Which scope do you use

[smellydeer]

I am looking for a scope to put on my 300 mag. I have not owned the higher end scopes before but may just break the bank and buy one this upcoming season. If $ was not an issue, what scope would you recommend and what power. Right now I have a 4-12 leopold vx2??
I am considering Leopold VX7 and poss a Swaro.

Thanks for your input.

 

[Foreman4x4]

IMHO, the scope you have is just about perfect and I wouldn't change a thing.

 

[Spencer]

Is there a particular reason that you want to spend as much money as you possibly can on a scope? As the other poster said, the VXII you have is perfect.

Just remember, more dollars does not always translate to more quality.

 

[drahthaar]

I am curious about this post. In reading many forums, when it comes to binocs, the Swaros seems to get the nod as the binos to get, if money were no object. Is this different with scopes? Its just pure morbid curiosity, as my hunting buddy saved for a few years and yesterday laid down $1600 bucks on a Swaro ph series 4-15 power scope. He was telling me, and I am thinking holy christmas dude!!! I have always heard you know, the rifle is only as good as the glass that is on it, etc. But $1600 bucks, ouch.

 

[nodakboot]

I have several Nikon Monarchs, great glass at a decent price.

Boot

 

[HNTBIGBULLS]

I have a ruger 300 mag topped with
a 3-9 40mm VXII, wich is my mountain
rifle. And on my sako 30-378 I have
a 3.5 to 10 VXIII.
I really like both, But I am thinking of
changing my VXII to one of the vortex 50 mm,
I have a buddy that just got one and it
seems to be a great scope for the money.

 

[NMRaptor]

I've got a 4.5x14 VXIII with the BC reticle on top of my 7mm Rem Mag. I really like the BC reticle.
-Raptor

 

[falloutwest]

To answer the above question, the reason you don't hear as many people pushing swaro type scopes as you do binos and spotters is because of the use. In the course of a season, you will spend countless hours staring through your binos and spotter straining to pick up a deer muzzle in 4 foot high brush across a canyon. In reality, how long are you going to spend looking through the scope on your rifle? A couple minutes before you let the lead fly and that's it. That being said, it is still nice to have good glass on a gun and Leupold makes some of the best rifle scopes around IMO. However, spending $1600 bucks to put a swaro scope on a rifle is a waste of money unless 1) you are rich and don't care or 2) you are a sniper.

 

[fatrooster]

I agree with falloutwest. I couldn't have said it any better. fatrooster.

 

[wapitihunter338]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-12-08 AT 04:55PM (MST)[p]Smellydeer

I'd like to add my two cents worth to this discussion if I could. My wife and I have Swarovski glass on all of our custom guns and I'll tell you why. Their quality of glass and light gathering capabilities in low light situations are second to none.

I'll give you an example. Five years ago we had a chance to shoot a nice mulie buck that we had been watching for two hours. The chance presented itself right at 1/2 hour after sunset (which is the end of legal shooting light here in NE). We were 400 yards from the buck. My wife had her 8X30 SLC's plus her 3X9X36 A-Line scope on her gun. I had my 10X42 EL's and a middle of the line Simmons scope on my rifle. She could see the buck just fine through both optics while I could only see him through my binoculars. Needless to say, she was the one to shoot the deer.

I know that Swarovski is very expensive and we're not rich. I have had to make sacrifices to afford this glass but I would never go back to lesser optics. I know that other makers make good glass as well but I have never had the urge to buy them. My advice to you is to try to meet people who already own the top notch glass and try their optics out. Many will be more than willing to help. Looking through the glass in a sporting goods store will never tell you the whole story.

One more piece of advice. If you can cultivate a friendship with an independent Swarovski dealer, you may be able to save $100-$300 off the listed retail price of the scope or binoculars.

 

[Anaconda]

I have been a loyal Leupold guy for decades.
I recently replaced one of my VX IIIs with a Kahles scope. The Kahles cost a bit more than the Leupold VX III but it IS worth it.
You think Leupold is really bright and clear until you get a good European scope in the field.
Big difference.
The optics, the repeatable adjustments, the rectical, just an all around better piece of equipment.
Take a look at Kahles and Zeiss Conquest, if you want better than Leupold but not as much $ as Swaro.
If you can afford the Swaro, also look at "Schmit & Bender".

 

[COOTER4151]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-13-08 AT 06:30PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Apr-13-08 AT 06:29?PM (MST)

I used to use a Leupold vxIII 4.5-14x50 and I started having tracking problems so i switched. I'm now useing a Burris Eurodiamond 3-12x50 haven't had a problem since and it spends for around $450.00-$500.00. The scope i have has the ballistiplex reticle with a 30mm tube.

 

[Flagstaff]

I agree with falloutwest. You are going to spend 99.9% of your time behind binos and spotting scope. Spend your money there. If you have extra money, then go to the rifle scope.

 

[sageadvice]

Another nod to falloutwest's reply.

One guy above, went from a simmons to mega bucks, that's like going from cool-aid to champain. A "better" quality scope costing $300-$600. will allow you to put the cross-hairs on everything you'll ever need to legaly shoot at. I'm shooting Burris Signature series on two of my hunting guns, great value for the money, i like them and Leopold as well.

If money is not an issue, you certainly can get better glass. That don't mean your gonna get more or bigger game.

 

[BPKHunter]

I had cheap everything until I moved to Idaho 4 years ago. Of course in No Calif where I used to live glassing over a few hundred yards was useless with all the damn timber, and I never shot over 100 yards in 20+ years. Now here in Idaho we have BIG country, so I accumulated 3 pieces of Swaro Glass(2x bino's and a spotter) and I sure can find the critters and judge them. Currently I have limited my shots to 400 yards, but I am currently working hard to stretch that limit. It is only at the longer ranges that I see the real benefit of the high $$ glass. I agree with the sentiment that you need great bino's and spotters, but once you have the deer, up to 400 yards isn't real tought to tell where to place the cross hairs. I certainly think that Leupold VXIII's, Nikon Monarch's, Bushnell Elite's, etc. can handle all of your needs up to medium range(400-800yds), but past that you need the optics and options on some of the "tactical" style scopes. Certainly I think some of the Bullet Drop Reticles available, when used correctly, can help as much or more for shots between 200-400 yards than that small amount of additional visual clarity your pay for in the expensive scopes. If you are familiar with John Burns, previously from the Best of the West hunting show, he has kind of pioneered the use of BDC dials for range on long range hunting, to the masses anyway, and he has his own line of scopes out now and they are based on the VXIII Long Range version from Leupold so if they are good enough for him I imagine they would work for most.

 

[forkhunter]

I have a swarovski av 3-10x42 TDS-plex scope for sale if you are interested. Got it from a friend as I was going to get a new rifle setup, but that is not going to happen this year. It is in perfect condition. It was mounted on a 300 mag, but there are no marks at all. Box is with it. Email if you are interested. These guys are right about one thing---bright and clear!

 

[NMRaptor]

Good glass is only one factor that should be considered. People tend to forget how recoil can affect a scopes performance. You can have the best glass in the world but if the scope itself can't hold up to the mule kicks from your magnum then its all for not.
-Raptor

 

[elkaholic123]

I liked leupold scopes and used them for 20 years,then I tried
a Zeiss conquest on my 300 win mag.I liked it so much I put one on my Deer rifle .270 WSM 4-14 x 50 mm! Jerry

 

[XPHANTOMFXR]

I use a Burris black diamond 4-16x50 30mm tube w/ ballistic plex
and the lock feature on a 30-06 Rem 700 bdl dm. I really like this scope and have taken 3 deer with it. It does have very good light gathering capability and holds zero well. I started out with Simmons Aetec 2.8-10x. I
took deer with it also. Next I bought a Leupold vari-x III 4.4-14x50 1 inch tube that took deer also. As I got more into reloading and accurizing I began upgrading optics. I think a lot depends on who you are. If you go to the range and a 2" group on a pie plate at 100 yds is acceptable and surely will kill any deer then great. I got a real good buddy just like that and he has the same budget simmons scope and has taken several deer with it. Me, it drives me mad. I reload and precisely measure everything, etc. and try and get the most out of everything I got to include the scope. I'm sure your leopold will do just fine . As hard as it will kick I definitely would not put anything less than leupold.
Burris was bought out and I believe Leupold is now the only American made scope. I Really wanted the Burris and it was clearance so I bought it. I can't even really bad mouth the Simmons. Good mounts are very important also. I would also align and lap them as required. It is a real eye opener the more you get into the sport of how everything is inter related.
A scope that is poorly fitted has stress on it and will fail in time no matter the price you pay. Do it right the first time and you will be happy no matter what you do.

 

[grizzly]

I have the Leupold VXIII 4.5-14x50 on my .300 WSM. I wish it was closer to a 3-9x40 for the weight. I just put a VXIII 2.5x8 on my wife's rifle. Very nice scope.

 

[mmwb]

I went cheap for years and finally got a VX III a couple of years ago. I love that scope! I researched for over a year before committing. What it amounts to is that there are several companies putting out high quality optics. Of those, most honor their warranties. Of those two stood out, hands down, for no questions asked, ease of customer service: Leupold and Swarovski.

I was planning on a VX II until I did a side by side with the VX III.

 

[Idahotrophyhunter]

There is not a scope made that compares to Schmidt & Bender... I have 6 of them and they are the only thing I use anymore. I do have a Nikon Monarch that a buddy gave me, but it just collects dust. The new Z6 Swaro is close but still not in the same league. Also, everyone who says a $300-500 scope all you need would be in for a rude awakening once they look through a S&B. Go chase a 1200 pound griz at last light in head high alder brush and you will see why. I guess it all comes down to how serious do you take your hunting?

 

[littlejoe]

Swarovski 4x12x50. Great scope, especially in low light. My friend has the same type of scope in a Leupold, sorry I don't remember the model, and he loves it as well. All a personal preference.

 

[COHunter]

I just recieved today my Zeiss Conquest 6.5X20X50 with target turrets from Cameralandny. Can wait to mount it this weekend and sight it in.

Cameraland has some purdy good prices IMO

 

[camuleycrazy]

I have Swarovski 4x16 PH with TDS and it is the best IMO. I reload for precision and it works well off the bench as do my VXIII 6x20 but in the field under variable conditions the Swaro is much better. I also have a burris and nikon and they do not compare. I do agree with the other posts about binos and spotters first. To give yourself the very best chance if you are lucky enough to get a monster in your scope I like the Swaro. Save and sacrifice if you are serious.

 

[REDDOG]

first off i will say i own the euro's in, swaro, zeiss, s&b, and i'm not talkin the cheap conquest and A-lines (not a cheap s&b), and will say they are opticly better than leupolds. but for you guys that think your gonna get a shot with them that you wont with a VXIII, ur full of #####. go ahead and feed ur ego, but it is an aiming tool, not a finding tool.