Suggestions for a new rifle scope

[Rio]

Was wondering what you all would recommend as far as a mid range scope for 300 winmag, I'm looking for good low light functionality and clarity, something good out to 400 to 500 yards.

 

Thanks in advance for any suggestions or help.

Karl

[GameHauler]

I think for the Money it is hard to beat the

Zeiss Conquest.

I have a 4.5X14-50 on my 7Mag

and really like it.

[Rio]

Thanks for the input GameHauler, really appreciate it, I've been interested in Zeiss based on some of the comments, but have no experience with them, I'll have to stop by one of the shops in town and see how they compare to the other brands.

[Red Rabbit]

Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 with B&C reticle.

You might check the websites of Cabelas, Bear Basin, Midway, etc to see if they still have a VX-III at reduced cost, as the VX3 has upgraded the VX-III.

40mm will be plenty bright for legal hunting hours, so no need for a heavier 50mm that requires high scope rings to ruin a cheek weld.

 

Doug~RR

[cramerhunts]

For the price range I would also look at the Vortex Viper series. Check them out at Cameraland. I bought one from Doug not to long ago and really like it, very crisp and clear and you can't beat the warranty.

 

Phil

[Rio]

Red Rabbit/Cramerhunts, thanks for the suggestions, I'll check those out along side the zeiss as well.

[Siwash]

 

You might also consider the Nikon Monarch in 3.5-12x42 with the BDC reticle. I have one on a .300 WSM and it does the job.

 

For what's worth, I have a VX-II 3-9x40 with the LR reticle on another rifle and side by side with the Nikon I would give the Leupold the edge for clarity at dusk, but the BDC reticle on the Nikon is more intuitive for my eyes and I feel more comfortable with it at long distances.

 

I looked at several scopes/reticles in the $400 and below range about a year ago and decided the Nikon suited my needs, mostly because it had good eye relief and I liked their BDC reticle the best for hunting scenarios.

 

I have a friend with the VX-III 6-18x40 and a varmint hunters reticle and he loves it. You do see those for sale used at a good price on occasion too.

[desertdog]

Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 with B&C reticle.

You might check the websites of Cabelas, Bear Basin, Midway, etc to see if they still have a VX-III at reduced cost, as the VX3 has upgraded the VX-III.

40mm will be plenty bright for legal hunting hours, so no need for a heavier 50mm that requires high scope rings to ruin a cheek weld.

 

Doug~RR

 

+1 on this suggestion. The only thing I would say is I have the Leupold VX3 4.5x14x50, and the extra height of the 50 does not bother me at all. The scope rings are more expensive as you stated RR. The 40mm will be plenty how ever I don't regret my decision to go with the 50 one bit.

 

One a separate not I don't think you can go wrong with a Leupold. I know the Zeiss and Sworos have gotten a lot of credit and hype as well they should. But the question I ask myself is do I really need to pay much more for a little extra quality. I say the difference is not that great and I prefer to keep my business American when ever possible.

[TAM]

I own a Ziess Conquest, Nikon Monarch, and a Vortex Viper scope. The Ziess is better glass, but also nearly twice as much money. The Nikon and Vortex are similar quality, but the Vortex has an awesome warranty. If the money isn't a factor go with the Ziess Conquest. If you're trying to stay within a budget take a close look at the Vortex Viper line.

 

Just my .02

[Rio]

Thanks for all the input folks. I stopped by Sportsmens tonight on the way home and took a look at the Leupold vx3, nikon monark, zeiss conquest, vortex, and burris, all in similar ranges (i.e. 4.5-14x40~). For me, the leupold and burris were tougher to establish the focal point, seemed to be very sensitive, but the zeiss nikon and vortex were very easy to establish the focal point, and seemed to provide some eye relief once I was looking through them. I know that the focal point will improve once they're mounted on the gun, but I'm still worried that it could be an issue for me. To be honest they all seemed very clear, but that was in the store to. I liked the reticle on the zeiss and vortex, I'm not sure that I quite like the reticle on the nikon though, seems like there is too much that will get in the way of the view. Right now, I'm actually leaning towards the vortex, but the zeiss was nice.

 

I'll use this weekend to do some more research, I have $250 in gift cards for Sportsmans that I can't use until Monday, so hopefully I'll have made a decision by then. Once I make a decision I'll post back here. Thanks again for all the input.

 

Karl

[sjvcon]

I'll throw another in fo the Zeiss Conquest. 4.5x14x50 mildot on my .300 and it is AWESOME. Not the most expensive offering from Zeiss, but from the dealer "its a better scope for the money spent". I've had Leupold's too, and liked them just fine, but I really like this one.

[joeybari]

i like my Super sinper 16X 40 from swft

it works great the optices are as good as the nikon scopes

the 33 m tube works great it makes it so easy to pick up couse in the az back ground

and also it comes with mil dot making it great when your range finder cant pick up game that small and the turrets are so clean and big

i was not going to buy one bcs of the cheap price and i always used a leupold but a friend of mine let me try his and i was hooked its a great scope

[Red Rabbit]

Karl,

Considering eye relief, I think the Vortex will be the shortest with just over 3", something to consider with a 300 WM in the field.

[Rio]

Red Rabbit, I was thinking about that over the weekend as well, I tried to get a sense of that last week when I was going through them, I'll have to check that again today when I pick one up. Thanks for the input, appreciate it.

 

Karl

[SunDevil]

I would probably recommend one with turrets.