Hunting Washington Forum

Equipment & Gear => Scopes and Optics => Topic started by: Huntbear on September 28, 2008, 08:15:25 AM

Title: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Huntbear on September 28, 2008, 08:15:25 AM: I am looking to buy a new scope this year. I am on a strict budget, so am looking at the Bushnell 3200 elite 3-9x50, but have also seen the Nikon Pro Staff 3-9x50 for about 40-50 bucks less. Other than the "rain guard" that Bushnell coats the lenses with, is there any other differences? Pros cons to either????

I have seen the Elite series in action, but not the Nikon.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: catwithboost on September 28, 2008, 08:27:21 AM: If you are on a budget look at the Nikon Buckmaster. I have 2 of them 3x9x40 with BDC and like them. Just a idea :dunno:
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: shag on September 28, 2008, 08:32:04 AM: Leupold VX I for another $40 bucks

Do a search and try to find a Weaver K series or the Weaver V series.

Of the two mentioned I'd go with Bushnell.

Go to the classifieds at 24hrcampfire. They sell Leupold VX II's all the time for about $225. Used but with Leupolds liftime garentee you can't beat the price and quality.

I'd take a Weaver over the Nikon. JMHO
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Huntbear on September 28, 2008, 08:34:01 AM: I looked at the buckmasters, but this is going on a .338. The OLD redfield scope that is on there, just needs to be replaced. And my budget is going to be about what either the Elite or the Pro staff run. I found the 3200 elite for 212.00 shipped. Best price I could find so far.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: AWS on September 28, 2008, 08:44:34 AM: If I were looking for a scope in that price range first thing I'd do is lose the 50mm objective. There is so little gain and more draw backs, high rings (need to lift head off stock for good sight picture), the higher the rings more stress on the scope and mounting system esspecialy on heavy recoil rifle. Also the 50mm scope is heavier.

AWS
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: shag on September 28, 2008, 09:02:27 AM: Had both Nikon prostaff's and Buckmasters and sold em for weavers. The Weavers are around $150-$175. My 4x and 6x Weavers are my favorite I've owned yet. I totally argree with AWS ditch the 50mm idea.

Here's examples of a great scope at a great price. http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2462496/page/1/gonew/1#UNREAD
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2460134/page/4#Post2460134

VX II can be had for $225 and both those shown I'm sure you could get for $200
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: bobcat on September 28, 2008, 09:14:48 AM: Quote from: shag on September 28, 2008, 09:02:27 AM
I totally agree with AWS ditch the 50mm idea.

+2

I would look at the Burris Fullfield II in a 3-9x40 if you're looking for a bargain. Great optics and great price. It has what they call the "Ballistic Plex" reticle which I really like.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: high country on September 28, 2008, 11:45:34 AM: another guy saying ditch the 50mm.

peek around and you will find 3-9x40 elite 4200's for 200-250bux. there is no tougher scope made. I have several of them, infact, on all my "hunting" rifles this is pretty much what I am swapping out to. long range is a different story, but if ou are gonna shoot 450ish or less it is hard to beat for the $$

the fullfields are pretty fair for the $$ I have had a few come and go. they are fair on the optics and do have the bal-plex.......but I crapped one on my 257roy...so durability is a big ???
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on September 28, 2008, 05:25:33 PM: 2 pards and I bought Fullfeilds with the ballistic plex, within a year, ALL 3 got sent back.

Nikon rock, have a few of them, had one on a 338 RUM, shot 1 hole groups, sooo they're tough. awesome glass too.

Have a Elite 3200 mounted on my Sako 243, love it, love the rain guard, works like a dream over here on the coast. I'd probally go with the Elite over a buckmaster or pro staff. Scrap the 50mm objective, they're garbage. IMO

Let us know what you get. Later
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: bobcat on September 28, 2008, 07:36:16 PM: Geez, now I'm getting nervous about my Fullfield. It's on a 30-06 and it's just my back up rifle so it hasn't been fired much. Probably only had 100 rounds through it so far. Tell you what, if something goes wrong with it I won't be sending it back. I'll throw it away and buy a Leupold VX-II in a 3-9x40.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on September 28, 2008, 07:40:21 PM: Ya, Burris have a good reputation, bad lot? 2 were 3X9's, the other a 4.5X14...
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Jason on September 28, 2008, 09:18:53 PM: Quote from: 257 Wby Mag on September 28, 2008, 05:25:33 PM
2 pards and I bought Fullfeilds with the ballistic plex, within a year, ALL 3 got sent back.

I have a fullfield 2 on A 300 winmag,never had a prob with it.
Burris has a great warranty if you need it, I think they have the best B-plex around.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: andrew_12gauge on September 29, 2008, 02:24:43 AM: im gonna go against the grain here and say go nikon, since ive only seen one other person say it, have a pro staff on my .300 wsm and i love it, had one on a .243 wssm and ended up selling the combo to get a .204 but before i sold it i was hunting deer on the high hunt and smacked the scope on a big ass boulder, looked through the scope afterwards and if you looked just right you could see a screw head inside the scope in the upper right corner i figured the scope was shot for sure but i took it home went to the range and shot a box of ammo through it it was still dead on and i played with it and all adjustments were still good, when i sold it i told the guy to keep an eye on it and if he had any problems to let me know and id get him a little of his money back but he called me about a month later and said hed been coyote hunting multiple times and still hadnt missed a dog, and it was still shooting great, so durability is no question, as for the suggestions of the ballistic plex in the burris nikon has the bdc reticle which is essentially the same thing but its only available in the 3-9x40 so just ditch the 50 mm objective and save a few bucks anyway
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: addicted on September 29, 2008, 02:47:29 AM: i had a bushnell then davee got his nikon and it had a way clearer view than my bushnell. not to mention it had the BDC that is not only cool but it works. my next scope is prolly gonna be a nikon.

+1 for nikon

the number one thing you can do to get exactly what you want is not to have a budget. dont mind that comment just dreaming over here....
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Bookworm on September 29, 2008, 07:23:08 AM: I've made the switch to Nikons myself. Shot Burris for years, just think that unless you get the upper end Burris the Nikons are better. I have six of them now with no problems. :twocents:
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: p-ohana on September 29, 2008, 08:13:02 AM: I would go with the Bushnell, You saw the results last year. The 50mm Obj makes all the differance in low light.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Intruder on September 29, 2008, 08:40:49 AM: Quote from: high country on September 28, 2008, 11:45:34 AM
another guy saying ditch the 50mm.

peek around and you will find 3-9x40 elite 4200's for 200-250bux. there is no tougher scope made. I have several of them, infact, on all my "hunting" rifles this is pretty much what I am swapping out to. long range is a different story, but if ou are gonna shoot 450ish or less it is hard to beat for the $$

I whole heartidly agree. This is a fantastic option and gonna give you the most bang for the buck out there. Fantastic scope!! No need for the 50 mm if you are looking to save $. Probably no need anyway.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Tony 270WSM on September 29, 2008, 12:07:14 PM: Nikon. Think it is the Primos series that used to be the old Monarch line, just renamed. A Nikon Monarch blows a Leupold VX I (which was suggested) away, not even a close comparison.

As was also stated, I'd stay away from the 50mm lens as a simple 40mm will do what you need and more.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: EastWaViking on September 29, 2008, 12:15:32 PM: I looked at Leupold, Burris and Nikon when I was in the market for a 223 scope earlier this year. The 3-9x40 Buckmasters Matte BDC was the clearest and least expensive, so I bought it, and love it.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: thinkingman on September 29, 2008, 03:44:16 PM: another vote for Bushnell 4200 for $250 or Nikon Team Primos for $199.
Blows Leupy away.
I still have 2 Burris FFII's and love them.
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: C-Money on October 21, 2008, 05:03:30 PM: Leupold vxII or the vxI. Also look at the Burris scopes. They are also well made. :twocents:
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: deaddog on October 22, 2008, 01:04:34 PM: I was looking to buy a new scope for a varmit gun. went to Cabels in ID, i compared the optics on bushy 3200, leupy I and II and Nikon pro-staff and buckmaster. I ended up buying a 4.5 x 14,40obj buckmaster for 290.00 and love it. I was not happy with the optics on the 2 Leupys at all. also i was told by the guy at cabels that they are using chines glass in those models. dont know if thats true but the glass was inferior to the nikons . just my opinion!
Title: Re: Bushnell vs. Nikon scopes
Post by: Huntbear on October 22, 2008, 07:55:54 PM: Well guys, I went with a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x50, with the FF reticle. I got it brand new off ebay for 200.00 shipped. My brother has already mounted it on my Sako, and it took 7 rounds to put 3 rounds under a quarter at 100 yds. and he says it is clearer and brighter than his 4200. I will let you know how it works out in the field after I get out there to God's country next week.