Nikon Prostaff or Leupold rifleman

Countryboy27012 · 01-08-2010, 07:01 AM

In your openion, which of these scopes are better? I just got a new (used) .270 rifle and was wanting to put a 3x9x40 scope on it. I have narrowed down to these 2 choices. Any input, bad or good would be appreciated for these 2 scopes.

Thanks!

Ron Duval · 01-08-2010, 08:28 AM

removed by RD

bugsNbows · 01-09-2010, 07:24 AM

+1 Ron's comments. The rifleman scopes are junk...IMO. I'd either get the Nikon Buckmasters or, better yet, either the Bushnell Elite 3200 or the Nikon Team Primos.

hometheaterman · 01-09-2010, 08:41 PM

Yep out of those two I'd get the Nikon. However, I think you'd be much better off with a Burris Fullfield II or a Bushnell Elite 3200 or even the Nikon Team Primos.

srwshooter · 01-10-2010, 06:41 AM

if you want a very long eye relief then the loopy is the one. both have a fairly narrow field of view . i'd go up to the buckmasters in the nikon,better optics ,but still narrow FOV. i bought a buckmasters and hated the FOV.

ajstrider · 01-16-2010, 07:18 AM

I think the Nikon is the best buy for the money. I have a Vari X II 3x9 and both a Nikon Prostaff 3x9 and a Buckmasters 3x9. I think both the Nikons are a clearer image with more light throughput than the Leupold. The Prostaff is half the money essentially and the Buckmasters is about 90 bucks less. I think the Buckmasters are about the best buy riflescope out there, sure it is $210 bucks without looking for a deal too hard. But it has excellent glass and excellent light transmission. The adjustment knobs are finger adjustable too which is a nice touch. I will be scoping new rifles with the Buckmasters for a while.