skeeter 7MM

I agree with FCI don't think the 4200 is cheaping out, in fact the likes of the 3200 elite, etc is a decent scope that will work for the majority of hunters in NA under normal biggame hours. While i agree on not skimping on optics and especially mounts I also understand that shelling out more for a scope can seem pretty tough compared to the rifle it is on. Took me awhile to appreciate the value of optics. However better optics never really amounted to more success in the field, they are more for me then the game. I see nothing wrong with spending 300 and getting a good return on investment. I also see no need for a high mag scope for biggame hunting either, I have taken gameoutwards of 500 yards with no more then 10X. I think a 3x9, 2.5x10, etc is perfectly suited for NA Big Game Hunting.

As far as rifleman comment about the massive recoil you get from a 300wsm.... I have shot a number of 300wsm's anddidn't view the recoil as massive. The LW rigs can be snappy but not crazy orhardpushinglike a .416 rigby!!!

The Rifleman

Once upon a time, a long time ago, I bought a Remington 760 Gamemaster 30/06 that had a Weaver 4 x 12 x 40 scope on it that looked pretty decent.

I sold the gun, but kept the scope.

I put the scope on a old used 300 Weatherby Magnum that I swapped for the '06.

After about 6 shots, I picked up the gun - off the bags on the bench to eject the shell - while my brother looked to see where it hit at 100 yards, and the scope made a jingling noise.

When I went to look through the eye piece - it was cracked in half.

That gun was a pleasure to shoot, because it was on a 1917 Enfield action and it was so heavy that it absorbed most of the recoil.

I then put a $100 Bushnell scope on it, and it would not hit the same place twice after about 5 rounds.

Now the rounds I was using was just the el chepo $30 a box - 2001 price, and was not the top of the line rounds.

After two boxes of shells, I couldn't even hit the target twice.

That scope crapped the bucket and I sent it back and gave it away when they replaced it.

That is my opinion of what a cheap scope is.

I never took to a Elite 4200 - because I didn't have any need for target knobs and a bunch of lines inside of the scope. Plus the 4200 Elite is about $500 - $600 - depending on the model.

I do however have two 3200 Elites on My BROWNING pump rifle - 300 Winchester Magnum and on my BROWNING A Bolt Medallion - .270 Winchester Short Magnum.

The 5 x 15 x 40 is no bigger than most regular scopes and it will hold a zero.

That is my point about cheap scopes. If it will not hold a zero - even after being inside of a scabbard - going across a mountain - with a ornery horse trying to throw you off at every pass. Then it isn't worth the Aluminum they wasted to make it.

I would rather look through the box than a cheap scope.

One ofmy brothers has a almost new, Leupold Vari X III -3.5 - 10.5 x 40 ? scope that he would sell you for the price of a new Elite 3200

Once you shoot a 15 power scope with real cross hairs, you will not go back to a Leupold with them tiny little cross hairs.

My other brother has an identical scope that he has not moved since he mounted it 5 years ago. Has not even sighted in his rifle since then!

Yes Leupold is a great scope - but how much do you want to spend.

4 Buck

Stick with a nikon or a burris

salukipv1

Thought I'd suggest whatever scope you get you consider one with a multiple aiming point reticle.....otherwise you're truly guessing at 300, 400, 500yds where that bullet is suppose to be.....

the leupold B&C reticle, or nikon bdc......most scopes now offer some reticle of this type.....

I have a 4.5-14, a 3-12, I'd say at least a 3.5-10, 14 is pretty high, 12 is perfect, though I'm having tough finding a 12 power I like.....or with the features I want......

As far as leupolds tiny crosshairs....? they could be finer IMO.....so larger isn't somethign I'd want.

And ya at 300-500yds I think 14x is quite a bit nicer than 10x. My first scope was a 2-7 on my .270, had it been a 3-9 I may not have replaced it, but I felt the 2-7 was just way too low of magnification for out west, ie 14x is twice that of 7x!!

DANTHEHUNTER

I have a Nikon buckmaster on my .300wm and it hasent changed its poi since I put it on there.Clear and great low light scope.

Wilds

Talk to Doug, he'll fix you up.........

http://www.cameralandny.com/

Mojotex

I think most "old heads" like me have been right where you are , and done that ... bought an "entry level" scope.You've gotten great advice here from all of these othe folks. All I would encourage you to do is scrimp, save, scrounge, work OT, beg, look under thecouch, hold a garage sale... whatever it takes ... and gather up enough $$$ to buy the very best optics that you can. I see far too many folks around here with a $500-$600 bolt action riflewitha $50 "Wally-World" special scope sitting on it. That's like putting recaps on a Carvette !!

At $300, you might seriously consider a fixed power in 4X or 6X. Mightget more quality in the glass and construction ruggedness for your dollar than a what you'd get for an equally pricedvariable.

salukipv1

My experience has been that most scopes are 75% on up to 150% of the cost of the rifle!

Not to say this is good or bad, but agreed putting a $50 anything on anything doesn't sound like much benefit.

More to my point was that it surprised me what decent glass cost when I first was in the market for a scope....

My feel is the gun/caliber dictates part of the decision, sometiems you can get by with not the greatest, sometiems it requires the greatest.....

I'd say I've been scammed much more by the supposed great products for a deal/bargain, than the best/quality at the normal/expensive price. As the years wear on, this seems to only be reinforced.....sometimes you pay more for a name......but when the best shares that with a name, you pay more/alot but you also get alot....I'd much prefer to pay alot and get what's fair, a quality product, than to get deal on a peice of junk, or something that under delivers.Because of this I find myself justifying quality more so than quantity, and its all how you want to spend your money, me I choose lesser quanity and higher quality than higher quantity and lesser quality.

Its funny to me also when you buy a "nicer/more expensive item" and even the box it comes in is nicer! To me this only goes to reinforce the quality you just bought. When even the box it comes in is nicer, what do you think of the item inside the box? ie the reason you bought it in the first place.

mossyoakkentucky

I love my Rifleman I might go ahead and buy another to put on my new gun

SJAdventures

Didn't hear much about Nikon Monarchs.