HarvDog Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I am considering one of two 3x9x50 scopes for a .270 or 30.06: Bushnell Elite 3200 Leupold VXII Any thoughts or preferences either way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missed160 Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I am trying to make the exact descision you are. I am putting my scope on a A Bolt Hunter 270. I really don't like the looks of a giant scope on a rifle, so I have 99.99% decided on the 3200 - but I am going to get the short action version 3x10x40. Look through them both, see if you can see a preference, if not - one thing which may sway you - IF you purchase the 3200 - they have a great give away going now - you can send in proof of purchase & get an a very nice/quiet Realtree AP camo rain jacket.. Looking at comparable ones on the Cabelas website, it looks like right around a $119 jacket!!!!! If you decide you get the 3200 & need a copy of the give away sheet, let me know.. Reed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Harv, my advice would be to get a nikon monarch in 3-9X40. Natchez still has them on for $199 I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
257bob Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I like the Nikon idea as well, but of the two you mentioned I would go with the 3200. They are an excellent scope for the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeramie Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Another vote for Nikon glass. Honestly, any of the three would serve you well. Im just not that caught up by the gold ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iron buck Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I have never been a fan of the big "hubble like" scopes. I have never found the need to have anything bigger than a standard 36mm or 40mm during any leagal shooting light when game came out. Even in the last few minutes of legal light. Besides.............the smaller tubes sit better, balance better and are lighter than the 50mm+ versions. Oh................and they cost less! Win Win Win all the way around. I'd go with either Leupold or Nikon. Take your pick. Either brand will make you happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hangunnr Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 I am considering one of two 3x9x50 scopes for a .270 or 30.06: Bushnell Elite 3200 Leupold VXII Any thoughts or preferences either way? Seeing as you asked for a pick between the Bushnell and the Leupold, I'd pick the Leupold. In my experience I find the Leupy glass to be more clear. hangunnr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJR Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 I have a used Pentax & a new Sightron II that are both 3X9X40 or 42. Both are very clear and I shot a real nice buck using the Pentax! Send me a PM if you are interested! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnf Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 I'm going to jump on the Nikon bandwagon. You can get the same quality scope for less money than the Leu. I also must agree on the size thing too. I've got the Pro-Staff which is the bottom of the line Nikon in 3-9X40 and have found that in most cases I can see fine past legal shooting with it. To me there is no point in getting something that you don't really need. If I were to get a better scope it would pobibly be a Nikon Monarch in the 3-9X40. I just don't see a real need for a big scope as good as the niko glass is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwlacy Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 Just curious. All those that mention you can see past legal shooting light with Nikon glass. At what range? Several of my spots are overlooking big fields. I can shoot however far I am comfortable with. Which is about 350 yards, 400 in the right weather conditions. Could you see clearly that far, and could you count points? Michigan has a 4 point per side rule for one of your bucks, so it would be nice to be able to clearly see that far. I have never looked thru any scope that only went to 9X that I could count points with at 300 or more yards. I am in need of new glass on a .300 H&H. So I am interested in these two scopes also. Thanks Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnf Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 I was out on a clear night and could read my license plate on my truck at 250 yards. That was in a field on a 3/4 moonlit night. If a buck were walking a treeline on an overcast night, I can't swear that I could make out the points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJR Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 A person would be hard pressed to count points at 300 yards right at dusk with a 9X scope! What I am saying is that some scopes are very good at light gathering and you will have had to use binoculars to count points with! Sometimes even with binoculars, you are not going to be able to count points! Remember, they blend in with the leaves and branches very good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowana Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Bushnell Elite 3200 vs Leupold I have both scopes in my safe. The Bushnell is on a Ruger M77II in .280 (Stock Rifle) and the Leupold is on a Remington 700 30-06 Ackley Improved (40 degree shoulder). The Leupold seems to have a crisper image and contrast, but I think the Bushnell holds a little brighter picture during the last legal shooting minutes. I think you will make the right choice no matter what you choose. Quality wise, I do think that Leupold has one step on the Bushnell. The Leupold VarixII is more on par with a Nikon Monarch series. I personally own just about every make of scope/or have owned. I now put most of my money into the scope first. Regardless of how well a rifle shoots.....you can't shoot wht you cant see!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwlacy Posted August 26, 2007 Report Share Posted August 26, 2007 OJR, I do use binoculars to try and count points. Any buck that I may be interested in at dusk at those ranges would be in a wide open hay field or cut corn field so there wouldn't be any thing to hide the rack. Just wondering if I should go with a larger scope? Maybe up to 12X or 14X in order to see better at the longer ranges. Currently when I hunt those spots if a buck comes out late it has to look pretty big or I don't even consider shooting it with our 4 point rule. Also will those lower end scopes hold up to the recoil of a .300? Thanks for any info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ousoonerfan22 Posted August 26, 2007 Report Share Posted August 26, 2007 Check out a zeiss conquest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSU_Seminole Posted August 27, 2007 Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 I am considering one of two 3x9x50 scopes for a .270 or 30.06: Bushnell Elite 3200 Leupold VXII Any thoughts or preferences either way? Zeiss Conquest 3-9X50. You'll be more than satisfied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.