Scoped it out!

W

warbirdlover

New member
Went to Gander Mountain and was browsing all the scopes mounted on the fake wood rifles for you to look through. Spent about an hour evaluating what they had to look through. (No Swarovskis, Leupolds, Ziess easily checked out without having to talk to a salesperson). I came away with some interesting observations. This is only in regard to clarity and eye relief. I wouldn't know how these scopes take recoil (other then the Nikons which everyone knows are great).

Redfield - This was the biggest surprise. This scope is meant to be Leupold's competitor to the Nikon ProStaff line and it far exceeds them IMHO. Very nice scope for the money.

Barska - Who would have thought? It was really clear and had a lot of eye relief. That's all I can say about it.

Nikon - I had the original Nikon which a year later was named the "Monarch" because of their adding more series. The Nikon Monarchs are great scopes BUT no better then my almost 20 year old version. The ProStaffs were good also for the bucks. The best ones were the Monarch 50mm IMHO.

Simmons - Oh my God! People buy these things?

These are not in any order of preference since some would find little things on one brand better then the other. None of these can touch my Mueller though for features per dollar.
 
Last edited:
Just throwing this out there. Store lighting is so bright and distances so short, it is hard to be sure. I would take a few outside to be sure before you buy. Even outsides, foget about brightness and focus on truness of color rendition. That will tell you how it will be at sorting target from background.
 
I agree with the OP statement on Redfield. They also have some nice binos.

Bushnell has some nice scopes that are sharp, gather light well and hold zero. Pentax has some very clear optics. Even the inexpensive Pentax Gameseeker gives very sharp images, but I am not sure how well it would hold zero under heavy recoil.
 
I took the two best scopes outside to check them at long range but I had a really hard time holding them steady what with the clerks chasing me! :p
 
ProStaff

I have a few of the Nikon ProStaff. They are very sturdy/reliable and very clear to the edges. The glass is some of the best I've looked through. I like them because they are basic and as a result hold zero extremely well. I don't like parallax adjustments etc... that has always been the thing that has let me down. I will not pay more than 150 buck as long as I can get one of these.
-SS-
 
I would have like it if they had some Bushnell's, Pentax and others mounted for easy checking. I also really wanted to look through a Swarovski and a Ziess Conquest. I wasn't really shopping for a new scope but like to get a feel for what is out there. I've never been overly impressed with Leupold but everyone's eyes are different I guess. Overall I'd say the quality of scope sights has really made some giant leaps from the old days.

I took the two best scopes outside to check them at long range but I had a really hard time holding them steady what with the clerks chasing me!

Hawky
Click to expand...

God I love this forum!! :D
 
Redfield - This was the biggest surprise. This scope is meant to be Leupold's competitor to the Nikon ProStaff line and it far exceeds them IMHO. Very nice scope for the money.
Click to expand...

The "new" Redfields are pretty much nothing more than rebadged Leupold "Riflemans". A good thing in my estimation. :)
 
My Vortex Diamondback far exceeds the Redfield in the same class, having said that it is a good scope. I know this because I have been in the field with three new scopes this week. The Vortex, the new Redfield and the Weaver 40 44 series, all cost about the same, but the proof is in the pudding, hands down the Diamondback kicks their butts, and my boy's( who own those other scopes) will agree. just my two pennies worth.:rolleyes:
 
I hate to say it, but to me the Leupold VXII is the most satisfying scope I've ever used. It's bright and very clear, guaranteed for life and it's adjustments are bulletproof. I fought buying one for many years and still only have one, but it's so far ahead of my Nikon Monarch, it's not funny.

The VXI is an okay scope but not in the same class as the VXII when compared side by side. The extra $100 seems to buy better low-light ability and clarity.

My Bushnell 3200 was also very unsatisfying. There seemed to be a lot of barrel distortion as you pan across wooded areas.
 
I currently have 4 scopes listed in order of clarity and eye relief in order from best to worst IMHO:
Minox 3x9x40
Pentax 3x9x40
Leupold VX I 2x7x32 on my .22 rimfire
Nikon Prostaff 3x9x40
Bushnell Banner 3x9x40 (came on my Weatherby Vanguard package & was replaced by the Pentax)

The moxt expensive was the Minox for $269, the Pentax Gameseeker II was $100, the Nikon was $129 and the Leupold was $100 used bought off Gunbroker.

Now, the absolute clearest scope at very low light (in the South Africa bush near dark) was on the rifle I rented from my outfitter. It was a Leupold VX III 3x9x40 but they are running close to $400.

I've looked at the Redfield's and didn't think it was any better than my Pentax even though it costs almost $60 more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top