Okay, I haven't bought my rifle yet, but am going to end up with aRemington 700, Ruger M77 Mark II, Browning A-Bolt or Tikka T3 in either 7mm Mag or 30-06.

I'mprimarily going to be using it in Eastern Montana where shots in the 200 yard range are not uncommon.

I've heard about Nikon, Leupold, Zeiss, etc. but the only thing in a resonable price I've seen there is the Nikon Buckmaster. In my post where I'm trying to decide on my rifle someone suggested the Burris Fullfield II scope as a possibility so I'm looking at that as well.

After deciding on a brand, deciding on the magnificationis kind of like deciding on a caliber for a gun. I for sure want a variable scope but am undecided between 3-9x or 4.5-14x. I know eye relief is better with the 3-9x and I'm not going to be shooting over 400 yards so the 9x would be adequate for that, but when you are out walking with just you and your gun often I've used the rifle scope as a spotting scope and the higher magnifications can really help with that.

So, with that novel I would like to know if anyone has any specific suggestions or recommendations on a scope. Right now I'm looking pretty hard at the Burris Fullfield II and there is a place online thatis throwing in a cheap garmin GPS as a package that is about the same as the Nikon Buckmaster.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

How about a Bushnell 3200 Elite 4x12 for around $275. I have one on my .300 win mag and have yet to have a eye relief issues. Burris Fullfield II scopes are suppose to be pretty good for prices ranging from $160 for a 3x9 to low to mid $200 for higher power.

I bought a new scope just yesterday and was facing the same delimma that you are. I looked at a Bushnelle elite 3200, a Leupold VX-II, a Nikon Buckmaster, and a Burris FF-II. I quickly narrowed my choices to the FF-II and the Buckmaster. I looked through each scope probably 100 times. I really couldn't tell the difference in optic quality. But remember I was in a well lit store. After all was said and done I chose the Nikon based on the look and feel of the scope. I haven't had a chance to mount it, but I feel like it will be a good scope.

What do people think about the choice between 3-9x and 4.5-14x? Pros and cons?

Thanks, Nathan

Elk hunting isn't always done in open country like your Eastern Montana deer hunting will be, so a scope that starts with 4.5x magnification may not be your best choice. I'd take a look at some 3-10s like the Weaver Grand Slam...or there are a few really nice 3-12s out there, like the Sightron SII and the Burris Signature Select. At 3x, you should be fine even in thick woods, and 10x-12x is more than adequate for shots at any distance you should be shooting at game.

i've got a 4-12x50 Swift and a 4-12x40 Pentax that i absolutely love! both of these scopes are in the price range and magnificationyou specified.

Go check out the Bushnell ELite's. The 3200's glass is great for the price and the 4200's glass and coating are hard to beat with even the >1000$ scopes. The rainguard feature is hard to beat.


Heres a ELite 4200 3x9-40 for 279$ IMO you will not find a better deal for under 300.

http://www.swfa.com/pc-7280-185-bushnell-3-9x40-elite-4200-rifle-scope.aspx

[:-]I'd advise aganist you doing that again. But in answer to your question, few people beyond varmit and long-range hunters will find any use for anything about 9x or 10x for practical hunting. I like Weavers a lot, and their Grand Slam series appears to be a nice line of scopes. Don't know if they fit in your budget, just throwing ideas out there.

Get the Bushnell 4200 Elite 3x9x40. Best scope in that class. About $270 including shipping from SWFA. They have the backpack thrown in for $10 also.

I have a Bushnell Elite 3200 and it is a good scope for the money. However, I would try to find one and put it on the gun you plan to put the scope on. The scope is definately bright and clear but the eye box is pretty small. Thiscould makeshots a little tougher in a hunting situation.