bigbulls

Scopes under $200. Forget about the rifleman. There are a bunch of other scopes being made that far outperform the rifleman by far for the same money.

Burris fullfield II compares optically with the Leupold VX-III. One piece main tube, fully multi coated optics, lifetime warranty. All in all the fullfield II offers more scope for the money than just about any other made. The sightron S2 mentioned would be in the same league as well.

Light transmission is better than the the buckmaster, rifleman, VX I, VX II, Elite 3200, Atec (don't know about the new master series)

In order of preferance my choices would be.....

Burris FF-II and/ or Sightron S2
Bushnell elite 3200
Nikon Buckmaster
Simmons Atec........... again I have not seen the new master series yet. If the new master series of Atec is what they claim then it would move up to #2 and possibly #1 on the list

2ndtimer

One other option that I would consider in your shoes would be a Weaver V9. They run around $150 or so and work pretty well. I had one years ago on a .243 Winchester and it worked great. Optically it seemed at least as good as the Leupold Vari-X II in 2x7 that I was also using on a 30-06 at the time. I would probably add it to the bottom of bigbulls list. I have to say I would also agree with his order of priority, as I own 2 of the Burris Fullfield II 3-9 with Ballistic Plex reticles.

biggunz.45-70

I just bought a nikon monarch 3-9x40 for $235 on ebay. This is the fifth one I own. I also own a buckmaster and I can't see alot of difference. I think the buckmaster and 3200 elite are both better than the bushnell legend. The legend looks good on paper so I bought one and I'm not impressed. I saw 3-9x40 buckmasters pretty cheap at www.theopticzone.com I bought a scope there and think they're the real deal. I think weaver v9 and v10 are a real buy also. The truth is if youstick with a 3-9x40 you'll get the most scope for your dollar since they are produced in greater quantity.