Recommend some glass!

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Recommend some glass!

Posted: 10/2/2007 1:58:06 PM EDT

Need a scope for my .243 M700.

Don't have a $1,000 budget, but I can let go (without divorce) around $500.

Looking at a Ziess Conquest 3x9-40, or a Leupold VX-II series 3x9-40...opinions?

Posted: 10/2/2007 4:38:32 PM EDT

[#1]

You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

Posted: 10/2/2007 4:40:34 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

+1
and 3-9 is a very good choice for deer hunting. I keep mine on about 4.5, and if I see something way off, I can crank it up

Posted: 10/2/2007 4:50:59 PM EDT

[#3]

Check out Bushnell Elite 4200.

Very good scopes.

Posted: 10/2/2007 5:01:10 PM EDT

[#4]

Love my Zeiss conquest

Posted: 10/2/2007 5:50:39 PM EDT

[#5]

Nikon Buckmasters 3.5-13x40. Small for the power w/ side focus, nice crosshairs for varmint or deer but ultimately up to the shooter. Around $400. There are also higher powers for a little more.

Not that I don't like Zeiss or Leupold but the Nikon is a nice piece and a little cheaper.

Posted: 10/2/2007 5:54:48 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

I agree it's the only scope I will own

Posted: 10/2/2007 7:56:41 PM EDT

[#7]

Both are nice glass. Given your two choices, I would go with the Leupold because of the lifetime warranty.

If you would like to include Burris in your choices, they make nice glass too. They have a lifetime warranty to anyone who owns the scope - even if you're not the original owner.

I have a 3-10X40 Burris Signature Select and it's the nicest scope I've owned.

Posted: 10/3/2007 9:13:03 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

You can't go wrong with a Zeiss, either.

I think Zeiss offers some of the clearest glass for the money spent. I would rather have the Conquest than a VXII. If you were to step up to a VXIII, I think the two would be very comparable.

Posted: 10/3/2007 9:38:09 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

+1

Yup, hard to go wrong with the Gold Ring.

Posted: 10/3/2007 4:01:56 PM EDT

[#10]

Leupold is my choice of scope
I own a few of them

try to look at the EURO 30 models very clear glass and have 30mm tubs not something you get on alot of hunting scopes and priced around the mid 300

Just picked up this Leupold Mark 2 6-18x40 for around 500
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v310/VITEKi/P1010708-1.jpg

Posted: 10/4/2007 8:29:54 AM EDT

[#11]

I have a ziess conquest and thats a sweet scope.

It is very clear and lets in a lot of light in lowlight conditions.

Posted: 10/4/2007 10:51:23 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You can't go wrong with a Leupold.

+1
and 3-9 is a very good choice for deer hunting. I keep mine on about 4.5, and if I see something way off, I can crank it up

I like Leupold Vari-X III's myself, and you can get some real good deals on used ones on ebay. Even if the scope should have some type of a mechanical issue, the Leupold lifetime warranty is good for whoever owns the scope regardless of when/who originally purchased it. You can get a damn nice hunting scope for well under $500

Posted: 10/5/2007 4:47:43 PM EDT

[#13]

BURRIS Fullfield ll scopes are somewhat better than Leupolds in my opinion. The Fullfield ll scopes are less costly than Leupold. BURRIS makes some serious competition to Leupold, hence; the Leupold Rifleman scopes. I have a BURRIS FFll tactical (OD) 4.5-14x42mm, adj. paralax, one inch tube on my deer rifle, replacing a Simmons WTC13. The view through my BURRIS is larger and brighter than Leupold`s VXL 3.5-10x50mm and much less costly than VXL Leupold. Both have the ballistic plex reticle. WEAVER also made the V16. super fine glass. I have a matte WEAVER V24 w/varmint reticle on my .223rem. CZ527 KEVLAR.

Posted: 10/5/2007 4:57:31 PM EDT

[#14]

height=8

Quoted:
BURRIS Fullfield ll scopes are somewhat better than Leupolds in my opinion. The Fullfield ll scopes are less costly than Leupold. BURRIS makes some serious competition to Leupold, hence; the Leupold Rifleman scopes. I have a BURRIS FFll tactical (OD) 4.5-14x42mm, adj. paralax, one inch tube on my deer rifle, replacing a Simmons WTC13. The view through my BURRIS is larger and brighter than Leupold`s VXL 3.5-10x50mm and much less costly than VXL Leupold. Both have the ballistic plex reticle. WEAVER also made the V16. super fine glass. I have a matte WEAVER V24 w/varmint reticle on my .223rem. CZ527 KEVLAR.

I had a burris Fullfield II 3-9x40 on my weatherby Vanguard 300 Wby mag. the scope looked good but with that recoil it never held Zero . then i went with a leupold and never looked back not a problem with that scope

Posted: 10/5/2007 5:28:08 PM EDT

[#15]

Ok, I will give the other view of this subject.

While I agree that Zeiss, Leupold, etc etc are all very good scopes, I tend to go with much cheaper scopes for my hunting rifles. I usually go with Bushnell, Tasco, Simmons etc. After all you are shooting at a large animal, probable not more than 100 yards, unless out west. Those out west folks can just disregard this post.

Anyway, back to my reasons for the elcheapo scopes for hunting. On more than one occassion here in Pa and Va, I have dropped my gun, slipped and fell on the ice, banged it on a tree, etc. Now if I go out and break a 50 dollar tasco, that sucks and ruins that days hunt. I drop my 1000 dollar Zeiss and break it, I cry for a long time.

I always try to fit the equipment to the task at hand. And the simmons, tascos, bushnells etc will plenty suffice for a deer rifle.

This is just one poor guys opinion.

Posted: 10/5/2007 5:44:14 PM EDT

[#16]

Try here!!

www.samplelist.com/

7953 Leupold 3-9x50 VX-II 56910, Matte finish, heavy duplex reticle, 1" tube, blemish scope from Leupold, lifetime transferable warranty. $299.95

Posted: 10/5/2007 7:30:55 PM EDT

[#17]

My wife was with me..

..She grimaced when I picked up a Ziess.I'm not gonna repeat the words she said, but it was'nt very nice

.
Looked at virtually every scope Gander Mtn had on display...Ended up with a VX-II 3x9x40, got it mounted up and hope to range test it tomorrow.
Thanks for the replies!

Posted: 10/5/2007 7:35:21 PM EDT

[#18]

The Trijicon 3X9 Accupoint is in my opinion the best kept secret in hunting optics.

Posted: 10/6/2007 6:29:07 AM EDT

[#19]

I have a 7mag that sports a Leupold VariX II 3x9. I have had it on my rifle since 1990. (Damn I am an old bastard!) Anyway I have taken the rifle to Alaska, British Columbia, Quebec, etc. It holds a zero. If money were no object I would still go with Leupold.

Posted: 10/6/2007 7:46:52 AM EDT

[#20]

Bushnell Elite is great because no fogging issues (that once cost me a shot at a nice buck warm hot breath on cold scope during the snow, sleet rain all in one day) and that firefly makes aiming at a black hog nice. Anyway I love mine and when I get another thats the one I'll choose.

Posted: 10/6/2007 9:40:00 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Ok, I will give the other view of this subject.

While I agree that Zeiss, Leupold, etc etc are all very good scopes, I tend to go with much cheaper scopes for my hunting rifles. I usually go with Bushnell, Tasco, Simmons etc. After all you are shooting at a large animal, probable not more than 100 yards, unless out west. Those out west folks can just disregard this post.

Anyway, back to my reasons for the elcheapo scopes for hunting. On more than one occasion here in Pa and Va, I have dropped my gun, slipped and fell on the ice, banged it on a tree, etc. Now if I go out and break a 50 dollar tasco, that sucks and ruins that days hunt. I drop my 1000 dollar Zeiss and break it, I cry for a long time.

I always try to fit the equipment to the task at hand. And the simmons, tascos, bushnells etc will plenty suffice for a deer rifle.

This is just one poor guy's opinion.

A good rule of thumb is to spend as much on a magnified optic as you did on the firearm, which makes it a 50/50 equation. The very least I would spend would be half of what the firearm cost.

In all my years of hunting, I've never dropped or fell on my scoped firearm. Not to mention that a more expensive scope should be more shock resistant than a cheap one. You definitely get what you pay for in the optics world.

Posted: 10/8/2007 11:24:42 AM EDT

[#22]

The VXII is a fine scope. You can save some coin by going that route. I have *Heard* that the Conquest has a bit better glass and may be a bit better in low light, but if you only hunt during legal hours, save the coin, IMO. The VXIII (3.5-10x40) Leupold is actually a more direct comparison (And would be my personal choice) with the Ziess Conquest line, and are more in the same price range. Either will do you a fine job. Get one, dial it in and start whackin' and stackin'!!

ETA- Don't go cheap on the mounts. A Dual Dovetail Leupold, Talley or a quality Weaver mount will save a LOT of headaches over the Millet, and other cheapo mounting systems, IMO...

Posted: 10/8/2007 11:46:30 AM EDT

[#23]

I've had Nikon before, with little success (fogging issues)

I've had burris before, with Ok results

I've had bausch and lomb only to break the crosshairs out

I've had good luck with Weaver

All of my rigs that mean a crap, or get used have Leupold glass on them. My #1 hunting rifle has an OLD VXIII 3.5x10x40 that is damn near purple now. I have never had an issue with it at all. My other back up hunting rifle has a very old VXII 3x9x40 and again, never one issue at all.

Leupy is like a sore pecker, hard to beat.

Posted: 10/12/2007 5:54:44 PM EDT

[#24]

I just bought a NIB Leupold VXIII 4.5-14x40 duplex retical for $440 delivered via ebay. Hey petegunner, that's like trying to beat a broken drum with a sore pecker.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Recommend some glass!

Outdoors » Deer Hunting

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us