Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

Sako Vixen .222 coming. What scope?

5K views 41 replies 14 participants last post by  TEDDY BEAR RAT 
#1 ·
I have just purchased a Sako Vixen.222 primarily for fun target shooting on my farm range. What scope(s) would you recommend? I have a pair of Sako 1” original rings, medium height.
Thanks for any thoughts or recommendations.

Best,

Jim
 
#3 · (Edited)
I have a heavy barreled Sako L461 in .222, which was set up as a target shooting rifle by the former owner. They are such nicely designed rifles. It wears a Weaver T36 and looks like this:



I really only shoot it at 100 and 200 yards from a bench. 36x is a comfortable level of magnification at those distances, and does not require use of a separate spotting scope to see holes in the target. The .222 is a great caliber for those distances, and the Vixen is a classic design. Congrats on your find! Hope yours is an accurate shooter. I was happy with mine from the first day at the range.









Note: load and seating length data is specific to my rifle and may not work or may be dangerous in any other.
 
#5 ·
I have a heavy barreled Sako L461 in .222, which was set up as a target shooting rifle by the former owner. They are such nicely designed rifles. It wears a Weaver T36 and looks like this:

That's actually a vintage Lyman All American on that Sako, not a Weaver. The Lyman is another good choice for the 222.
 
#8 · (Edited)
With the huge leaps in optics technology, I'm not really into vintage scopes with clearly inferior adjustments and less-than stellar views, no matter how "right" they might look, so I'll leave the vintage recommendations to others. I also do not really favor massive scopes mounted on petite rifles; I'm less repulsed by the big glass on obviously target-style rifles with heavy barrels. Also, FWIW, I often use various 36x scopes for load testing and development, but I have found them very restrictive and limiting when shooting in the field. On the other hand, you only mentioned target shooting.

I will say that I just mounted a Leupold VXi 4.5-14x on my recently acquired Sako L-46 sporter (.222), and the medium Sako rings (they happened to also be offset) allowed almost perfect scope clearance...but it is an L-46 sporter with a light contour barrel; no promises on a Vixen with an unspecified barrel diameter. The 4.5-14x is as light and compact as most 3-9xs but offers relatively high magnification without compromising balance and handling, especially after I boosted it to 6-20x using a 4x booster.

Your call on the direction you go: keep with vintage look; or keep with size and balance.

Please post pics.

TBR
 
#10 ·
JamesHP sir I would suggest a Weaver Grand Slam 4-16x scope its short and has really nice glass in them...if you could find a 800656 which is the Varmint EBX reticle model I think that would be a great all a round magnification scope for Varminting and plinking optics. The scope at 4x gives a wide field of view and allows you to do offhand shooting and 16x when you want/need more power when you want the up close and personal touch on game or paper.

I have the GS 4-16x on my CZ 452s, 455s and 527 rifles. They are hard to find now...it will be like the needle in the hay stack...but it would be worth it. Being only 11.5" long they are a nice short powerful scope for your rifle with side focus that adjust down to 25 yards.

Good luck on your quest :bthumb:

Signalman :mad::):D
 
#11 · (Edited)
Thanks for all the recommendations. Love the pics! Beautiful!!
I am also an amateur astronomer and am quite aware of the advances in optics. If not for the advanced in lenses my eyeglasses would look like coke bottoms!!

So, I like the original rings I have but would be more interested in a modern optic. Leupold, Swarovski, Weaver are all worthy suggestions. Is it ok to spend as much on the scope as the rifle?

Jim
 
#16 · (Edited)
I understand exactly what you mean when you talk about middle-aged eyes (I’m 69) and whether or not they can appreciate the difference between a good lens and an excellent lens. As a pathologist, I have made my living looking through microscopes for over 40 years and, as an amateur astronomer I have been looking through telescopes and various eyepieces for over 50 years. Throw in some time spent with my Nikon and various lenses I have come to some conclusions on what I want in an optic. I want a flat field of view which is in focus from one side to the other. Little to no field curvature. I want true colors and no color fringing of objects, particularly bright objects. The image needs to be sharp with fine detail easily and clearly seen.
Now, is all that really needed to shoot my 22 LR at targets 50 yards away? Is all that really needed to go squirrel hunting wanting to shoot head shots? No, of course not. When hunting or shooting targets you only need the center of the field of view in focus and color fringing is not likely to cause any problems with aiming unless the color fringing is overpowering.
Given the huge strides with low dispersion glass in the optics industry, more and more high-quality optics are available at lower cost than ever. I prefer to stay away from Chinese products but that is just me.
Having bored you and talked your ears off I can say I do not require the absolute best / highest priced optics but, I am willing to pay to get what I want. The only question is what do I have to pay to get to where I want to be?

Best,

Jim
 
#19 ·
I understand exactly what you mean when you talk about middle-aged eyes print sees I'm 69 Britton seas and whether or not they can appreciate the difference between a good lens and an excellent lens. As a pathologist, I have made my living looking through microscope's for over 40 years and, as an amateur astronomer I have been looking through telescopes and various eyepieces for over 50 years. Throw in some time spent with my Nikon and various lenses I have come to some conclusions on what I want in an optic. I want a flat field of view which is in focus from one side to the other. Little to no field curvature. I want true colors and no color fringing of objects, particularly bright objects. The image needs to be sharp with fine detail easily and clearly seen.
Now, is all that really needed to shoot my 22 LR at targets 50 yards away? Is all that really needed to go squirrel hunting wanting to shoot head shots? No, of course not. When hunting or shooting targets you only need the center of the field of view in focus and color fringing is not likely to cause any problems with aiming unless the color fringing is overpowering.
Given the huge strides with low dispersion glass in the optics industry, more and more high-quality optics are available at lower cost than ever. I prefer to stay away from Chinese products but that is just me.
Having bored you and talked your ears off I can say I do not require the absolute best / highest priced optics but, I am willing to pay to get what I want. The only question is what do I have to pay to get to where I want to be?

Best,

Jim
Jim sir it sounds like you on the right track...the only thing I can suggest is for you to pick out what works for you...there are a lot of different brands of scopes out there and when looking for another one.

For me the most important thing is the reticle...I have had ones that were so thick that it could only be used for elephant hunting (not really) but better for big game and others so thin that they would disappear in certain back grounds. so my first choice is to find a reticle that works for you and not one you have to make work.

second is magnification depending on what your shooting and how far away and what size game/target you want to shoot and how your shooting freehand or off a rest or bench....but from what you have said so far I think a 3-12 or 4-16x would serve you best. Starting with a scope at 6x is too much for off hand quick shot at close range. The only other item is I don't buy scopes these day without either a Side Focus or an Adjustable Objective.

I would suggest you take a look at a Weaver Grand Slam 3-12x scope that Natchez has on sale its pretty short and small in size and has pretty good glass in it. Checkout "join the Grand Slam club" thread to see what others say about this scope. if it works for you great and if you already have another brand you like better then go for it just choose wisely.

Good luck on your quest :bthumb:

Signalman :mad::):D
 
#17 ·
Very thoughtful and useful conversation. Here are a few pics of my L-46:




There are three obvious conclusions that we can draw from these photos. 1) IF your barrel is similar in contour to this rifle, and the Vixen receiver is about as tall as the L-46 (I believe it is), you can't really use a scope with an objective much larger than 40mm and still use your medium Sako rings. If they are vintage Sako rings, they are little jewels of precise machining and perfect polish and finish, so I do recommend them. 2) Most current scopes are now matte finish. I don't have much aversion to matte-on-gloss, but I know some do. 3) You will be limited to a one-inch tube, but I personally think the 30mm tubes look overly large...but that's just me. So, only you can decide.

Twenty to 30 years ago, Leupold lenses provided the flattest image of any variable scope around, but the lens coatings lagged behind the European counterparts. That has changed, and all top-end brands feature the flatness of field and state-of-the-art multicoatings, although some eyes prefer certain coatings over others -- the greenish tints of Japanese lenses do not look as good to my eyes as the rose-tint of most European lenses. Where Leupold still holds an advantage is in weight. The Leupold scope will usually be lighter than its competitor in equal size and magnification scopes. This is not just a matter of overall field-ready rifle weight. Less mass in optics usually equates to more durability, since inertia can play less of a role in tearing things apart.

I am (was) also an amateur astronomy nut and a gunsmith and have followed this pretty closely.

Let us know what you decide.

TBR
 
#18 ·
Here is the rifle. Should arrive on Tuesday.
I agree with you. 1” tube. 40mm +/- lens.
 

Attachments

#23 ·
Sweet! Just such classic lines. Signalman (above) has been the RFC master at fitting Weaver optics on CZ rifles with adjustable tangent iron sight ramps. The short Weaver scope he mentioned would be worth looking at, if you could get your hands on one. The triggers on these are nice too. I think you are really going to enjoy it!
 
#24 · (Edited)
I will have the rifle on Tuesday and will take it to my farm next weekend where I can try one of my other scopes to see what will fit. I have a Swarovski Z5 3.5-18 X 44 BT that I will be interested in trying.
The rifle comes with weaver scope bases which I was going to remove to be able to use the Sako medium rings and bases but we’ll just have to see.
 
#25 ·
:eek:man:

Heres mine.....'68 w/ Boefer BBl.

Not a safe queen ...just a handsome varmint rig
Its got a bed job and makes one hole groups at 100 yds.:bthumb:

I have Bausch & Lomb Elite 4000 6-24 with Burris bases and inserted rings

Works for me.

... in the field or on the bench, wonderful scopes:t





Maranatha-
pipestone
 
#27 · (Edited)
James HP, just a little clarification, please. Your original post stated the rifle is to be used on your farm for fun target shooting. What is the max shooting distance you will likely be shooting? Is your target shooting to be done from a bench, improvised rest, prone, off hand, or likely a combination of all of them? Are you wanting to try to shoot very small groups on paper targets BR style, clay pigeon/soda bottle size targets at known ranges, recreational targets at varying unknown distances, occasional varmint/pest control, or some combination of all of them? The Sako rifle and .222 cartridge should make for an exceptionally accurate combination...we just need to determine the best scope recommendation to give you the most enjoyment for the intended use you have in mind. All of the above suggestions will work, but some will excel at a specific task, but won't be ideal at others. Small group shooting, especially past 100 yards will require higher magnification to really explore the fine intrinsic accuracy of the .222...the better you can see very small targets, the better your on target results will be. Stalking around a pasture/tree line looking for groundhogs or similar with shooting sticks or improvised rest, less scope power for a wider field of view and faster acquisition/shooting. Standing off hand shooting at soda bottles, even less magnification, to minimize the unstable sight picture that comes from unsupported shooting. There are quite a few modern scopes that are reasonably compact but give very wide magnification range, many in one inch tube models., with 40 to 44mm objective lenses. The best all around compromise situation would seem to be a scope with near 20x on the high end and around 5 to 6x on the low. You will want a scope with side focus or forward adjustable objective that also can focus down to under 50 yards. Myriad of choices....good luck and please post pictures of your final choice....just trying to point you towards the best tool for your specific needs.
 
#30 ·
To answer your questions as best as I can. I will be primarily shooting off a bench rest (DOA) which is in a small open building in a field with a range of about 300 yards. Primarily interested in punching paper at 100 yards initially looking for the tightest groups.
Just FYI I put two coats of Smith’s Original Deep Penetrating Epoxy to protect the plywood tabletop from rain.

I decided to buy another Swarovski 3.5-18 x 44 BT rifle scope. I recognize the need for magnification and believe the 18x should work.

Jim
 
#31 ·
Sounds like an excellent, all around choice and won't look ungainly on your rifle. When you discover just now accurate the .222 can be, you may step up to a dedicated high power target scope in the 24, 32, or even higher magnification range. No need for a spotting scope and you can hold on a single bullet hole in the target at 100 yards easily. 8x32 Bushnell Elite 4000, accurized Savage 12 .223 with tailored handloads 3 shots @ 200 yards click here
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top