Post by: Antlershed on December 03, 2008, 07:18:31 PM
Post by: 270Shooter on December 03, 2008, 08:13:14 PM
Never had a Nikon though.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 03, 2008, 08:17:45 PM
Still can't go wrong with either. :twocents:
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2008, 08:20:20 PM
Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x40 for around the same price
That would be my choice. I might also consider the same scope in a 3.5-10. Can't go wrong with a Leupold. Another great scope for the money is the VX-II in a 3-9x40. They are $299 and are pretty much equivalent to the old Leupold VariX-III.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 03, 2008, 08:24:18 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2008, 08:27:32 PM
Well the reason I went with the Nikon is when I went to get the Leupold, the Nikon seemed to have better eye relief. With the ultra mag, the more eye relief the better...
Really? Eye relief is what Leupold is known for, that's the reason many people choose Leupold over other brands is for their superior eye relief. But I can't say as I've never looked through a Nikon. I do agree, "the more eye relief the better."
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 03, 2008, 08:55:56 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 03, 2008, 08:58:09 PM
Post by: Charlie on December 04, 2008, 08:15:17 AM
Post by: addicted on December 04, 2008, 08:23:08 AM
Post by: Sagedawg on December 04, 2008, 08:34:57 AM
This will either be going on a .300win-mag or a .300RUM. My last .300win-mag had a Simmons Aetec and I think that was a horrible scope choice on my part. I just don't think it could handle the recoil. The rifle will be getting a brake put on it, so I am just curious what can handle the shock as well as optics quality. I am looking to spend probably in the $400-$500 range max. I have been looking at the Nikon Monarch 4-16x42 for $449 or the Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x40 for around the same price depending on which reticle. I have always been a Nikon person, but wouldn't be opposed to putting a Leupold on it.
You have picked to good ones here. I have both of these as well as a Burris in the same power range. I like them all very much, BUT I think the best glass is in the Leuopld followed by the Nikon, then the Burris. The Leupold and Nikon are on 338's and my 300 winny wears the Burris. They have held up very well, with no problems . I will say that I belive the way a scope is mounted and what rings and bases are used . Buy the best that you can and check for proper alignment as well as scope setting correct in the rings. . I dont think you will make a bad choice by picking any of these that you have mentioned. One other thing to consider, with good glass you dont need huge objectives, this will alow you to keep the scope mounted lower to the bore which will help promote good shooting form.
Hope this helps you out. Keep us posted on what you decide to do.
Sage
Post by: addicted on December 04, 2008, 08:44:57 AM
what you need is a schmidt and bender 5-25 x 56...
tell your wife you need it cuz josh (me) said so. I'm sure that will go over well :chuckle:
something like this one
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpage.exe/showpage?saleitemid=574012&utm_source=froogle&utm_medium=free&utm_campaign=657
Post by: GoldTip on December 04, 2008, 08:45:15 AM
Post by: Antlershed on December 04, 2008, 09:12:09 AM
Post by: Intruder on December 04, 2008, 09:28:45 AM
Post by: Antlershed on December 04, 2008, 10:49:40 AM
Post by: Timberstalker on December 04, 2008, 10:54:02 AM
Post by: Timberstalker on December 04, 2008, 10:56:42 AM
This is their website. Their scopes work. My buddy has it on a 300 ultra and we have shot paper out to 700 yds. They live up to what they say they are. Trust me you will not be dissapointed
Post by: Intruder on December 04, 2008, 11:17:07 AM
The Zeiss is out of the question cause something in the 4-16 range is around $800, and the Bushnell Elite is out cause I want the BDC reticle. How do the high end Burris scopes compare to the Nikon and Leupold?
Wasn't sure if you were set on the higher end magnification. I believe Bushnell has a custom reticle available for like 50 bucks. While not a true BDC, it is a mil dot. Some of the high end Burris stuff is pretty dang nice. Again, I think it hangs there (or comes darn close) with what you're looking at. There's a lot of good choices in your price range but you're definitely have some limitations based on the features you're wanting. Of the scopes you originally mentioined I'd probably lean to the Leupold.
One suggestion.... go look through a bunch of different scopes in that price range but don't pay too much attention to the features like power, BDC, etc. Just look through various scopes from basic 3x9s on up to the more powerful, featured filled scopes you're targeting. See if you see any differences and then you can make a more informed choice... it may help you balance the cost vs. features vs. need vs. want equation a little.
Post by: fc2038 on December 04, 2008, 12:53:16 PM
But to each their own
Post by: Red Dawg on December 04, 2008, 01:03:59 PM
Post by: EastWaViking on December 04, 2008, 01:23:38 PM
Post by: high country on December 06, 2008, 05:28:45 PM
the christensen was about 5.5 lbs w/o a scope and un broke. my 700 mc millan setup is about 6.5 lbs w/o a scope. if you are shooting a light 300 I would seriously heed what I have posted. my swaro puked on my spring bear hunt. my wife had to drive me a rifle 100 miles from home. I was beyond pissed.
Post by: Antlershed on December 06, 2008, 09:06:40 PM
Post by: EastWaViking on December 06, 2008, 09:14:48 PM
i have a zeiss on my 700bdl/mc millan 300RUM, it is still alive. on my christensen 300ultra, I broke a couple leuys, a nikon, a swarovski and a burris. a 4200 and a mark 4 were the only ones to go more then a couple boxes. I have a huge respec for the 4200's. they are as tough as a montana boot. the swaro did not make it 20 rounds.....never again.
the christensen was about 5.5 lbs w/o a scope and un broke. my 700 mc millan setup is about 6.5 lbs w/o a scope. if you are shooting a light 300 I would seriously heed what I have posted. my swaro puked on my spring bear hunt. my wife had to drive me a rifle 100 miles from home. I was beyond pissed.
How on earth are you breaking scopes? You are supposed to look through them, not shoot at them! :P I had a cheapo Tasco Euroclass on my 300 Weatherby before the Burris, and there
was never a problem with in on a large caliber gun, it just was a cheap tasco and I wanted to up
grade, it's still going strong on one of my 22's. The Burris is as good as the day I put it on.
Post by: Red Dawg on December 07, 2008, 08:22:03 AM
Post by: ICEMAN on December 07, 2008, 07:11:13 PM
I really like the way the 50mm front objective seems to pull in the light. Plus, I like the extra 3/8inch height the scope rides, I can carry the whole gun from the scope tube. (I know...I know...probably not a cool thing to do....but I have been doing this for years, and I have big hands and like the extra room. ) Whole package shoots wicked good.
Post by: high country on December 07, 2008, 08:12:47 PM
good question. :yeah: How do you break a scope. In the back of my mind I thought that an RUM could break a scope. But have never heard about it till now. That is crazy what are you doing to them. I have also learned lately that it should be better to put dual dovetail bases on your gun instead of a windage screw base. I have the windage screw base on mine and never had a problem but I guess they have had plenty of problems.
on my 700 the only thing I ever broke was screws. if they are too loose or too tight they WILL break.
on my christensen, the gun was just too violent. if you do the math on recoil velocity and force it is unreal. the recoil velocity was faster then the 460 roy and dang near equal on force. it was a time bomb. I spoke to burris about a posi lock, they told me not to waste my time....it WOULD break. after talking with the leupold cs they too did not think there was any lightweight scope that they could offer me that would take it. swaro was my own thought, that was a mistake. that thing was a waste of time. I should have known when it took longer then normal to zero. the rifle itself actually blew the bedding somwhere between 0 and 500 rds. I pulled the stock when I sold it and it was cracked in several pieces. cool gun to carry, horrible on optics.
ps if you have a rifle that has a recoil vel of 28-30fps and better then 80ft/lbs you might as well go open sights.
Post by: 7mag. on December 07, 2008, 10:52:12 PM
Post by: Antlershed on December 07, 2008, 11:11:48 PM
I did come home with a new toy today though. :)
Post by: high country on December 08, 2008, 07:16:31 AM
Post by: Antlershed on December 08, 2008, 11:13:26 AM
if you liked the zeiss, you'd better never look through a USOI just looked at their website, and I don't think I can even afford to look through one. The Zeiss I looked through was about $800. The amount of light it gathered compared to the Nikon and Leupold was pretty impressive. I will have to see how much $$ I have after x-mas.
Post by: Intruder on December 08, 2008, 11:52:25 AM
I just checked pricing and it looks like scopes took a jump up in recent months. Both the Z. Conquest and the 4200s are up from what they were last year.
Did you get a chance to look through any of the Burris Signature stuff? Just interested to see what you think compared to the other stuff. I like it, for optical quality, right there w/ Leupold. I like it quite a bit more than the Nikon stuff. Have heard other say just the opposite. :dunno:
Post by: Antlershed on December 08, 2008, 12:00:44 PM
Post by: Antlershed on December 16, 2008, 10:55:16 AM
Does anybody know how the warranty work is on Zeiss compared to say, Leupold?
Post by: washelkhntr on January 04, 2009, 08:38:01 PM
Post by: Antlershed on January 05, 2009, 01:32:47 AM
Post by: Intruder on January 05, 2009, 07:44:32 AM
I guess I should have mentioned that I bought the Zeiss a couple weeks ago. :) I just couldn't pass up the clarity/brightness.
Nice!