Black powder scope!!
 

Looking for a good scope for my Black powder rifle. looking for something under $200 bucks. Shots are generally 100 yards and closer. Long shots of 150 yards.

I like the Bushnell Trophy XLT 250 DOA. Good glass, 5" of eye relief, and BDC reticle which will be good for your 150yd shot. It also comes with Butler Creek lens covers.

Well within your price range.

X2 on what Pete said about the Bushnell 250 DOA.

Dave

I personally would get a Nikon Pro Staff 2-7x32mm. Its a Nikon for one thing. So the warranty is excellent. The glass is very good. They are easy to adjust. And don't let the 32mm throw you off. They gather light excellent, and the 2x makes a great walking around power, the 5-7x are good for sitting and long distances.

When I went looking for a scope for my White I went to a gunsmith/gun shop owner. I told him money was not the issue but I wanted a tough, high quality, never fail type scope for under $250.00. He kind of laughed and said.... I could sell you an expensive scope but .... he then handed me a Nikon Pro Staff in 2-7x32mm. He explained its excellent clarity, easy to focus, easy to adjust, and tough as nails. He then said... I never get one of them back for a trade in. Everyone that gets them holds on to them.

Well he mounted that for me and was he ever right. In my opinion and I have Leupold, Bushnell, and even better model Nikons... the Pro Staff for the money, around $139.00 new is just hard to beat. I have them on three rifles. I do like my Nikon Omega, my Bushnell Elite, and an old Leupold I have on a center fire. Also I have some cheap scopes that are amazing for the little the costed.

I don't even have an idea of how many scopes I have had, and after some fail on a muzzleloader from the different type of recoil they have and some were discarded for other reasons I ended up with Nikons on all my muzzleloaders I have a 2X7 32mm[Omega] two Omega 3X9 [Endeavor and Triumph and one Home assembled encore] 4.5 X 14 on my long range 45. If I knew in the past years what experience taught me it would have saved me a bunch of money.

Don't mention Omega to my friend. He's had two of them fail on him.

You just never know with scopes. I'm sure even Swarovski's fail.

None of my six $40 Simmons 4X ProDiamonds have failed yet. The one on my little X7 has seen well over 1,000 shots. The one on the .45 GM/TC Renegade has seen something like 800 shots.

(When I clean the Sinful Sisters, I pull the barrel from the stock and dunk the breech end in a bucket of water - scope and all - to pump the bore.)

I think as long as you avoid the low line scopes (ie: less than $100), you are usually fine. Lots of good choices and many options in your price range.
If you go mid line or above, you'll have a better scope and it should last. If you hunt around you can find some nice deals on clearance models. Some places blow out the old models for half price or less when putting out a new line.

within your price range.....Bushnell Trophy XLT 3-9x40

$90.00

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Barga...3Bcat105678180

I have a Bushnell Banner Dusk till Dawn 3x9x40 on my cva muzzleloader and love it!

I was having problems with my Encore losing accuracy the last couple years. I checked few things and determined it was the cheap scope I had on it. I just purchased at Leupold VX-1 3-9x40. Dix sporting goods had them for $199.00 plus I had 10% off coupon so out the door for under $200.00 I normally sight this gun in a few inches high at 100 yards. I fired two shots which you will see in the pic below. They were on top of each other and a little left. I moved it four clicks right and went a tad too far, needless to say my groups are back were they should be.

It's so nice when you get it worked out like that. Good shooting.

Bushnell Trophy on my 54 Cal Remington 700 has worked well for well over 18 years now.
Had a Bushnell dusk to dawn on my 50 cal for a long time but needed a low power scope for my slug gun so it is now in the 870 slugger. it is about 12 years old.
Got a loopy Var X II for the 50 cal and had to send it back before it was even 6 months old. Replaced it with another Bushnell trophy and am happy.
Have a very old Weaver K4 fixed 4 power on My 50 cal T/C plains rifle I paid $5.00 for at a yard sale back in 1979 and it still works well.

:D Al

Nikon Pro Staff in the 2X7. The power adjuster has a larger raised piece that is easier to change with gloves. I had it with shoot through mounts but changed it back.

I have many of the popular scopes in this price range and the only ones I've had any problems out of have been the Leupold VX-I. I've had a couple and everyone I've used has had to go back to Leopold for repair. They have great customer service, but that's about it imo. This all said I don't think the current model VX-1 (previous gen VX-II) is a horrible scope for the price. They have good glass, but I just don't think they are the quality of some of the competitors offerings.

That said, I've had pretty good luck with most others in this price range, but think some are better than others. I've also had a Bushnell Banner and a Trophy and neither are anywhere near the quality of a Nikon, Burris, etc. Everyone I've had has had sub par glass, horrible adjustments, etc. Once you step up to the Elite series they have good glass, but other than a tactical fixed power I've never had one that tracked accurately, which is a big let down for the price. In addition to this you get poor costumer service and other than the Elites you not only have to pay shipping to them if you have a problem, but you also have to send them a check for return shipping. This is unheard of with the other more reputable companies. I just see no reason to buy a Bushnell when there are soo many better options out there.

Now onto the Nikon Prostaff. I've had a couple of Prostaff scopes as well as several Monarchs. I'll focus on the Prostaff here though since it's in your price range. The ones I've had have taken some serious abuse and never lost zero. I've dropped them, banged them around, etc and they always keep on trucking. I also like the magnification ring because as mentioned it's way to turn with gloves on. The adjustments on mine haven't been repeatable, but on a muzzle loader most people zero them and don't touch them again. If that's what you plan on doing it's a good scope for that. If you are planning to dial in for longer ranges and need to be able to return to zero, this scope isn't for you. To me this isn't all that relevant on a muzzle loader though.

Next is the glass. This is really the only place I think the Prostaff falls short. The glass is decent, certainly better than a Bushnell Banner or similar but it's not great. They pick up a lot of glare if you're shooting in the direction of the sun and for my eyes, chromatic aberration is pretty bad if it's sunny out. This doesn't make them unusable by any means, it's just there. As far as other lighting conditions, they seem to do well. In low light they do decent. I've never had a situation during legal hunting hours where I was thinking I couldn't make a shot with a Prostaff.

Overall, I feel like the Prostaff isn't really great at anything, but is good at everything with good durability, decent glass, finger adjustments, etc.

Now, all of that said the Burris Fullfield II is also in that same price range and blows everything out of the water including the Prostaff. The glass on them is excellent. They handle glare much better, while the Nikon is just fine in low light, the Burris is much brighter. Glass wise I don't think you can get anything better until you step up to the Zeiss Terra. At least I haven't seen it if you can.

The Burris is also very durable and I've also been very rough on them and the hold zero very well. They have steel on steel adjustments that provide a good feel. They are just all around great in this area too. As for the reticle imo their ballistic plex is much less intrusive than the huge circles on Nikons BDC reticle, but this is more of a personal preference.

The only downside I see with these scopes is the magnification adjustment. On the original, when you assist the magnification the whole eye piece turns. This nakes it hard to run flip up scope caps as they'd constantly be turning when you changed the magnification. Imo this isn't a huge downside, but just something to consider if you want to run flip up covers. The newer E1 and C4s fix this though.

So all of that said, imo the Burris is by far the best choice in this price range and it doesn't really have a competitor rat even comes close. The Prostaff would probably be my second choice, and it's not a bad scope at all, but it falls pretty far behind the Burris imo. I've also had a couple of Redfield Revenges and Revolutions and while they aren't bad choices, I think they fall short in comparison to the Burris and even the Nikon. If you have any specific questions just let me know and I'll be glad to to answer them.

I have many of the popular scopes in this price range and the only ones I've had any problems out of have been the Leupold VX-I. I've had a couple and everyone I've used has had to go back to Leopold for repair. They have great customer service, but that's about it imo. This all said I don't think the current model VX-1 (previous gen VX-II) is a horrible scope for the price. They have good glass, but I just don't think they are the quality of some of the competitors offerings.

That said, I've had pretty good luck with most others in this price range, but think some are better than others. I've also had a Bushnell Banner and a Trophy and neither are anywhere near the quality of a Nikon, Burris, etc. Everyone I've had has had sub par glass, horrible adjustments, etc. Once you step up to the Elite series they have good glass, but other than a tactical fixed power I've never had one that tracked accurately, which is a big let down for the price. In addition to this you get poor costumer service and other than the Elites you not only have to pay shipping to them if you have a problem, but you also have to send them a check for return shipping. This is unheard of with the other more reputable companies. I just see no reason to buy a Bushnell when there are soo many better options out there.

Now onto the Nikon Prostaff. I've had a couple of Prostaff scopes as well as several Monarchs. I'll focus on the Prostaff here though since it's in your price range. The ones I've had have taken some serious abuse and never lost zero. I've dropped them, banged them around, etc and they always keep on trucking. I also like the magnification ring because as mentioned it's way to turn with gloves on. The adjustments on mine haven't been repeatable, but on a muzzle loader most people zero them and don't touch them again. If that's what you plan on doing it's a good scope for that. If you are planning to dial in for longer ranges and need to be able to return to zero, this scope isn't for you. To me this isn't all that relevant on a muzzle loader though.

Next is the glass. This is really the only place I think the Prostaff falls short. The glass is decent, certainly better than a Bushnell Banner or similar but it's not great. They pick up a lot of glare if you're shooting in the direction of the sun and for my eyes, chromatic aberration is pretty bad if it's sunny out. This doesn't make them unusable by any means, it's just there. As far as other lighting conditions, they seem to do well. In low light they do decent. I've never had a situation during legal hunting hours where I was thinking I couldn't make a shot with a Prostaff.

Overall, I feel like the Prostaff isn't really great at anything, but is good at everything with good durability, decent glass, finger adjustments, etc.

Now, all of that said the Burris Fullfield II is also in that same price range and blows everything out of the water including the Prostaff. The glass on them is excellent. They handle glare much better, while the Nikon is just fine in low light, the Burris is much brighter. Glass wise I don't think you can get anything better until you step up to the Zeiss Terra. At least I haven't seen it if you can.

The Burris is also very durable and I've also been very rough on them and the hold zero very well. They have steel on steel adjustments that provide a good feel. They are just all around great in this area too. As for the reticle imo their ballistic plex is much less intrusive than the huge circles on Nikons BDC reticle, but this is more of a personal preference.

The only downside I see with these scopes is the magnification adjustment. On the original, when you assist the magnification the whole eye piece turns. This nakes it hard to run flip up scope caps as they'd constantly be turning when you changed the magnification. Imo this isn't a huge downside, but just something to consider if you want to run flip up covers. The newer E1 and C4s fix this though.

So all of that said, imo the Burris is by far the best choice in this price range and it doesn't really have a competitor rat even comes close. The Prostaff would probably be my second choice, and it's not a bad scope at all, but it falls pretty far behind the Burris imo. I've also had a couple of Redfield Revenges and Revolutions and while they aren't bad choices, I think they fall short in comparison to the Burris and even the Nikon. If you have any specific questions just let me know and I'll be glad to to answer them.

It's all a matter of opinion. I've had the Nikon ProStaff, and Omega. To me the Bushnell Trophy XLT looks better, and way better than the Leupold VX1 and VX2.

It's all Asian glass anyway.

I will not ever buy a Bushnell scope because years ago{back when they supposedly honored their warranty) I had a Bushnell Banner that while held zero and was quite clear changed point of impact as power changed .I sent it back and they said even though it had their name on it, it was made in Japan and rebranded so they could not repair it. They offered 50 percent off on a new banner from them and I almost bit, until I checked MidSouth and found I could buy it cheaper from them. Had them send it back and still have it. They lost a customer for life and I hope others will learn before purchasing.

I have a Bushnell Banner Dusk to Dawn 1.5-4.5x32mm on my Black Diamond XR and it has been an excellent scope. I sighted it in many years ago and have never had to touch it since. Very good glass, and just a real nice scope.

Sure didn't learn anything from your weak example.

I have a Bushnell Dusk to Dawn 1.4 to 4.5 32MM on a bolt 30-06. It has not had a lot of hard use but I am very happy with it. Low cost and a wide field of view, so far it has been very accurate.

I have a Redfield Revenge Accu-Ranger Sabot ML 3 to 9 42MM on a CVA Optima. I have not used it much either but it seems to be a very good scope for the money. Midwayusa was selling them for under $100 with free shipping awhile back. If this scope goes wrong you send it to the Leupold folks who own the company. It also has been very accurate.

What's weak about it? I called them and they said they would make it right. After i paid shipping both ways they did not! It says Bushnell Banner on it and they admitted it had a problem.
This was after they had the scope 4 months with no confirmation of receipt and/or communication.
Good luck to you if you if you ever have a warranty or factory service problem.

Because you had one bad experience with one of their cheaper scopes. They didn't ignore you. They offered you something. You asked everybody to not buy Bushnell, because of your one experience when I see a lot more happy customers with Bushnells. Me being one of them.

All scopes can have a problem. Even if you payed $3000 for it.

btw Changing POI when you change power is normal for cheap scopes. Which is why on a BDC scope they tell you to sight in, and use the highest power with a BDC reticle.

That's Funny!
I have at least 8 lower priced variable scopes including 3 cabelas powderhorn scopes $49 that do not change point of impact when changing power.
Maybe it is normal for a Bushnell, since I only have 1.
How about anyone else, does this seem normal to you?

I have three 'elChepo variables, a Tasco 3x9, a Simmons 4x16, and a Powderhorn 3x10. None of them change POI with a power change.

btw Changing POI when you change power is normal for cheap scopes. Which is why on a BDC scope they tell you to sight in, and use the highest power with a BDC reticle.[/QUOTE]

Never herd of scopes changing POI when changing power, cheap scope or not.

Sorry to give links that break the rules here, but it's the only way to prove my point.

...Deleted by CalHunter...

Lots more, but this should be enough.


Edit Note--If you google search some of the scope manufacturers, you can see that some (Leupold comes to mind) state that POI does not shift with changing a scope's power for successive shots (review their scope reference sections). This is one of those subjects that hunters and shooters disagree on sometimes although other factors (loose mounts, cheaply made scope, etc.) can also influence whether POI shifts with magnification change or not. While the links to competitors violates HNI's rules, Muley's point is still valid.
CalHunter
Moderator

A Bushnell Trophy XLT is not even in the same league as a Leupold VX2. I own both.

I've owned both too. Just your opinion.

Yes it is my opinion. I dont need to list links to different forums to make a point.

I wouldn't either, but how else can I make a point if they don't believe me?

I didn't look anything up when I made the original statement. I just knew it from experience.

I give you the same challenge. You say the VX2 is better. How are you going to prove it? I have a different opinon, and i've had both scopes. How do you convince me i'm wrong?

Muley Editedn by JW - bashing fellow poster rule #2

You have talked repeatedly about having very poor eye sight on here so you would be the last person I would ask about differences between quality of glass. I can find however much information I want on the internet to support my scope of choice.

I have both scopes that are mounted on guns. The VX2 has clearer glass then the XLT. Just because the glass is Asian does not mean its all the same. The XLT does not have 5" of eye relief like you have posted.

The Nikon Omega does not even have their claimed 5" eye relief. The eye relief of the Nikon Omega is indeed more then a Bushnell Trophy XLT though.....yes I have a Nikon Omega mounted on a gun also.

You are a good Googler. I'll give ya credit for that.

Funny! I got Omega and chaded posting.

Not going to argue with you guys. I feel the glass is close enough to not notice a difference. Some others feel the Bushnell is better glass. I won't claim that, but it seems as good.

Doesn't have 5" of eye relief? Wrong again.


http://www.bushnell.com/hunting/rifl...oa-250-reticle

Just because the manufactor lists 5" does not mean it actually has 5". Google up some more info, post other peoples targets, list other peoples load data. I'll let you keep on keepin on now.

I have the scope mounted on my gun right now. The scope is so far forward that the Butler Creek lens cover interferes with the hammer. I had to turn it up out of the way. That's more forward than a Leupold that claims to have 4" of eye relief. Bushnell says it has 5" of eye relief. I think they know more than you do about their own scope.

You sure don't accept defeat well.

All you can do is talk about Google, and the links I posted. How about talking about what's in the links. They back up what I said before I had to find links to back up what I said.

Don't you use Google, or is it too hard to figure out?

The bottom line is everything I said is not wrong, and I didn't need Google to say it. maybe you should post some links backing up what you say, or am I just suppose to believe you? I can show you guys saying in reviews that the glass in the Bushnell is better than a VX2. You can probably show the same thing in reverse. Like I said in the beginning. It's a matter of opinion. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the Leupold cost twice as much. It should have better glass. Too bad it doesn't.

I had to think about this, because I wasn't sure what you were talking about. You must mean when I posted a target Carlos did. I believe it was 300yds with a CVA to prove the gun were accurate. I don't shoot 300yds with a muzzleloader. Not many guys can. However, Carlos is an ex sniper, and gets everything from a gun that most can't. I make no apologies for posting his target. It made the point that a CVA is accurate which was my goal.

It's not my style to post my range reports. I tried it once, and chaded accused me of not shooting it. So, it's unlikely you'll see anymore.

I'll tell you what. If you ever get to Colorado give me a call. We can go to the range, and see how it turns out.

Guess I can respond to this. Yes, blind in my right eye, but since you don't need vision in both eyes to see if glass is clear. Have you noticed you only use one eye to look through a scope?

So, we're talking about the eye that I have sight in. I need glasses to see up close, and different glasses to see distance. I can't wear either one when using open sights, so I end up with no glasses. Everything is a little blurry, but that's better than wearing one of the glasses.

However, none of this affects using a scope, because I can focus both the reticle and the target. With a scope I have 20/20 vision, and can easily tell good glass from bad glass.

Make sense youngster?

It has been my experience that the power setting of the scope has to be turned to a certain value so that the BDC marks correspond to the point of impact of the load one is shooting.

Myself, i abandoned using a BDC reticle, when i learned from actual shooting that the power of the scope had to be reduced to make the various lines of the reticle fit the actual point of impact. It irritated me to turn the power of the scope down, when shooting long range. What good is a variable power scope, if one can't use the highest power to shoot the longest ranges, was how it looked to me. So.. the scope i owned with the BDC reticle, was sent back to the manufacturer for them to change the reticle to a standard duplex cross hair, and change the elevation dial to utilize a CDS dial engraved for the particular load i was hunting with at the time.

Muley,
If what you say is actually true would it not defeat the whole purpose of a variable scope? The whole idea is to have a lower power for in close shots and a higher power for longer range. If the scope is only accurate at the highest power why not just use a fixed power? I guess we have all been duped into wasting our hard earned money on useless variable power scopes.
by the way the scope in question moves 4" horizontally and 6" vertically between 2 and 8 power at 50yds.Not normal!