Best scope from about $350-$425.

[jcpython357]

Looking for a clear, bright, reliable, 3x-10x range scope with accurate adjustments,(give or take 1/4") for shooting big game out to 400-500yds. What do ya'll got? Or what's new thats of interest? Thanks, Jay

[ 02-26-2004: Message edited by: Jay Gorski ]

 

[sakofan]

Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40. Best scope in it's class, IMO>..sakofan..

Also, Nikon 3.3-10x44, I believe can be had for around $400.

[ 02-26-2004: Message edited by: sakofan ]

[ 02-26-2004: Message edited by: sakofan ]

 

[Mikecr]

Tasco super sniper.

 

[jcpython357]

Sakofan, I'll have to check them Conquests out, How do you think they'd compare with one of those new Signature Selects? Heard some really good things about both of them,

Jay

 

[4mesh063]

Jay,

Not sure if your dead set on a zoom or not, but a Weaver T Series 15x Fixed would be pretty nice on game I would think. I use the T36 on my one LG and I may get one for my 6BR. I like it a lot for the shorter range stuff. Especially 100-200 yd shooting.

If there's a drawback to my T36 it's the dawn and dusk performance. It gets pretty dark and the crosshairs get hard to see. But, then again, it's a straight 36x.

 

[4mesh063]

Oh, and I think the 15's are on sale at Natchez right now.

 

[trader388]

Jay,

I have been looking for a rifle scope for about 4 months. And during that time I have looked at everything (pentax, burris, weaver, nikon, leupold, sightron, zeiss, swaroski, leupold, bushnell, and night force)and even bought and then sold a leupold black ring tactical.

Here is what I found...

Bushenll 4200 is by far the best value for the money and they are right in your price range. The optics are far better than leupold and are on par with zeiss with out the price.

Leupold is overprice and the optics stink the only good scopes they make are the tactical line and if you are going to spend that much you might as well just get a nightforce which is far superior to leupold.

European makes cost a ton not because they are that much better but beacuse the labor cost in europe are the highest in the world.

Zeiss doesn't strictly focus on scopes or optics...Zeiss is like tommy hilfiger making scopes here in the US.

Anyway if you just want to hunt with it get a bushnell. If you want to range find forget mil-dot ...just get a range finder. And if your nuts like me and want everything get a nightforce lol

Good luck

 

[Nate Haler]

Sightron or Nikon Monarch are both excellent values.

I agree that the Bushnell 4200 is a good scope, except that their higher magnification models have a truly pathetic amount of internal elevation. Nearly useless past a few hundred yards, unless you mount it on a tapered base and tapered (Burris Signature type) rings. For close stuff, say to 200y, they are a neat scope. 100y if you'll be using a rimfire.

Weaver Grand Slam is another best buy.

[ 02-26-2004: Message edited by: Nate Haler ]

 

[sakofan]

Jay, I will be looking at the Signature Select's very soon. I dont think I know anyone actually using them right now, in my area...sakofan...This Leupold country, big time!!

 

[trader388]

Nate - I totally agree with that.

Jay they have plenty of 2.5-10 models. I'd stay away from anything bigger than 4-16. Problem with 4-16s is click value is .125. Personally i like .25.

 

[jcpython357]

Sakofan, They're(Sig. Sel.) supposed to have the same outstanding optics as with the Signatures, so that can't be too bad, looked through one(Sig.) a little while back, was pretty impressed with what I saw, I think the other scope was a.... Conquest(I think)and the sight picture was too close to call, both outstanding, Should I get the Conquest over the Burris if it came down to them two? I'd like to buy from an American comp.

Does the Conquest have any big or even small advantage over the Sig.? I couldn't tell from the spec sheet I looked at, Zeiss, ER-3.5', Burris, ER-3.5-4.0", FOV was pretty close, clarity/sharpness, couldn't tell one from the other, brightness went to the Sig., Burris was a bit heavier, but I'm told that's from the "bigger" internal lenses, not concerned with weight anyway, what's a few ounces? The Zeiss had a 'big' reticle, but could live with it I suppose, I can get the Burris with a Ballistic Plex, that seems like a often needed feature for Loooongrange shooting, that really interests me! How's the scale tippin here? I'll have to do more comparing, I guess. How do some of you guys decide when comparing scopes that are close in every way? Jay

 

[sakofan]

Jay, I have said this a long time ago. Burris is VERY lucky to have a customer like you. If you see no difference between the Burris and the Conquest, then I would go with the Burris, every time.

You have raved about the CS of Burris, defended them at every turn on at least 3 other forums that I know of. You my friend, are a Burris junkie!! And thats OK with me.

I on the other hand, will probably stick with the Euro's. I will continue to evaluate all scopes that I come across. But, my heart belongs to the Euro's. And the Zeiss Conquest, and my IOR's specifically.

As you know, I have opened a post on AR about the differences between the Conquest and the Zeiss Diavari. I got some great feed back, but to be quite honest, no one has been able to produce any evidence to me to make me think that the Diavari is a "much" better scope than the Conquest. Slight coating difference's, a slight TL factor, (very slight), eye relief, and a few other minimal differences that probably cant be determined by the human eye. Or at least my eyes. IMO

I guess it comes down to value to me. I know that you have found a product,(Burris), that you love. A customer service dept. that you are on a first name basis with, and that means a lot to you. And it means a lot to me too.

I know that when and if something breaks on my Conquest or my IOR's, that the company will back that product to the highest degree. They all ready have.
There is currantly NO perfect scope out there, to my understanding. All scopes fail. Optics are getting better all the time. Nikon, Sightron, Conquest, Burris Sigs, Leupold, etc. That means good things for all of us. We all win.

Used to be just Loopie on top of the heap. Thats all changed now with the emrgence of the Japs primarily. Jap scopes used to be junk, mostly. Not any more!! They are outstanding, and getting better all the time. Notice how the new Loopie VXIII has jumped on the band wagon. Fast focus eye piece, finger turrets, supposedly better glass. The Japs and the Conquest has raised the bar for the hunting optics world.

Sorry to go on and on. Snowed in here in the Carolinas,and got too much time on my hands.

..sakofan..You go Burris Boy!!!!!!!

 

[Jake in NC]

Hey Jay.. FWIW.. Something else to consider since you're looking at Burris' scope line.. I just recently purchased a little Fullfield II for a "hunting rifle" with the BP reticle.. I sent it back in to Burris and they installed an elevation target knob for only $40.! I'm seeking a Leupold alternative and Burris is boasting dual spring action and steel-on-steel clicks.. I've always liked Burris' optics and excellent customer service.. If the mechanics are there I may have found a new scope line.! d:^) JiNC

Egads..! I just checked Bear Basin's spec list and they say the 6-24 Signature only has 22 MOA.!! Hmmmm.. That little FFII has over 40MOA internal..!! (head scratching ensues)..


PS- All the parts are assembled to start the Shilen DGA 7-08AI sporter project.. I'm looking forward to see if there are any real gains over the "standard" 7-08..

[ 02-27-2004: Message edited by: Jake in NC ]

 

[Sako7STW]

My .02 The Elite 4200 is the one to get with the Nikon Monarch as close to it as one could get. If you can buck up a bit more the Conquest is the next level, but its not much if any over the 4200.

I shoot 550 yards with my Elite 4000(pre Rainguard) 4-16 and have never had a problem with not enough clicks. Prolly depends on the round I imagine.