Scopes for 2021 WA Muzzleloader season?

[Tenkara]

1x scope is not going to increase effectiveness an easy 3 times.

[JimmyHoffa]

1x scope is not going to increase effectiveness an easy 3 times.

Maybe not for range, but depending on brightness and field of view, I could see how it could really boost effectiveness in heavy brush or low light conditions.
Muzzleloader hunters will have to get used to the idea of wearing orange.

[Cougartail]

1x scope is not going to increase effectiveness an easy 3 times.

Muzzleloader hunters will have to get used to the idea of wearing orange.

With the new wildlife commission we will be wearing pink with rainbow hats.

[Sabotloader]

This little experiment really doesn't mean much but...

So this morning I climb up and retrieved an old 1.5 variable scope that I had stored.  My intentions were to match/compare it to the normal peep and hooded fire sight that normally hunt with when looking at a target 50 yards away.

With my current sight setup, a Williams peep and fire sight front bead with hood.





Then I switched to the 1.5 scope to compare that view.  While the scope really did not appear to add any magnification to the door knob I was sighting on - it really did make everything look clearer and more crisp.

Plus one other advantage of the scope was the reticule it added a lot to the effectiveness of the scope. It has a ballistic reticule for ranges.  This particular scope could be a big advantage.

The next problem is even finding a fixed 1X scope on the market today.  I have done some searching and only finding variable 1x scopes.

[M_ray]

Like I said before I’m not advocating for it but it won’t bother me if they pass it. But where do you all get that this will “turn a muzzy into a rifle” or ”shoot three times farther???  

You guys realize the 1x is only going to let the shooter see the front sight on the end of the gun better? It’s not going to increase down range effectiveness. And if the shooter sees the front sight better you can still only shoot so far.

For those that think all of the sudden geezers and newbies are going to be able To shoot 300 yards You clearly haven’t shot a muzzleloader. At 200 yards with open sights  weather you can see the front sight or not it covers an entire deer and most all of the vitals of an elk! A 1x isn’t going to magnify the animal at that distance it’s only going to give the shooter a clear sight to try and line up. When the pin covers an entire vital or most of an animal it’s a difficult shot to make And why even younger guys that can see the sight don’t attempt shots beyond 120-130 and the majority won’t even shoot if it’s over 100.

When jacketed bullets were approved everyone cried the same tune ... “This will ruin the herds cause guys will now take 300 yard shots!!!”

Well people quickly realized that if the pin covers the animal And you can’t find the vitals you can’t shoot 300 yards.  Of coarse some proficient shooters will increase their range but in general terms 90% won’t be able to hit a paper plate at 300 and soon realize it isn’t going to magically turn them into a competition shooter.

Now tell ma again That it’s not like the fiber optic sight on a bow? I remember all the archers making that same plea and same argument when those against it accused them it would increase their range. You all said it will only make it easier to line up an ethical shot!!!

Now the muzzy guys want the same courtesy and you all cry NO!!!   

[M_ray]

Oh might I also add that all you young guys ARE going to get old Too, and $h!ts gonna get fuzzy for you When you try and line up an animal someday. 

[BULLBLASTER]

Like I said before I’m not advocating for it but it won’t bother me if they pass it. But where do you all get that this will “turn a muzzy into a rifle” or “shoot 3 times farther”
You guys realize the 1x is only going to let the shooter see the front sight on the end of the gun better? It’s not going to increase down range effectiveness. And if the shooter sees the front sight better you can still only shoot so far.

For those that think all of the sudden geezers and newbies are going to be able To shoot 300 yards You clearly haven’t shot a muzzleloader. At 200 yards with open sights  weather you can see the front sight or not it covers an entire deer and most all of the vitals of an elk! A 1x isn’t going to magnify the animal at that distance it’s only going to give the shooter a clear sight to try and line up. When the pin covers an entire vital or most of an animal it’s a difficult shot to make And why even younger guys that can see the sight don’t attempt shots beyond 120-130 and the majority won’t even shoot if it’s over 100.

When jacketed bullets were approved everyone cried the same tune ... “This will ruin the herds cause guys will now take 300 yard shots!!!”

Well people quickly realized that if the pin covers the animal And you can’t find the vitals you can’t shoot 300 yards.  Of coarse some proficient shooters will increase their range but in general terms 90% won’t be able to hit a paper plate at 300 and soon realize it isn’t going to magically turn them into a competition shooter.

Now tell ma again That it’s not like the fiber optic sight on a bow? I remember all the archers making that same plea and same argument when those against it accused them it would increase their range. You all said it will only make it easier to line up an ethical shot!!!

Now the muzzy guys want the same courtesy and you all cry NO!!!   

If you have a scope you dont need the front sight. The scope has a reticle. 

[M_ray]

Like I said before I’m not advocating for it but it won’t bother me if they pass it. But where do you all get that this will “turn a muzzy into a rifle” or “shoot 3 times farther”
You guys realize the 1x is only going to let the shooter see the front sight on the end of the gun better? It’s not going to increase down range effectiveness. And if the shooter sees the front sight better you can still only shoot so far.

For those that think all of the sudden geezers and newbies are going to be able To shoot 300 yards You clearly haven’t shot a muzzleloader. At 200 yards with open sights  weather you can see the front sight or not it covers an entire deer and most all of the vitals of an elk! A 1x isn’t going to magnify the animal at that distance it’s only going to give the shooter a clear sight to try and line up. When the pin covers an entire vital or most of an animal it’s a difficult shot to make And why even younger guys that can see the sight don’t attempt shots beyond 120-130 and the majority won’t even shoot if it’s over 100.

When jacketed bullets were approved everyone cried the same tune ... “This will ruin the herds cause guys will now take 300 yard shots!!!”

Well people quickly realized that if the pin covers the animal And you can’t find the vitals you can’t shoot 300 yards.  Of coarse some proficient shooters will increase their range but in general terms 90% won’t be able to hit a paper plate at 300 and soon realize it isn’t going to magically turn them into a competition shooter.

Now tell ma again That it’s not like the fiber optic sight on a bow? I remember all the archers making that same plea and same argument when those against it accused them it would increase their range. You all said it will only make it easier to line up an ethical shot!!!

Now the muzzy guys want the same courtesy and you all cry NO!!!   

If you have a scope you dont need the front sight. The scope has a reticle. 

Then clearly I have it wrong and confused with a halo type sight, I’ve never seen a 1x scope with a reticle my apologies ... I still don’t think a 1x reticle is going to do much of anything down at 300 yards 

[M_ray]

Bullblaster I see your point now, but I’ll say I would probably be more in favor of the type I was thinking of like a shotgun halo to view the sight better than anything that will increase the down range capabilities. Sorry for my rant I didn’t even know a 1x fixed reticle even existed so my brain went straight to a 1x halo or shotgun type sight window.

If they want a reticle why don’t they increase an opportunity for a dedicated season? Maybe for seniors???  Maybe that’s the way to go about This instead of fighting and dividing between user groups 

[BULLBLASTER]

Like I said before I’m not advocating for it but it won’t bother me if they pass it. But where do you all get that this will “turn a muzzy into a rifle” or “shoot 3 times farther”
You guys realize the 1x is only going to let the shooter see the front sight on the end of the gun better? It’s not going to increase down range effectiveness. And if the shooter sees the front sight better you can still only shoot so far.

For those that think all of the sudden geezers and newbies are going to be able To shoot 300 yards You clearly haven’t shot a muzzleloader. At 200 yards with open sights  weather you can see the front sight or not it covers an entire deer and most all of the vitals of an elk! A 1x isn’t going to magnify the animal at that distance it’s only going to give the shooter a clear sight to try and line up. When the pin covers an entire vital or most of an animal it’s a difficult shot to make And why even younger guys that can see the sight don’t attempt shots beyond 120-130 and the majority won’t even shoot if it’s over 100.

When jacketed bullets were approved everyone cried the same tune ... “This will ruin the herds cause guys will now take 300 yard shots!!!”

Well people quickly realized that if the pin covers the animal And you can’t find the vitals you can’t shoot 300 yards.  Of coarse some proficient shooters will increase their range but in general terms 90% won’t be able to hit a paper plate at 300 and soon realize it isn’t going to magically turn them into a competition shooter.

Now tell ma again That it’s not like the fiber optic sight on a bow? I remember all the archers making that same plea and same argument when those against it accused them it would increase their range. You all said it will only make it easier to line up an ethical shot!!!

Now the muzzy guys want the same courtesy and you all cry NO!!!   

If you have a scope you dont need the front sight. The scope has a reticle. 

Then clearly I have it wrong and confused with a halo type sight, I’ve never seen a 1x scope with a reticle my apologies ... I still don’t think a 1x reticle is going to do much of anything down at 300 yards 

the vortex crossfire 1x scope (i believe it is dicontinued now) had a 2.5 moa crosshair, that is a much finer aiming point than a .070 fiber otpic front sight. A 2.5 moa crosshair would cover 8 inches or less at 300 yards. Again much easier to aim that at a deer shoulder versus a .070 fiber optic. Not to mention aleviating the near/far focus issue. All it would take is learning the scope adjustments to hit at 300 yards from the 100 yard zero. Not difficult at all. 

[BULLBLASTER]

Bullblaster I see your point now, but I’ll say I would probably be more in favor of the type I was thinking of like a shotgun halo to view the sight better than anything that will increase the down range capabilities. Sorry for my rant I didn’t even know a 1x fixed reticle even existed so my brain went straight to a 1x halo or shotgun type sight window.

If they want a reticle why don’t they increase an opportunity for a dedicated season? Maybe for seniors???  Maybe that’s the way to go about This instead of fighting and dividing between user groups 

We posted at the same time. I honestly think the major differences at this point and the limitation with muzzys is the sighting system, take that restriction away and it is much closer to a rifles capabilitys. 

I admittedly dont know anything about halo sights.

[M_ray]

Bullblaster I see your point now, but I’ll say I would probably be more in favor of the type I was thinking of like a shotgun halo to view the sight better than anything that will increase the down range capabilities. Sorry for my rant I didn’t even know a 1x fixed reticle even existed so my brain went straight to a 1x halo or shotgun type sight window.

If they want a reticle why don’t they increase an opportunity for a dedicated season? Maybe for seniors???  Maybe that’s the way to go about This instead of fighting and dividing between user groups 

We posted at the same time. I honestly think the major differences at this point and the limitation with muzzys is the sighting system, take that restriction away and it is much closer to a rifles capabilitys. 

I admittedly dont know anything about halo sights.

Gotcha  sorry I’m on page now, I’m really not in total favor of increasing it to be like a rifle. But I can say it sucks getting old and loosing your close up vision. I get tested at work all the time and still have 20-15 distance vision but need readers for anything close up. Maybe the compromise here would be something like I was thinking it was??? That way the old guys can see the front sight again and NOT have a thin reticle that would increase down range effectiveness... what are your thoughts on that?

[BULLBLASTER]

Bullblaster I see your point now, but I’ll say I would probably be more in favor of the type I was thinking of like a shotgun halo to view the sight better than anything that will increase the down range capabilities. Sorry for my rant I didn’t even know a 1x fixed reticle even existed so my brain went straight to a 1x halo or shotgun type sight window.

If they want a reticle why don’t they increase an opportunity for a dedicated season? Maybe for seniors???  Maybe that’s the way to go about This instead of fighting and dividing between user groups 

We posted at the same time. I honestly think the major differences at this point and the limitation with muzzys is the sighting system, take that restriction away and it is much closer to a rifles capabilitys. 

I admittedly dont know anything about halo sights.

Gotcha  sorry I’m on page now, I’m really not in total favor of increasing it to be like a rifle. But I can say it sucks getting old and loosing your close up vision. I get tested at work all the time and still have 20-15 distance vision but need readers for anything close up. Maybe the compromise here would be something like I was thinking it was??? That way the old guys can see the front sight again and NOT have a thin reticle that would increase down range effectiveness... what are your thoughts on that?

Very similar to a verfier lens in an archery peepi think. It helps with the focus on the sight pin and target at the same time. I believe that is on the docket right now as well. I personally dont see any issue with that. It still keeps the open sights.

[M_ray]

Bullblaster I see your point now, but I’ll say I would probably be more in favor of the type I was thinking of like a shotgun halo to view the sight better than anything that will increase the down range capabilities. Sorry for my rant I didn’t even know a 1x fixed reticle even existed so my brain went straight to a 1x halo or shotgun type sight window.

If they want a reticle why don’t they increase an opportunity for a dedicated season? Maybe for seniors???  Maybe that’s the way to go about This instead of fighting and dividing between user groups 

We posted at the same time. I honestly think the major differences at this point and the limitation with muzzys is the sighting system, take that restriction away and it is much closer to a rifles capabilitys. 

I admittedly dont know anything about halo sights.

Gotcha  sorry I’m on page now, I’m really not in total favor of increasing it to be like a rifle. But I can say it sucks getting old and loosing your close up vision. I get tested at work all the time and still have 20-15 distance vision but need readers for anything close up. Maybe the compromise here would be something like I was thinking it was??? That way the old guys can see the front sight again and NOT have a thin reticle that would increase down range effectiveness... what are your thoughts on that?

Very similar to a verfier lens in an archery peepi think. It helps with the focus on the sight pin and target at the same time. I believe that is on the docket right now as well. I personally dont see any issue with that. It still keeps the open sights.

 

Well since that was my thinking in the first place I’d support that type to keep the open sights in place but extend a little help to see them!

[LDennis24]

Why not just use these?