I could get either one of these for about $200. I'm leaning towards the Nikon simply because my spotting scope is a Nikon, but I'm a total newbie when it comes to riflescopes. Is there a good reason to choose one over the other?

https://www.bushnell.com/bushnell/prime-1-4x24-illuminated-riflescope/BU-RP1424BS9.html

South Korean glass.

Excellent scope...

I thought Nikon was getting out of the rifle scope business

They are, but there is still stock on the shelves.

Crossfire has mediocre Chinese glass.  Nikon M series is most likely Philippines (better) or possibly Japan glass (even better yet).  Nikon is heavily discounting because it is leaving the sporting optics market.

Grab the Nikon while you can.

A Friend has a Nikon P Tactical 1.5-4.5 with bullet drop reticle which was surprisingly good.   This Nikon did not have a lighted reticle.  He had it in a Nikon mount on his optics ready Bushmaster 16” carbine.  My Son in Law has the Bushnell 1-4 SFP scope with BDC and I have the Bushnell 1-4 FFP with BDC.  Both the Bushnell scopes have lighted reticles.  Any of these are better than the Crossfire II.  The only advantage for the Vortex is their warranty but the Bushnell linked above looks very good with the German reticle.



Here is a link to the discontinued Nikon my Friend has.  This scope is a 1” tube whereas the Bushnell scopes have a 30 MM scope tube.  

https://www.eurooptic.com/Nikon-P-TACTICAL-Riflescope-223-15-45X20-Matte-BDC600-16527.aspx

I went with a Nikon M-Tactical 1-4x24 Mk1-MOA for my M1A SOCOM16. It seems very well built and has amazing glass clarity. Under $200 & built in the Philippines. Only con was lack of illumination. It beats out all competition in the price range in all other areas.
Attached File

Nikon is a far better scope. I’d heard that the “M” prefix was for “Monarch” and “P” for Prostaff, their more and less expensive lines respectively.

I liked it so much I bought a second Nikon M-TACTICAL 1-4x24 scope for my Ruger MPR.
Attached File

For the price i paid i have no complaints, have one on my 6.8 deer/hog AR.
No cluttered reticle.

Putting together another 6.8 upper now, it will get better glass.

Attached File

Nikon has a better tracking reputation. The Crossfire V-Brite has a floating dot, with near useless illumination.

I vote Nikon with MOA reticle.

It's useless illumination if you want a daylight bright red dot.
I prefer a very low visible setting for dusk dawn when you can make out your target but not the reticle.
Many scopes have a first setting that is too high to be useful in that situation without washing out the target.

How far out would you feel comfortable engaging steel 12"x20" targets with a 16"bbl .308 AR-10 equipped with the Nikon M-Tactical 1-4x24 Mk1-MOA scope?

Is this enough scope to make hits at 500-600 yards?

Edited 11FEB21
I ended up getting the Nikon M-Tactical 3-12x42SF MK1-MRAD Reticle for reaching out past 500m because I'm addicted to these awesome discontinued Nikon's.