Scope Decision for 338LM - Poll

[AJ Peacock]

I voted for the NF, as I have no direct experience with the Sightron, the Luep 6.5x20's that I've played with, I always had problems getting my eye into the correct position. I only played with the vxIII's , but it soured me on the Luep. I have a 4.5x14x40 vxIII that I absolutely love. If I was wanting a light scope, that's what I'd put on it.

AJ

 

[BHP9]

I voted "OTHER", and the other is Schmidt und Bender.

I have an S&B PMII LR on my PGWDTI Timberwolf and it's crystal clear.

Recoil isn't a problem with the listed scopes.

 

[gbp]

Voted other also
1st choice would be US Optice SN3 T-Pal
2nd NF 5.5x22 X 50 instead of 56 just to get it closer to the barrel and not loose much in light

 

[slymule]

Another vote for the Sightron SIII 6-24x50. I own two of your 3 choices (Leupy and Sightron) and I prefer my Sightron to my Leupold. You listed one of the cons of the Sightron scope being as it has the turret caps, just leave them off if you don't like them, Sightron says their waterproof. They put them on as a safety to keep the turrets from being turned by accident, they're not a necessity. Never owned a Nightforce but I have used them side by side with my Sightron, their nice scopes but twice the money and about a lb. heavier.

 

[bighornbob]

Nightforce is without a doubt the best of the three overall. I have several Leupolds, I have one on my 338 RUM, it hasn't failed yet but I hate the eye relief. I recently bought the Sightron, very nice optics for the money. I just sold my Swarovski PH 3 x 12 x 50 to buy the 5.5 x 22 x 50 NF for my 300 Weatherby. It is by far the best scope I have used.
I have hunted many places with many diferent rifle/scope combinations. My opinion is you will never notice the extra 10 ounces when shooting extreme distances. With scope weight over the center of the rifle it is much different to carry as opposed to an extra 10 ounces of muzzle or barrel weight. The weight is balanced when centered on rifle.

 

[Aussie Powder Burner]

Other - I have used a 8.5-25 Mark 4 with TMR reticle for 2 years and find it excellent especially for wind hold offs and tracking / return to zero.
In a direct comparison against NF this year with low light conditions the Leupold was far better.
APB

 

[Michael Eichele]

My vote is for the NXS but I would recomend the 5.5-22x50 NOT the 56. This will reduce weight and bulk conciderably. I have owned too many 56mm scopes and after getting sick and tired of them I went to the 50's and have never looked back. Much better IMHO. This is coming from a beyond help backpack hunter. 6mm doesnt seem like much but when you compare side by side the difference is huge. Yes they cost more but IMO they are more than worth it.

 

[30-338]

Ditto on the 50 mm objective lens. I was initially worried about the little extra light I would be losing if I didn't use the 56 mm lens, but in my experience I have not even noticed.....Love the NF especially the repeatability of the click value...You can really count on them and this gives me extra confidence when I dial my windage or elevation. 30-338

My vote is for the NXS but I would recomend the 5.5-22x50 NOT the 56. This will reduce weight and bulk conciderably. I have owned too many 56mm scopes and after getting sick and tired of them I went to the 50's and have never looked back. Much better IMHO. This is coming from a beyond help backpack hunter. 6mm doesnt seem like much but when you compare side by side the difference is huge. Yes they cost more but IMO they are more than worth it.

 

[Jon A]

While likely bigger and heavier than the OP would like, it should be mentioned the 5-25X56 Premier can be had at a discount for $2500 if ordered now.

The use of the scope as a spotting scope to identify details at long range, and being small/compact/light weight are really two contradicting desires. While some make the compromise better than others, generally the better you want to see the more you'll have to carry.

 

[ScottBerish]

Premier Heritage 5-25x56 I can't wait.

Scott

 

[BigUglyMan]

I would go with the NXS if I were scoping a 338 LM. My tame smith uses a NXS 8-32 on his 338 LM AI and raves about it. I've got an NXS on my 308 and a MK4 on my 300 WM. Both great scopes but given the weight of the actual rifle, what's a few more ounces? Go with the NXS - I think it will be more rugged in the end and given that sending a MK4 in for repairs is nearly impossible from Canada that gives the NXS the edge for me.

 

[britz]

My experience is strictly from research and reading not hands on experience with this price range of optics. I did however vote for the Leupald for three reasons. Cost, weight, and proven reliability.

With that said, If you can afford it, it seems the NXS is most definately a scope in a higher class than the other two. however, it is about 400 or more higher than the leupald so it is up to you. I don't think you could "kick yourself" for having purchased any of the three you listed since they are all pretty good optics.

good luck ( wish I was in your shoes! lol) I'll have to sick to my Nikons for a while yet.

 

[BountyHunter]

NXS in 5-22x50.

Add the Gene Davis 3x optical booster ($100) which screws into the eyepiece. It has Zeiss lens and is super clear, gives the power of the 8-32 with elevation of the 5-22.

Best of both worlds. Also made for the Leupolds. He also has a rubber booted model that slips over the eyepiece of any scope.

BH

 

[ScottBerish]

NXS in 5-22x50.

Add the Gene Davis 3x optical booster ($100) which screws into the eyepiece. It has Zeiss lens and is super clear, gives the power of the 8-32 with elevation of the 5-22.

Best of both worlds. Also made for the Leupolds. He also has a rubber booted model that slips over the eyepiece of any scope.

BH

Wow, that's an interesting product, do you have a link?

Scott