Which scope????
 

OK....got my left handed Browning Stainless Stalker in 7mm. Mag. finished with its barrel break in, so now it's time to top it off with a scope.

I've used Leupold mostly, a few Nikon Monarch's, and 1 Zeiss Conquest.

From what I've read, the Conquest seems to be the pick of the litter.....BUT.....while the 3.5X10X44 that I had was super bright in low light....I really didn't care for the crosshair. It was great for precision target shooting, but not enough "thicker" crosshair to get you on target quickly in a real life hunting situation.

I'm thinking of going with the 4.5X14X40 Leupold Vari-X III or my old standby 3.5X10X40 Vari-X III

Any ideas or opinions??? I looked at the 4.5X14X44 Zeiss Conquest and it's HUGE!!!!!! Much larger scope than I was expecting.

Any help would be appreciated.

RE: Which scope????
 

There are a couple of places that have the Swarovski A-Line scope on sale right now. I have one in 3-10 and it is an incredible scope. I have the other scopes you mentioned and the Swaro. is a considerably better scope(IMO). I think the sale price I noticed was about $850. They also had the 4X12 on sale. I have looked at some of the new Leupold prices, and they have went through the roof. I am not knocking the Leupold-they are a great scope and I have several. However the A-Line Swaro. truly is a dandy. Take a look at one.I think you will be pleasantly suprised.

Also congratulations-that is one fantastic hunting rifle. And all the ones I have shot have been great shooters. I am a lefty also-and I think you will really be happy with it. Tom.

RE: Which scope????
 

I've got a 4.5-14x50 Side Focus Mil-Dot with Target Turrets on my 257 Wby and I LOVE IT. I've got a dozen other scopes ranging from very cheap Bushnells, to a Konus China special to a Nikon Monarch. The Zeiss is brighter and sharper than all of them. It's not as obvious at the store, but I've had my Rem/Zeiss on the bench next to both the Konus on my Savage .30-06 and the Bushnell on my Savage 10ML-II, and it's like day and night what I can see with the Zeiss over the other two scopes. Last time I was at the range I used the Zeiss as a spotting scope for sighting in my 10ML-II at 175 yards. No way could I see the shots with the 10x Bushnell, but the 14x Zeiss they are clear as a crystal.

What I really want to do now that I have what I consider a minimum battery of rifles is to go back through and buy a Zeiss for the 10ML-II and the Savage .30-06. Probably 3-9x40mm versions for both. I haven't yet decided if I want to leave the -06 as-is, or rebarrel it, but I want to put a Zeiss on it no matter what. I just can't decide if I want to take the caliber up or down. I was thinking either a 6mm Rem for a deer rifle for my wife, or a .338-06 to make it a full blown elk/bear rifle should the opportunity ever arise down the road to hunt them. Either way, I want it to eventually wear a Zeiss. It's the best glass you can buy for the money that I've found. They ARE more expensive, but they are worth it.

Mike

RE: Which scope????
 

I've shot, but never owned, a Leupold. Some people might take this a sacrilege, but I think that the Leupold scopes are over-rated and cost too much. The Conquests have better glass than all but the most expensive Leupold scopes, and cost about the same as the VX-III series. And if you have the money to spend on a top-shelf Leupold, you got the cash for a top-end Zeiss or Swarovski, both of which will blow away the best glass Leupold has to offer. Everybody raves about how great Leupold's warrantee and service dept is, but I've never heard of anyone having had to return a Zeiss for a manufacturer defect. I hear about Leupolds going back to the factory all the time.

Mike

RE: Which scope????
 

My choice would be the Leupold 4.5 x 14 x 40 for your new 7mm.

RE: Which scope????
 

If I was going Leupy, I'd go VX3 not VXIII. Regarding reticles, there are other choices. I kind of like the German #4 myself. I also agree 100% with HEAD0001. I have two Swaro AV's and they are wonderful scopes. I believe Swaro is adding a new 3X erector series thus the great prices on current inventory AV's. Check out S.W.F.A.

RE: Which scope????
 

FYI-Natchez has scopes from most every brand on sale including some incredible deals.Well worth a look.

RE: Which scope????
 

A lot of wisdom in sticking with what works for you -- stay with Leupold. In fact, staying with the same scope -- VariX III 3.5-10x 40 mm -- makes a lot of sense, too. In a pinch, you could likely quickly cannibalize one scope off another rifle and move it to the other, for example in the instance of a remote hunt (provided you carried the second rifle with the same scope as backup).

For a hunting rifle -- unless your hunting requirements are very definitely specialized -- I would avoid an oversized objective lens scope. Similarly, I would avoid an overly powerful magnification range.

Other opinions may vary. Good luck and happy hunting with your 7 mm magnum.

RE: Which scope????
 

You guys are killing me, I fully understand the benefit of having quality optics, I just can't afford any of them. The best scope I was able to afford is a Mueller 4.5-14x40 AO that I put on my .17hmr. Overall though I have three Tasco 3-9's, the first was purchased in 1976, and it still works great. I guess I'll just keep reading posts like this one and maybe someday I'll hit the lottery.

RE: Which scope????
 

With the current higher prices on the Leupold scopes-the difference in price between the best Leupold's and the A-Line Swaro. is not as large as you think.

I realize everyone has their own opinion on things. However I have seen a bunch of guys who have a half dozen deer rifles and a half dozen different scopes. Then they say they can not afford a high end scope?? I would much rather have one high quality rifle and scope over 5 or 6 low or even medium quality rigs. But again that is just my opinion. But you know what they say about the guy who only has one rifle...................Tom.

RE: Which scope????
 

+1

That was my point for spending more on the scope. I'm not rich (not even close), but I wanted a great rifle with great glass that I'll be proud to own for the rest of my life. Awhile ago I realized I preferred accuracy to volume, so I sold my SKS's and inaccurate semi-auto rifles and started buying bolt action rifles that would shoot 1.5 MOA or better. I could blast all day with an SKS as surplus Russian ammo, but I'd be very lucky to keep all the shots on an 8.5x11" sheet of paper at 100 yards. After serving in the Marine Corps and having the chance to put 10's of thousands of rounds downrange from real machine guns, the appeal of the SKS wore off.

More recently I realized what many hunters don't, that the quality of the glass is every bit as important as the rifle it's mounted on top of. I know many, many guys who won't think twice about buying a $700-1,000 rifle, and then they'll mount a $50 Trashco in the cheapest aluminum rings they can find on it, and wonder why the darn thing gives them fits at the range. Most of them then blame the RIFLE!

Is $700 a lot to pay for a quality rifle? Most would say no. So why then do so many balk at paying at least half that much for at least mid-level glass? If you can save for the rifle, then you can save for the scope, too. It might take you longer to scratch that new-gun itch, but you'll be glad you waited.

Mike

If you feel the Zeiss Z-plex is to small for you in the field and buy a leupold you should be looking at the heavy duplex rather then the standard. Personally prefer the conquest and swaro a-line's to leupold VXIII in all optical aspects...however I'm not you so buy whichever you feel is the best. Leupold may not be the best for the dollars spent at the present however they are still good optics and a solid choice IMHO.

In regards to the nikon monarch I don't care for the bulk of the 2.5x10x42mm and the power ring is very stiff still after a year on my 10 II ML (which sees a lot of action). Optically I am happy for the dollars, though personally would buy a bushnell elite 4200 instead.

As to which mag (X) I personally don't see the need for more then 10x on a biggame setup. I think the money could be used on better things then more mag on my scope. Just my 2 penny's though.

Good luck

Everyone you mentioned is good.




I use Burris; in fact I put this one on every rifle I own




http://www.burrisoptics.com/sigselect1.html#4x16x

Finally bought it!
 

After a lot of looking a long time at the Leupold and Zeiss lineup, I went with ol' faithfull again

Leupold VX3 3.5X10X40mm.

Mounted it on my rifle and after a quick bore sighting, it was within 2" of spot on at 100 yards.

I was amazed!

Took it out right at dusk last night at my hunting lease and could still see well enough to shoot WELL after legal shooting light.

I'm VERY pleased!!!!

aLL YOU MENTIONED ARE GOOD.



dON'T OVER LOOK bURRIS




http://www.burrisoptics.com/sigselect.html

Got a Loopy 3.5x10x50 Vari x III with the heavy duplex reticle on my Model 70 in 7 rem mag Been a great combo for years would not change it for nothing.

Dollar for dollar and year after year the standard Leupold's are hard to beat.. I own at least a dozen 3X9's, 3.5X10's a 6X18 on my hunting rifles and have never had one fail, fog or otherwise cause me any problems and most of the 3x9's are many years old and cost from
$150--$250, which is no more expensive that the vast majority of scopes produced.. On my target rifles I have the 36d's and Nightforces..both of which are far more expensive but good clear lenses and precise movements..hard to beat
Leupold for the average Joe!!

i just got a bushnell DOA 600 for my new marlin xl7 and i would like to know if anyone has any experience with this scope.I like the crosshairs thick and i would like to know if it is good in low-light conditions when im normally hunting.Any imput would be nice.