Bushnell 3200 Scopes?

[wyotimberghost]

Anyone have any experience with these? I've narrowed my scope choices down to either the Bushnell Elite 3200 5-15X50 or the Nikon Monarch UCC 5.5-16.5X44 for my varmint rig. I know Nikon makes a solid product, but I don't have any experience with the Bushnell 3200 line. Any input is appreciated.

[Folically Challenged]

Funny you should mention this! I was just at the store this pm looking for a scope to put on the Remmy 788 in .243 that my Dad got me when I was 11. It had a Tasco 4x that crapped out, so I was going to look at another fixed power, maybe in 6x this time.

Naturally, Bass Pro had NO fixed power rifle scopes above the "crap" level, so I looked at some 3-9 x 40's in Burris FFII, Bushy 3200, & Bushy 4200. I also brought along a spare VXII I've got, to see if I should just stick with that one.

Long story short, I was WOWED by the 3200. So bright, so clear, damned near on a par with the 4200, and at 2/3 the price! I really wish the 3200 series had a 6x, but it doesn't appear they do. BTW, all the scopes were clearer than my 2002 VXII.

As for the Nikon, they were totally out of the Monarchs, so I couldn't compare them. The bottom line, though, is that I have a newfound respect for the 3200.

Good Luck,

FC

[boss400]

i just purchased a browning 3x9x40 it is a bush 3200 with fully coated len.the reason i got it i compared it to a leupoldII a nikon ucc azest and the browning scope wasa lot clearerat close range and long range.so i got one on e-bay for $169.00.the otherhigh priced scopes did not empress me.

[Tony Orlando and Dawn]

The 3200's are excellent scopes I currently own four of them.

[skeeter 7MM]

I have had excellent service from my 3200 elites. However the 50mm models are beefy so if weight and length are a concern this maybeworth considering. I assume you'd be possibly add a sunshade, which tome the 3200 50mm's look like baseball bats to begin with[8D], alot of real estate in that scope. Styling points may suffer, if that is a concern at all.

I currently don't own any Nikon monarchs but to my eye a slight advantage in brightness and clarityto a comparable 3200 model.

Both scopes have solid following, as such either is a good choice, but the only way to be sure is SxS comparison and let your eye tell you which scope to buy.

If it were me and those were the 2 scopes models I was down too I'd opt for the Monarch, personally. I like the 3200 a lot butin the 3x9x40 bigame usage.

Good Luck.

I have reallly grown to like the 3200 scopes. I have 4 now. Also like the monarch as I got one. But really the Nikon is in the 4200 category, not the 3200.

[DANTHEHUNTER]

I agree with Big ,even though I am a nikon fan.

[James B]

Both are very good scopes. I have never had the Monarch but the 3200 is hard to beat. I have had the Buckmaster and pro staff's. I liked the Pro-Staff but the eye relief on my Buskmaster was to critical.

[demoIL]

I have Leupold on everything I own EXCEPT one gun. I have a 22-250 with an Elite 4200 6-24 on it with mil-dots. Love the scope and hard to beat for the money. Probably the brightest scope I own.
The 3200 aren't far behind so that would be my choice.

[halcon]

I have the 5X15X50 3200 Bushnell and it comes with the sunshade . To me the clarity compares with most of the better scopes on the market . It's a bit big for a carry rifle but on the range it's great , I have it on a 300 Win Mag .