Post by: 383man on September 13, 2009, 08:46:21 PM
Post by: bobcat on September 13, 2009, 08:53:01 PM
Post by: jackelope on September 13, 2009, 08:57:30 PM
I would go with a Leupold VX-II in a 3-9x40. They are $299. Great scope for the money.
i had a stainless synthetic a-bolt with a silver leupold vxII on it 3-9. it was a good looking rig.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi79.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj139%2FBAILEYDAD%2FTHEKILLINGMACHINE.jpg&hash=98da07f79f264b6e2790c069ff2f204b489d6ea2)
Post by: 383man on September 13, 2009, 10:14:49 PM
Post by: 383man on September 13, 2009, 10:18:41 PM
Post by: Wacenturion on September 13, 2009, 11:40:27 PM
Post by: addicted on September 14, 2009, 11:53:44 AM
When i got my first stainless gun a little bit ago it felt important to me to put a silver scope on it as well. black scope on a silver gun just seems kinda half assed. I ended up putting a BSA contender 6-24x40 on it. it looks good, but the performance may be lacking lol.
Post by: Elk-aholic on September 14, 2009, 12:25:28 PM
Post by: MtnMuley on September 15, 2009, 04:20:16 PM
Post by: JoshT on September 15, 2009, 08:50:06 PM
When i got my first stainless gun a little bit ago it felt important to me to put a silver scope on it as well. black scope on a silver gun just seems kinda half assed.
Big silver scopes on stainless guns remind me of 22" chrome rims on a 4x4 F-150. I always prefer the matte scopes in matte rings on stainless guns... especially when they have black stocks.
If you must go with a silver scope... the Leupold silver finish is by far the best looking, and the VX-II 3-9x40 is excellent... never seen the need for a 50mm objective on a 3-9.
Post by: LongTatLaw on September 16, 2009, 08:20:01 PM
pick the very best Leupold you can get for the price and then do a side by side comparison with a Nikon thats close in price!
I like to clarity better on Nikon and Im impressed with Nikon's warranty although its not necessarily known for it.
Post by: Antlershed on September 16, 2009, 08:31:36 PM
pick the very best Leupold you can get for the price and then do a side by side comparison with a Nikon thats close in price!And then put them both back and grab the Zeiss :P
All kidding aside...given your price range, I would look into the Leupolds like has been said.
Post by: JoshT on September 16, 2009, 09:19:50 PM
just do me a favor...
pick the very best Leupold you can get for the price and then do a side by side comparison with a Nikon thats close in price!
I like to clarity better on Nikon and Im impressed with Nikon's warranty although its not necessarily known for it.
I've had two Nikon Monarchs... both were optically very clear. Problem was... they weren't very tough... neither would hold a zero under normal hunting conditions. Never had that problem with a click adjust Leupold (and only a couple times with the friction adjust models). Don't do you much good to have a crystal clear image of something that you can't hit...
Also... take a look at all the "Factory Refurbished" Nikons available online or in catalogs... not sure as I've ever seen a "factory refusbished" Leupold... unless it was sent in for a clean bill of health before being sold privately.
Post by: KimberRich on September 17, 2009, 07:51:34 AM
You can get the VX-III 3.5-10x40 for around $400 if thats your price range and I would recommond it over the VX-II if you can swing it. The adjustment dial is easier to move, it has the better lens coating system also. If you go with the VX-II I like the 4-12x40. :twocents:
Post by: addicted on September 17, 2009, 08:57:33 AM
Post by: jackelope on September 17, 2009, 11:51:16 AM
Post by: KimberRich on September 17, 2009, 01:31:32 PM
I think it goes rifleman, then VXI, VXII, VXIII, VX7, and then the big boys which i don't keep track of.
:yeah:
After VX7 they're out of my price range so I don't have a clue either.
I run Riflemans on my rimfire guns, VX-II's on my predator/varmit guns, and VX-III's on my hunting rifles. All great scopes with a great warranty. Only other thing I would buy would probably be a Zeiss but there even more $$. Swarovski is great but stupid expensive..
Post by: KimberRich on September 17, 2009, 01:36:17 PM
I had one on a M-70 featherweight 30-06 and took it off becasue I didn't think it transmitted near as much light as a 40 mm front bell. Hard to believe but those 7mm of bell lets in more light during low light situations which is when you really need it.
IMO the 40mm is the best. 50mm is to tall on the rifle and requires high rings and the 32mm doesn't allow as much light. :twocents:
Post by: follow maggie on September 18, 2009, 11:46:37 PM
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on September 20, 2009, 09:24:18 PM
just do me a favor...
pick the very best Leupold you can get for the price and then do a side by side comparison with a Nikon thats close in price!
I like to clarity better on Nikon and Im impressed with Nikon's warranty although its not necessarily known for it.
I've had two Nikon Monarchs... both were optically very clear. Problem was... they weren't very tough... neither would hold a zero under normal hunting conditions. Never had that problem with a click adjust Leupold (and only a couple times with the friction adjust models). Don't do you much good to have a crystal clear image of something that you can't hit...
Also... take a look at all the "Factory Refurbished" Nikons available online or in catalogs... not sure as I've ever seen a "factory refusbished" Leupold... unless it was sent in for a clean bill of health before being sold privately.
I have/had several Monarchs. Love em. Had one mounted on my LSS 338 RUM shootin stoked up 225's. Shot 1/2'' groups. Kicked pretty good, maybe not good enough? Maybe I got lucky? Maybe I baby my stuff...