Too much scope?

[Sumaru]

Hey Henry fam...just mounted a Vortex 3-9x 50 with Henry's base/rings assembly on my AW Big Boy. Nice optic, very clear sight picture, but clearances are minimal and hammer is somewhat obstructed- and I'm not convinced the eye relief is optimal given the positioning constraints. 50mm seems possibly overly large for this gun, although I appreciate its superior light gathering and FOV compared to lesser objective lens' diameters. Did I buy too much scope for this gun? What are you all running with yours?

[Mags]

I have a Leopold V3xi 3.5-10x40 on my Long Ranger. It seems about right.
I also have a Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6x24 on my .30-30. It's not quit enough.

[Sir Henry]

I would be more concerned with the power which in your case is 3-9. That seems about right. The large 50 mm objective just gives you more light and field. I think the scope is about right if the eye relief is okay.

[BrokenolMarine]

You can get an extension for the hammer that sticks out to one side our the other to allow easier thumb cocking or decocking as needed. It's a common problem with a simple solution.

From the Henry parts page:


https://henrypride.com/collections/rifl ... bidextrous

[Rifletom]

I have a Weaver Classic 1-3x20mm on .357 and a Leupold 2-7x33mm on the .45 Colt. Both Henry's. Good with clearance, eye relief is fine on both.
The Leupold is a shotgun scope; very slim package. Works.

[markiver54]

I have a Weaver Classic 1-3x20mm on .357 and a Leupold 2-7x33mm on the .45 Colt. Both Henry's. Good with clearance, eye relief is fine on both.
The Leupold is a shotgun scope; very slim package. Works.

I have the same Weaver on my BBS 357, with the hammer extension. I like the setup given the limited distance the 357 is capable of.

20181201_111131.jpg (91.61 KiB) Viewed 6267 times

[Rifletom]

Mark, while I'm not looking, but, if I happen on another of those Weaver Classis 1-3[Japan], I may grab it. For a lever gun, they are hard to beat.

[JEBar]

we use 3 - 9 X 50 Nikon scopes on all of our Henry rifles .... the recommendation to get a hammer extension is a good one .... they negate working the hammer issues

[markiver54]

Mark, while I'm not looking, but, if I happen on another of those Weaver Classis 1-3[Japan], I may grab it. For a lever gun, they are hard to beat.

Nice little scopes for sure. Maybe hard to find though. I think I learned here on the forum that Weaver was not making scopes any more.

[Mags]

... I think I learned here on the forum that Weaver was not making scopes any more.

Weaver still makes scopes (through Natchez). Nikon quit.
https://www.outdoorlife.com/story/gear/ ... flescopes/
https://riflescope-review.com/weaver-op ... s-sort-of/

[markiver54]

Thanks Mags, It was Nikon I was thinking of. Memory was a bit off.

[Sumaru]

I have a Weaver Classic 1-3x20mm on .357 and a Leupold 2-7x33mm on the .45 Colt. Both Henry's. Good with clearance, eye relief is fine on both.
The Leupold is a shotgun scope; very slim package. Works.

I have the same Weaver on my BBS 357, with the hammer extension. I like the setup given the limited distance the 357 is capable of.

20181201_111131.jpg

I think the hammer extension is a great idea. Just cycling the empty action a few times to check the ergonomics with the mounted scope, there was a slip or two letting the hammer down. Not good! And that was without the adrenaline dump. Opted for the ambidextrous extension; maybe I'm overthinking things, but went that route thinking the gun would wear evenly with equal weight coming down on each side of the hammer.

[Sir Henry]

I have a Weaver Classic 1-3x20mm on .357 and a Leupold 2-7x33mm on the .45 Colt. Both Henry's. Good with clearance, eye relief is fine on both.
The Leupold is a shotgun scope; very slim package. Works.

I have the same Weaver on my BBS 357, with the hammer extension. I like the setup given the limited distance the 357 is capable of.

20181201_111131.jpg

I think the hammer extension is a great idea. Just cycling the empty action a few times to check the ergonomics with the mounted scope, there was a slip or two letting the hammer down. Not good! And that was without the adrenaline dump. Opted for the ambidextrous extension; maybe I'm overthinking things, but went that route thinking the gun would wear evenly with equal weight coming down on each side of the hammer.

I shoot both left and right so having it extend on both sides would work better for me.

[Luv the lever]

50mm seems large and and optics will require hammer extension install.

[JEBar]

way back in time (AKA - my younger days) the rule of thumb we followed for selecting the magnification power of a scope was 1 power per every 10 yards you anticipated shooting .... for us, our Henry 357 and 44 Mags are 100 yard guns .... so good 3 X 9 scopes works well

[markiver54]

way back in time (AKA - my younger days) the rule of thumb we followed for selecting the magnification power of a scope was 1 power per every 10 yards you anticipated shooting .... for us, our Henry 357 and 44 Mags are 100 yard guns .... so good 3 X 9 scopes works well

That makes a whole lotta sense to me.

[Sumaru]

50mm seems large and and optics will require hammer extension install.

After mounting it, I have to agree, it seems too large. Is there any appreciable difference between 40 & 50mm where light gathering and field of view is concerned?

[Sumaru]

way back in time (AKA - my younger days) the rule of thumb we followed for selecting the magnification power of a scope was 1 power per every 10 yards you anticipated shooting .... for us, our Henry 357 and 44 Mags are 100 yard guns .... so good 3 X 9 scopes works well

That's what I'm running, a 3-9. Any take on the 50mm vs 40mm objective? Is 50mm overkill?

[Mags]

... Any take on the 50mm vs 40mm objective? Is 50mm overkill?

50 a little better for pre-dawn, dusk, and shooting into shadowed areas.

[North Country Gal]

way back in time (AKA - my younger days) the rule of thumb we followed for selecting the magnification power of a scope was 1 power per every 10 yards you anticipated shooting .... for us, our Henry 357 and 44 Mags are 100 yard guns .... so good 3 X 9 scopes works well

That's what I'm running, a 3-9. Any take on the 50mm vs 40mm objective? Is 50mm overkill?

Sumaro, as a gal who made a living selling optical equipment - binoculars, telescopes, microscopes, spotting scopes and riflescopes - my advice is to not overplay the importance of objective (front lens) diameter for the purposes of image brightness. Yes, it is an important part of image brightness, but it is not the only factor, not by a long shot. You can't just take one feature and assume all scopes are the same. It's just not that easy when comparing different scopes. Other factors are very important. I don't want to start a mini course on optics, but assuming the same 6x magnification, a 40mm lens with high grade lenses and top of the line lens coatings can appear every bit as bright in low light as a cheap 50mm scope at 6x with cheap lenses and coatings. And that's just the beginning of the conversation.

Okay, if the science of optics is not your thing, I also used to hunt back in the day, early morning, late evening. I can't think of a single low light situation where a quality 40mm scope was not bright enough to make a legal/ethical shot. Emphasis is on quality, here. Never underestimate the importance of optical quality.

PS. I never had a customer who ever came back and complained that I sold them too good a quality optic.