Help with scope choice
 

I am currently looking to re-scope a Savage 11 308 win. I have narrowed my choices to

Burris Fulfield II
Nikon Buckmaster
Bushnell Elite 3200

Can anyone chime in on opinions? these were the clearest scopes i found at the store. Assume all are the same $$$. all of them are 3x9

I'm a Burris Scope fan.

A Nikon Bino and rangefinder guy.

I do have some "Mini" binos from Bushnell, that are "pretty" good.


Lifetime warranty and good customer service after the purchase is what matters.

The answer is - none of the above.

The reason for this answer is that I have or have had all of those scopes at one time or another and I came to the conclusion a long time ago that if I was going to buy a new scope it was going to be a Bushnell Elite 3200 5 x 15 x 40 or 50

I have one of each.

The 3 x 9 x 40 has some issues that the 5 x 15 scope solves.

The last one I bought was about $200 for a 3 x 9 x 40 Bushnell and the Elite 3200 5 x 15 is about $100 more - maybe $125.00

For that $125 - you get twice as much scope.

I will use my brothers as a example. I have two brothers who bought Leupold Vari X III scopes on the same day, off the same dealer, mounted on two identical guns. (Both guns are 30-06 Gamemasters) and both brothers will tell you that the Leupold was just a name and that they have a hard time seeing a one inch bulls eye at 100 yards with their scope.

They will both tell you that if someone gave them what they paid for their scopes right now, they would both sell their scopes tomorrow to anyone and buy the Bushnell Elite 3200 5 x 15 x 40.

All they had to do was shoot either of my guns one time to see that their scope was just a name and it did not do anything more then the Bushnell and they paid substantially more - for the name.
The price of their scopes has gone up substantially since they bought them, which was about 4 or 5 years ago - so anyone that was willing to spend $400 something - could have them both..

There is no advantage to the Nikon. My opinion is that the Buckmaster series of scope is a cheap scope that does a good job as long as you don't ask it to do something more then what it was designed to do. You aren't going to shoot 500 yards with it.

My dad has a Burris Fullfield and it's ok - but there isn't anything about it that would make me sell everything I own and go out tomorrow and buy one.

This is all from a person that has sent many scopes back to the manufacturer because they were not to my specifications - not theirs.

The only used scope I ever bought was a REDFIELD WIDEFIELD and I have two rifles right now that uses them and both of those rifles has shot plenty of deer.

The Nikon is probably the best scope out of the three - but you would have a hard time getting me to admit it.

Scope choice?
 

That's exactly what it is. I have chosen Nikon for all of my rifles primarily because I used Nikon cameras in my work for many years.
I have chosen Monarchs, Buckmasters and ProStaffs depending on the use of the rifle. There is no argument that there are better(maybe) scopes out there, but for the dollar spent IMHO you won't do better than NIKON.
GOOD LUCK and GOOD SHOOTING!!!

On a hunting rifle I'd pass on the Nikon scopes. Not enough tolerance on the parallax.

While I agree with the poster regarding the higher magnification, that is a personal preference. Bushnell makes a very good scope for the money. If you want to step into the good line they start at the 4200 series. If you can afford it I'd go that route.

Otherwise I'm not sure you'll go wrong with any thing on your list. They will all work.

Tom

Im sorry but you are not comparing apples to apples here.

A Nikon camera has absolutely nothing to do with a Nikon scope.
They are two separate entities.

Because I have worked in the field of machining, I know a little about scope manufacture. One of the first things to look for in a rifle scope is a one tube manufacture. The second is a positive click type system. The third is the coating on the lens and the seal on the glass and the adjustments. Then you look at appearance and fit and eye relief. Once you get beyond that stage then you look at Parallax, if you can get past that, then you need to look at the amount of magnification and the size of the field of view at that amount of magnification. When you get beyond that stage - then you have to look at brightness and clarity.

All 3 of the scopes he has chose is by price only and not by performance. Choosing a scope - because of name of manufacture or reputation does not get you any closer on the paper to the bulls-eye then does picking a scope by magnification alone.

The end result is - you may never need a 15 power scope, but if you can buy a scope that you only need to shoot 3 shots to confirm from one year to the next that it has retained it's zero - the Bushnell Elite with rain guard 3200 5 x 15 is the clear choice winner.

Target knobs is just fine for a bench rest rifle, but has no real place in the woods where something can get knocked around or changed and forgot and then not set back to zero - which would mess up a normally good hunt.

In my younger days, when a person asked me a question like this, I would tell them to go down to Burger King and work a second job for a week or two to make the difference so they could purchase the better scope. But I have mellowed out in my old age and my opinion is that a person has to do what they have to do.
Some people would rather settle for something less then spectacular then wait and buy a better quality product when they could afford it. I would rather buy something once, use it for the rest of my life and then not have to worry about it then to buy the same piece of crap two or three times before I got what I wanted in the first place.

That was the problem that my brothers made the first time when they ran out and bought Leupold scopes on reputation only and not by actually looking through the scope and comparing it to other scopes...

There is only 3 or 4 machines in the whole world that grinds all the glass for all the rifle scopes made in the world. So trying to say that one is better then another would be like me trying to tell you that one brand of Good Year tire is better then another when they both have the same rubber compound and the same tread design.

I personally have used Nikon quite a bit in the past, but have more recently become a VERY big fan of Bushnell for budget conscious scope buying. I can second the problems with paralax issues with Nikon's.

Here's my REAL WORLD example, from just this month... We have had a 3-9x40mm Bushnell Elite 3200 on my fiancee's 100yrd benchrest rifle for quite some time. She wanted to step up to something with a little more zoom, so I purchased a Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14x40mm. After just ONE DAY at the range, she had me re-mount the Bushnell, because at maximum zoom (anything between 10-14x), the Nikon had terrible paralax issues. I have had SOME issues with Nikon's in the past, but this scope is far and away the worst. I will be contacting Nikon about it, and if they don't resolve the issue, we'll be asking for a refund.

I still have 2 monarchs and a lowly prostaff sitting on the shelf that I'm working on selling, but my preference has definitely been swayed to the bushnells.

The bushnell elite, even the low end 3200's, have great glare and fog proofing, amazing range of focus with ZERO paralax issues. I couldn't be happier with ours, and I guarantee you'll be happy with yours!

I have 3x9x40 Nikon buckmaster on my .06. For the money and the price range it is in the scope is fine. No you probably won't be able to shoot 500 yds with it, but most people, me included shouldn't be shooting that far anyway. I bought my Nikon scope because of past experiences with their products and customer service. I looked at and researched other scopes but the Nikons just seemed to have better reviews. This is just my experience with Nikon and my .02.

Of the three you listed I'd go with the Bushnell 3200. But I agree with statjunk on this one. Save a little more and go with the 4200 from Bushnell.

I personally like the Burris over the other two. The Bushnell 3200 being a close second. I also second the suggestion of the 4200 if you can spring it.

As far as magnification goes there is no reason in the world that a big game rifle needs more than 10X magnification. 10X magnification is enough to get you to 500+ yards on a deer sized target. A general purpose big game rifle with a variable scope should have a magnification range that starts out lower than 5X or 6X. You will need the low end many more times than you will need the 15X or 16X.

i have bushnell 3200 and 4200 scopes. there is a HUGE difference in the 3200 and 4200. try to get your hands on a 2.5-10x50 4200

Before the antler restrictions in Pennsylvania, if you did not have a scope that you could do a hair analysis with - it probably wasn't a very good scope. Most deer in my area of the country did not live much past their second birthday and when they are running through the Pennsylvania hardwoods and you have to verify that they have a antler to be legal to shoot - a good scope is a must.

At the same time, since the antler restrictions - a deer now must have 4 points to one side to be legal. I have passed on several trophy deer - even ones that were limping - just because I could not put the 4th point on the rack.

We are not talking about sitting in a blind on posted property here or in the middle of a food plot or next to a deer feeder. I am talking real world conditions. As I have said in the past - I have shot a lot of deer, I have used a lot of guns and I have owned a lot of scopes.

I hear all these people who say that they use a 2.5X scope and stuff to hunt deer, and maybe for them that is fine. But in a real world situation where you have 3 - 5 seconds to determine is it legal and can I shoot it - you are going to need a scope that not only points the barrel where you are looking - but also confirms that what you are about to shoot is indeed legal.

Maybe I am the only one her - but every time I pull the trigger, I always wonder - did I shoot the right deer and was it the one that had the antlers. Especially if it was running with one or two other legal deer. Until I walk up to the deer and confirm that it is indeed the deer that I was shooting at and that it was a legal buck, I worry that I might have shot the wrong deer or that I missed or that I did not shoot it where I intended. All these things races through my mind.

The last thing I would want to do is to have to worry that the deer wasn't legal or that I shot the wrong deer and would have to turn myself into the Game Warden.

4x is about at the minimum end that I see anyone in Pennsylvania with a scope use and as a person gets more confident - they might turn their scope up to 5 for normal everyday hunting. But if the deer is down on the other end of a long pipe line or power line - you always see hunters try to turn their scope up as high as possible - to give them the best possible shot. Once you shot with a 15x scope - you will take that 9x scope and mount it on your .22 rifle.

I have never seen a person wish that they could turn target knobs to adjust for windage or elevation when most shots are taken at 40 - 60 yards.

Here is a great writeup that I highly recommend you take a look it. I've tested a couple of the scopes he talks about here and my experience mimicks his. So it's not just some bs made up because of brand loyalty like most of this thread.
http://opticstalk.com/inexpensive-sc...opic21176.html
That being said, I wanted to review a Nikon Prostaff also and see if my opinion was the same as his, so I did, and sure enough here were my thoughts on it.
http://opticstalk.com/nikon-prostaff...opic25460.html

The Burris FFII is my favorite scope I've used in that price range range, but I've not used the Vortex Diamondback. Another option to consider is right now some of the Vortex Vipers are on clearance, and they are a much much better scope than any of the ones you listed.

I agree with Bigbulls about saving a little extra money for the 4200. The 3200 is definitely the best on the list, but the 4200 is well worth the wait.

That said, I disagree that big game rifles never need more than a 10x scope, especially out to 500+ yrds. I personally am on the other side of things. None of my hunting rifles have less than a 4-16x glass, and I almost NEVER use the scopes below 10x. Even at ranges less than 100yrds, I crank up the magnification as high as I can. The only time I zoom out is if the animal is too big to fit in the field of vision, which is pretty dang close (FOV for a normal 24x40mm scope at 100yrds is about 6ft, plenty of room to fit a deer!)

It's a cheesy line from a crazy guy's movie, but "aim small, miss small". If your scope only zooms tight enough to see a deer, and you aim at a deer, you'll probably hit the deer... SOMEWHERE... But if your scope zooms tight enough to pick out it's shoulder blade, and you aim just below and behind the shoulder blade, you'll probably hit the vital area, instead of just hitting the deer. The difference in a 3-9x and a 6-24x scope at 100 yrds is the difference in aiming at a deer, vs aiming at it's heart. I'd rather aim at it's heart.

I'm also in the high magnification club. I don't buy a scope unless it has 14x power. I just like to pick my shot.

Tom

Got to disagree with you here. I have a Zeiss Conquest 3-9X40 that I can plainy see .277 caliber bullet holes with at 100 yards at 9x.

For all those in the high power scope club, how do hunters ever kill deer with straight 4x and 6x scopes? Hunters have been using them for years and continue to do so.

Scope choice?
 

Mr. Deer Hunter,
I was not "comparing" anything. I was making an assessment of a company's quality and customer service based on past experience as it contributed to my "choice". I don't expect anyone to make their choice based solely on my or anyone elses "opinion". Over the years I have used Burris, Bushnell, Leupold, Simmons, Weaver, and Nikon optics.
Once again, IMHO for the dollar spent I haven't done better than NIKON.
GOOD LUCK and GOOD SHOOTING!!

There were also many many years that hunters killed deer with a spear, but I won't be doing so any time soon.

Yes, a 3-9x is a great all around deer hunting scope, for the average hunter that will only ever shoot beyond 150yrds a few times in a hunting career, and it's very budget friendly.

I'm personally the type that prefers to have the best equipment I can afford to help ensure precise placement of my bullets. A low quality 6-24x glass is NOT better to have than a high quality 3-9x, but if waiting a few months to save up the difference between a high quality 3-9x and a good-to-high quality 6-24x, I'm going to wait until I can afford the higher magnification.

But then again, I'm also the guy with a safe full of heavy barreled rifles, even for hunting, in preference to accuracy over affordability or comfort.

Consider this, MANY MANY competitions through history have featured open sighted rifles shooting 600-1000yrds. Many competitions still use this format. Also, countless NRA matches are shot with open sighted AR-15's, Garands, or M-1A's out to 600-1000yrds (AR-15 out to 600yrds: every marine that goes through recruit training). However, in open class 1000yrd competition, while an open sighted pedersolli sharps might do well in a buffalo rifle competition (20" plus gong's at 600-1000yrds), the HIGHLY magnified (30x-50x top end), highly modified custom bolt rifles win the day (5-8" groups at 1000yrds). Yes, the old .45-70's or the open sighted battle rifles CAN shoot fairly accurately that far, but NO, they are NOT the best equipment available to do it, and they CAN NOT compete with the modern specialized equipment.

Gimme a high mag glass any day.

To each his own. I have taken alot of deer over the years and many have been well past 150 yards. Never felt underscoped with a 3-9 variable. I would rather buy quality glass over higher magnification any day.

You mention hunting with spears. I think Alabama has a spear season for deer. I would not mind trying that as I'm sure it would be very challenging.

Unless a person is hunting in the wide open there are gonna be many more times they will wish they had 2X or 3X magnification at the low end than 14X, 16X or 24X at the high end.

Trying to find that buck walking through heavy cover at 40 yards with that 6-24X is gonna be a hard thing to do.

If you have a bunch rifles that are set up for a variety of hunting situations like a bean field rifle, pronghorn rifle, varmint rifle, etc... then by all means set them up with high magnification if needed. But a general purpose rifle that may have to pull duty in everything from thick woods at bow ranges to 400 -500 yard shots in a food plot a 3-9X or 3-10X is perfect and all that is needed.

I own higher mag scopes for target/varmit hunting but when it comes to biggame above 10x I see no need. My hunting situations offer everything from tight cover of the forest/trees to wide open plains. My hunting range from in position/situations is 0 -500ish yards. I've take a lot of animals past 200 yards with no more then 9 or 10x, ie last fall antelope buck 438. For me high mag is great in a more controlled situation where you have a solid rest,etc. For me personally this doesn't equate to my big game hunting "real world". I am definately of the opinion less mag better glass is the way to go. When you think about when opportunities arise low light better glass will pay dividents in full and higher mag isn't always an option in poor light making one power down. Ie: big buck cruising along the treeline in the last few minutes of legal...no skyline, you want as much light as possible.

I'm sorry the thought of hunters using their scopes to field judge animals gives my the willy's. I had an experience where a shot rang by me from a guy who didn't know his target and beyond, nor adhered to always assume your gun is loaded. Used his scope as binos and accidentally touched one off!!! I thank god he missed! Guys/Gals please use binos or spotting scopes for assessing and not your rifle!!!

In terms of the scope all 3 have good followings. Pick the one that looks the best to your eyes.

Good Luck

For the guys saying "10x tops", take note that they ALL have said "I'd rather have lower mag in a better scope, than have a high mag". The arguement isn't about a Ferarri being better than a Ford, the arguement I'm making is that an F-350 Diesel can out pull a F-150, which is a simple fact.

There is no arguing that having a HIGH QUALITY glass is better than having a HIGH MAG piece of junk, but my point is that the average shooter would be MUCH better served by a HIGH QUALITY, HIGH MAG scope than by an entry level magnification scope.

Granted, I've been shooting high mag scopes once or twice a week for about 10yrs, and I use a "switch focus" sighting method, so maybe I'm a special case. I shoot both eyes open, watch the target in my left eye, bring the cross hairs in my right eye onto the target in my left eye, then switch my focus over to the right eye, and the cross hairs are on the target. It takes a bit of practice, but it's an easily attainable skill.

If you live in an area where you literally could NEVER take a shot beyond 50yrds, then a low mag scope (or open sights) is king. But very few of us honestly live in such dense areas. If, like 99% of the country, you live in an area that COULD have shots beyond 100yrds, then the higher the mag, the better potential placement of your shot. In my experience 9x zoom on a deer at 100yrds is about the same as a 24x zoom at 225-250yrds. So in terms of shot placement precision, a 9x shot at 100yrds is about the same as a 24x shot at 250. So if we're playing a game where inches matter (not that hunting requires extreme accuracy though), magnification is king.

A big buck is about 3-3.5ft high at the shoulder, 5-5.5ft high at the tip of the rack, and around 6-7ft long. FOV for a 3-9x on 9x at 500yrds is around 60ft, so the buck will make up only 1/10th of the frame. FOV for a 24x is about 25ft, making the deer about 25% of the frame. The ENTIRE DEER in the 9x frame will appear about the same size as the VITAL AREA in the 24x. Magnification shaves Minutes (MOA) off a group. The more precisely you can AIM at something, the more precisely you can HIT something.

At the other end of the spectrum, FOV for a typical 6-24x40mm glass is around 20ft at 100yrds at 6x, and 6ft wide at 24x. The buck will still fit inside the glass at 20x, and be swimming in the glass at 6x. Even at 50yrds, the FOV is around 10ft, plenty of room to fit the buck inside the frame.

At the end of the day, I'd much rather shoot a 4x or 6x (bottom end of a 4-16x or 6-24x) at 30yrds than take a 7-9x shot (top end of a 2.5-7x or 3-9x) at 500yrds. It's MUCH easier to miss at 500yrds than at 30yrds.

I have a Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14 X 40 on my .308 and absolutely love it. Low light transmission is very good as is clarity. I also have a Buckmaster 3-9x40 on my .243 that is also a great scope.