Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/27/2005 10:18:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/27/2005 10:18:48 AM EDT by RSnorris]
Weaver Classic V vs. Nikon buckmaster



I got a new AR for Christmas, its a flat top with a 20 in. bull barrel it will be used for varmit hunting and target shooting. I am noobie to scope purchasing. I would apreciate any oppions. I am really pumped and can't wait to get a scope for it.

Thanks in advance, if anybody else has any others they would like to add in the $300 range, I would like it to go up to at least 16x.

thanks
norris

Link Posted: 12/27/2005 1:10:37 PM EDT
I've no experience with Weaver scopes, other than simply looking through them while shopping around, but comparing them to Nikon, they were very similar in optics quality. I settled on a Nikon Pro-Staff 3-9x40mm for the price. It was a great scope for the money; light gathering and clarity was outstanding.
Link Posted: 12/27/2005 1:18:15 PM EDT
Thanks

I am also looking at a Leupold Rifleman so if anybody has any info I would appreciate it.

thanks again for the reply

norris
Link Posted: 12/27/2005 1:55:57 PM EDT
I would pick the Weaver Classic V over the Nikon Buckmaster. The Weaver has Fully Multicoated Lenses. I would however pick either one over a Leupold Rifleman which does not have click style adjustments.
Link Posted: 12/27/2005 2:08:46 PM EDT
Thanks, for the reply glazer if you have one that you think is better than the weaver let me know.

thanks
norris
Link Posted: 12/27/2005 10:26:15 PM EDT
I would look seriously at the Weaver Grand Slam scopes. I find Weaver scopes to be very good, perhaps even on par with my Leupolds, but for less money. In my research I have found this to be a commonly held opinion.

- CM
Link Posted: 12/29/2005 8:58:51 PM EDT
Weaver Classic line have pretty good optics, strong one piece tubes, and good adjustments. They are also very light. I have several.

I don't own a Nikon, but looking through them I would say that the optics are a little better than Weaver. The Nikon does not have a one piece tube, and several people I know have had mechancal problems with Nikon scopes - this is the reason I don't own one.

Personally, I prefer Bushnell Elites over all others (good value)
Link Posted: 12/30/2005 2:31:06 AM EDT
In my opinion, the Weaver scopes are one of the most under rated scopes out there. Value for money, they can't be beat and will give Leuopold a run for it's money. They are that clear. The Buckmaster is a pretty good scope, however, field of view is quite narrow. I'd get the Weaver if you are not too concerned about reticle choice. I do have both and compared them.
Link Posted: 12/30/2005 7:08:42 AM EDT
I've got a Weaver V-16 on a target 22 rimfire bolt gun. For the money, it is really great. Optics are clear (but not as good as Leupold) and the adjustments have been totally repeatable and accurate. I think I paid $289 from SWFA a few years ago for it. Wouldn't be my first choice for one of my better varmint guns but on a budget it is a good scope for the buck.
Link Posted: 12/30/2005 3:13:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ChairmanMeow:
I would look seriously at the Weaver Grand Slam scopes. I find Weaver scopes to be very good, perhaps even on par with my Leupolds, but for less money. In my research I have found this to be a commonly held opinion.

- CM

+1

I was just looking at the 1.5-5x32mm Grand Slam just last night, and it looks to be a pretty good piece of glass. Perfect for an AR.
Top Top