzzleloader scope:
1. the range of a modern front-loader
2. the higher the power, the less field of view you have
3. we use a scope to shoot game, it’s not made to replace a pair of binoculars or a spotting scope
I hope this information can help you use your scope bucks wisely. We’ve done a lot of research on scopes, I’ve bought and used more scopes than I can count. I would urge all of you to take a look at all your options that will allow you to shoot Point-of-Aim, Point-of-Impact. I truly believe it’s the most simple and effective option of all.
I will have future posts on each of the scopes we’ve tested that will help you accomplish Point-of-Aim, Point-of-Impact as I get a chance to write them and
I will continue this Saving Your Buck$ series with future posts covering loads, bullets, powders and primers to help you achieve MAXimum accuracy from your modern, in-line muzzleloader.