Ok, I realize that this is a topic that gets talked about alot (which is better?) but I have a few questions. All of these would be 3-9x40 or close to it.
I can get a Buckmaster for about the same price as a 3200 and I believe I can find a monarch for about the same price as a 4200. I've seen some opinions that favor the Nikon when compared to Bushnell but how do these four compare to one another? And how much of a price savings would you have to have to pick one brand over the other in each class? Is it worth it to get the bushnell for the rain guard?
I've also seen the browning version which I understand is just a 3200 on sale for $129 which sounds like a bargain but I don't won't to short myself if it is actually a lower quality scope?? I don't know if it is or isn't.
Something else to consider is the Burris brand, I've read alot of suggestions for the fulfield II
how would it compare?
And I've also heard good things about Vortex Binos but nothing about their scopes; again how would they compare?
[&:]
__________________
TC Omega .50 SS/Lam (gray/black) w/Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40 & Leupold QD rings
Rem 700ML .50 Blue/Syn (black) w/Nikon Monarch 4x40 & Leupold QD rings
TC Hawken .50 Brown/Walnut
-----------------------------
No matter where you go.....there you are.
I have owned Bushnell, Burris and Nikon scopes (among others). Each have attributes and flaws, though they all performed the task for which they were intended. My own opinion is, Nikon optics appear the brighest of the bunch though that doesn't mean they are the best or clearest. In fact if I had to choose Bushnell would be the clearest edge to edge of the 3 to my eye in comparable scopes. Burrisplus was it tracked POI adjustment better then both Nikon and Bushnell. Bushnells advantage was features such as rainguard but more price related to return, here/then it was several dollars less then comparable from either Nikon or Burris (has changed somewhat now). These are just a couple of personal opinions I have about each, though they are just my opinion based on my experience which is more in terms of the Elites as I have ownedmultiples vssingles.
I am sure any of the 3 brandswould be fine, however optics are like shoes you need to try them out to find what fits. So I suggest instead of just looking at others opinions to base a decision,you also head out and do some trying on for yourself. Willing to bet you'll find one that fits andmeets your needs.
In my opinion the 3200 elite is closer to the monarch than the buckmaster. I would rate the buckmaster closer to a Bushnell trophy than a 3200 elite.
As far as a monarch and a 4200 I would have to look at both models side by side to figure out which I would really take home.
Me personally I wouldn't spend the extra money on a 4200 over a 3200 unless I really had it to waste. At least not on a standard 3-9 hunting scope. Now if we were talking higher power varmint scopes or something and I had the money I might pick the 4200 because that is where the better glass would really be noticeable.
That is only my situation though, I don't have a lot of money and the price difference between the two is a pretty big deal to me.
Paul
__________________
I didn't climb to the top of the food chain to eat carrots! (Ron White)
I think Paul makes a very good point. When you are talking about 3-9 scopes the differences are not so significant. But, when you bump up the magnification and are really trying to stretch the yardages, that is when things sift themselves out some. In the 3-9 class, any of the scopes mentioned will perform well. Minor ergonomic difference or person asthetic preferences should be what helps make your decision.
My take on it is everyone will see things through a scope just a little different! There is no doubt that the Bushnell Elites are excellent scopes but they do not appeal to my eye. I get the feeling that I am looking down the tube of a roll of paper towels when looking through an Elite. I do not experience this on my Nikon and Leupolds.
__________________
"Never stand and take a charge...charge them too."
Good infor everybody, just the kind of stuff I'm looking for. I realize I'll have to look through some different ones before my final decision but alot of times there are quirks or pluses that you don't notice during the decision process.
Anybody know anything about the scopes Brunton is coming out with?
And I should mentioned Swift earlier, how do they compare (generally speaking).
Was I correct about 3200=buckmaster and 4200=monarch?
__________________
TC Omega .50 SS/Lam (gray/black) w/Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40 & Leupold QD rings
Rem 700ML .50 Blue/Syn (black) w/Nikon Monarch 4x40 & Leupold QD rings
TC Hawken .50 Brown/Walnut
-----------------------------
No matter where you go.....there you are.
Here's another thought for ya! For $319.00 @ natchez shooters supply.com you can have a weaver grand slam in 3.5x10x50! I have been a leupold guy only all my life,,and thanks to a friend that does an ungodly amount of shooting asked me to try one of these scopes out and boy,,,am i ever glad i did,,what a scope for the money,,and as a matter of fact,,,i had both guns this year in a field where i could shoot 600yds,,a doe stepped out at 4:50pm and looking her over with both the grand slam and a leupold 4.5x14x50 long range tactical,,,i could see no difference in clarity between the 2 scopes,,,both crystal clear,,JMO
Decisions decisions.....
