I like the Bushnell Trophy, 3x9x40....... Since I have won 2 of them....
Seriously though, you can't go wrong with a Bushnell if you are on a budget. Also, since Redfield has been taken over by Leupold, that might be a good way to get a "Leupold" quality, but for not much more $$$$ than the Bushnell. I believe their starting price is around $130 or so.
If price was no object, well, maybe a Leica. You are gonna pay well over a grand for one of those, in most cases.
Looking for scopes advice. What's the best scopes out there
(2) Is price wasnt an option
I own a good number of scopes, more than I care to admit. I spent a lot of $$ upgrading the scopes on my rifles the last 3 yrs or so. In doing that I've formed some very definite opinions about the quality needed and the $$ to get that quality. I have found that if you shop well, $200. will buy you a good scope. This will be a scope you can rely upon and should give you many years of good sevice and decent all-around performance.
Some of these scopes include the following brands and models: Burris FFII both the 2-7x35 and 3-9x40 models... the Bushnell 3200 Elite series in 2-7x32 and 3-9x40.... Redfield (new Leupold made) 2-7x33 and 3-9x40.... Nikon Prostaff 2-7x32 and 3-9x40. Just barely above this price break is the Leupold XVI 2-7x33 and 3-9x40.
At a bit more $$ the Leupold VXII 2-7x33.... the Nikon Buckmasters 3-9x40 ($300)
At the next price break, $400., the scope that cannot be beat, IMHO is the Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40. I happen to own about 20 Leupold scopes, but only 3 Zeiss Conquests. I'd trade every Leupold scope I own for a like powered Zeiss, period. This includes my high $$ 30 mm Leupolds.
One point I will emphasize is that by buying a lower powered scope, 2-7 vs say, a 4-12, you may save enough $$ to move up one "grade". You will forever be glad you did, trust me. Seldom, if ever is over 7 or 9X needed in big game hunting!
I once read years ago and quite possibly before you were born that the scope that you put on your rifel should cost just as much as the rifle. Now with that being said I will admit that I am a Leupold guy. All my hunting rifles that have scopes on them have them except for one and that one is a Redfield that I bought in 1971. The funny thing is that every time that I suspect that the scope is off and I take it to the range I find out that I made another mistake and it was just me and not the rifle or scope.
Now on a few of my T/C pistol barrels I have Burris scopes on them.
Midway happens to have a sale on Nikon scopes right now.
I am of the agreement that in general optics are more important then rifle. I have seen "poor shooting rifles" suddenly become sub MOA with a scope change. And as said Id rather spend more on optics then the rifle BUT I tested and used a Nikon Pro staff 3-9 and it was flawless, glass is very high quality and it held zero with some very hard recoiling 30-06 rounds (200 gn). I used it for two prarie hunts and one back country mountain hunt where it and myself fell on ice, rechecked zero that after noon as the rifle hit vary hard on the ice and it was right where I left it suprisingly. It is now a permanant replacment to the Leuy 3-9 that was on it. BTW the Nikon is a 40mm and Leuy is a 50MM and I found a noticable advantage the Nikon had in light transmission in dim light.
MY 2 cents is get the most you can afford but A/B them side by side.
Buy the best quality glass that you can afford. If you consider it an investment in a tool that you will use for teh rest of your life, there is no reason for you not to spend at least a couple of days' pay on your scope.
I like Leupold, because despite my own advice - I can't quite bring myself to pay for Zeiss.
I've only had one scope 'fail'. That was a Simmons prohunter that literally fell apart after a few hundred shots on my 30-06. Simmons replaced it for just the price of postage so I can't complain about the customer service from Simmons, but I have never really trusted that scope again.
I have used the phrase buy the best glass you can afford too, but as I think about it is it really true? I can afford a Zeiss, but opted for a Leupold and cannot really think of a situation where I'd say, geez, if I only had a Zeiss instead of my Leupold I would have made that shot.
Hi, I'm from Bulgaria. I bought a Bushnell ® Trophy XLT Riflescope Rifle for my CZ 550 cal.30-06. Optics is soon on the market in Bulgaria has no feedback on it. If any of you, let me share any comment. Will last you a kickback of 30-06. How do you think.
I've only ever purchased Leupold scopes. But I have used quite a few others. I think for the money Leupold makes a pretty excellent scope. What sets Leupold apart from most other brands is that the quality and optical clearity is the same across the line for their US made scopes. Only difference in price are the various models with added and various features, lens coatings, reticles styles, power, etc. I believe the construction is also relatively the same across most of their scope line as well.
I am not a Leupold fan. Owned one and was not excited about it. But I'll say this, you can't get much better a scope for any money than a Leupold. That said I am an old redfield fan and got a new 2-7x from Leupold. Leupold done well on the Redfield, I'll get more of them. But Bushnell makes some very good scopes too, so does Nikon. I have two Nikons one has BDC reticule and that is in my opinion the biggest waste going. Won't ever have another one of them. Didn't want that one but figured Nikon would change the reticule for me, nope! The difference between a lot of three hundred dollar scopes and thousand dollar is mostly a money difference. One of my old /denver Redfields has been working flawlessly for pushing 40 yrs. I think it was $89 new. I have aa very old Bushnell Banner that is pushing 30yrs and works just fine. A lot of to do is made about spendin g a lot on the scope, I don't buy it. For a couple hundred dollars you shopuld get a good scope that will last. My 2-7X Redfield was $130 brand new! Has a full lifetime warrenty same as the leupolds and is given all the same test's as the Leupolds befor it's sold. Why would I want to pay $800+ for a scope?
If price wasn't an option, my next scope would still be a new Redfield.
There can be too much of a good thing with antler rattling.
I like to hit the horns together for a good 30- to 40-second rattling sequence and then hang them up and resist the urge to hit them again.
This works to the hunter's advantage, because if a buck has heard it, he may have been 300 or 400 yards away and he comes in and he's not exactly sure where it came from.
When finally is time to rattle again throw a slight change-up into the routine.
The second time, don't rattle as loud...