Printable View
$400 secondhand will get you a much better scope than the same amount new, and several scope makers have transferable lifetime warantys so its really hard to justify buying those new.
What sort of mag range are you after? I seem to be ending up with a draw full of scopes as I sell off rifles and spend the $ on upgrading the optics on what remains
Many many years ago, a good friend of mine told me never to buy cheap optics's, buy the absolute best you can afford, and then some. So I bought a brand new Tikka 22.250 and a Weaver scope. Have never had the expendable income to buy top of the line, but I spent as much as I could possibly could. I now have 12 Weavers [I think], never regretted it, but the initial purchase did cause some heartache at times. His second piece of advice was to buy Kahles, every time. Thats all good and well for a guy on $70k in the 90's, with a wife earning much more. So I started to buy the odd Kahles and now have a few of them. Buy once, cry once has been quoted on here many times, but it holds true. Pick a scope that is possibly beyond your budget, look through a few and buy wisely. A cheap rifle can be made to shoot, but a cheap scope cant be made any clearer at 300 or 400 than what it is. It cant pull in any more light in dull conditions than what it is, we cant pimp a scope. Weaver have served me well, wouldn't touch a modern Zeiss, seen too many issues with them. But an older Zeiss Diavari is way better than many modern scopes. And Kahles, well thats another whole league ahead, definitely not in the modest budget category. For reliability and reasonable quality its hard to go past a VX2 - dont even look at the VX1. Have fun and let us all know what you finally choose.
Not everyone can afford $400 and up for a scope so the answer to your question is yes! Nikon's PROSTAFF scope will let you get dialed in and will not let you down. The PROSTAFF scope has outstanding light gathering and Nikon's BDC reticle can be dialed in using Spot On for excellent longrange accuracy. I put on one my Father In-Laws .308 and he has gone 12 shots 12 deer over the last 4 years. Considering he used to average about 1 deer per 10+ shots that is pretty darn good. Nikon's No fault warranty will give you pice of mind too.
http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/...F4-12BDC-1.jpg
Yeah man the eye box on the cheaper loopies is a bit fussy. At the very entry level I don't think Leupold represents the best buying. Vx2 and up are aightQuote:
Originally Posted by muzza
There is a VXII (of mine) for sale on here if interested.
+1 for the V9.
Had one on my 308 bush pig for a number of years now and it has been great. Got it on line from the states for less than half of what they sell for here.
Dont buy a Weaver classic 3-9 if you intend to take it outside ever.
Bit of a wierd statement vietnamcam. Care to elaborate?
He had a bad experience with one fogging once. Plenty of us on here and elsewhere have had years of reliable service from them though, any manufacturer has the odd lemon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 300wsm for life
Not one but THREE in a row!Quote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
Replaced not repaired each time, Time the fourth one arrived I told them to put it on there shelf and credit me its cost against a shiny new vx3 and lived happily ever after.
Now it may well be just that particular model that has fogging issues which is why I was specific instead of bagging on all weaver scopes, I have a steel tube fixed 4x Weaver here that must be at least 30 years old that has never fogged or shifted zero.
Thanks for all the advice folks I have whittled it down to a Nikon prostaff 4 to 12 for 225 Or a vx3 3-10 for 450. Think I will probably go with the Leopold just because I will feel fancy
The leupy is far superior if you can afford the extra awesome low light ability and very clear
I am going to advocate a different view to some that has been expressed in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by huglife
Scope these days have so many different features and attributes. much of what you pay does not go into simple glass clarity. Every additional feature cost money to make and cost money to buy, therefore it is important to know exactly (or in the ball park) of what feature matters to you and therefore you need or want it, and what does not matter.
For example, is extra magnification important to you? I for one, do not like 3-9. I am short sighted and am too used to shooting bigger magnifications. My 7mm-08 sports a Bushnell Elite 6500 4.5-30. Other people can do excellently using just 3-9.
So, if you do not want features such as zero-stop, 50mm objective, 15x magnification, 5x zoom range, FFP, then for the same money or slightly less amount of money you could get a better scope. On the other hand if you bought a scope with all these modern day features without being the top of the line (but is the most that you could afford), optics quality may suffer a little.
editedQuote:
Originally Posted by dannyb
I have the 6-16 Nikon Monarch and love it. Solid build nice easy adjustment and holds zero as it should. I keep my eye open for a 3-9 or 4-12 for my boys 223 to replace his Nikko Stirling as although his 3-9 Panamax works ok, I love the extra clarity the Nikon offers. I have used many others and think the Nikon is underrated for the cost.