My rem is done. :)

Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35mm ballistic plex ($200) in the :runaway:lowest rings you can find:runaway:.
add a $5 Weaver rail, and top it with steel $22 Burris Zee rings.

reticle_chart.jpg
ballplex_elk.jpg


opticsplanet_2013_603030262


and some Burris propaganda:
burris-ffcutaway.jpg
 
never owned a Nikon, so i cant say.

i have a 3-9x40mm ballistic plex FFII and a 10x40mm mil-dot 3200 and IMO the Burris is the better built scope. optics at 9x mag vs the 10x seem clearer (although this is 100% subjective), and the 1-piece tube is a big plus in my eyes. on the Bushnell the turret assembly looks like its sortof 'glued on' to the side of the scope with some sortof clear adhesive. the ballistic plex reticle on the Burris is a huge plus in my eyes to a standard plex reticle.

my 10x40mm Bushnell is made in Japan (not sure about the other ones), which is definitely a plus: the Burris is made in the Philippines. both have a lifetime warranty but the Burris youll have to send stateside and deal with shipping/customs while the Bushnell service depot is right here in Ontario in Richmond Hill.

that said, DO NOT BUY A 10x40mm :runaway: - its useless as t!ts on a bull in the field.
 
Sounds good, will have to see if I can scrape the cash up. ANyone else have any other useful comments on scope selection? Not that I am implying some comments were not useful. Or some usefull ones were not as some were very welcomed.
 
manbearpig said:
Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35mm ballistic plex ($200) in the :runaway:lowest rings you can find:runaway:.
add a $5 Weaver rail, and top it with steel $22 Burris Zee rings.

reticle_chart.jpg
ballplex_elk.jpg


opticsplanet_2013_603030262


and some Burris propaganda:
burris-ffcutaway.jpg
Click to expand...

Pretty tough to beat this advice. By the way, red dots/aim points are common on center fire rifles. Mostly for short range hunting when the target needs to be acquired in a hurry. They're handy when a dog pushes a deer out in front of you. Easy to use with both eyes open(I know people who use them with great success). I have never used one and probably never will and often wonder about the integrity of them.:)
 
jedimaster said:
As for a banana clip, cigarette lighter and not sure what the other things were, those are not very helpful in having me setup my rifle. Just childish remarks that may make other laugh but really serve no purpose in helping anyone out.
Click to expand...
Hey ...... Who has more fun than people? :dancingbanana:


.
 
While I agree that 50mm objective may be on the large side, the "smaller objective / better lens gives equal light" argument is only valid to a certain point. I had a Leupold Vari-X III in 1.5-5X20 that was completely useless for my deer hunting purposes (last 30 minutes of legal light).
 
Thats my concern with going with the 2x7x32mm versus 3x9x40mm
As I have said I don't need the 9x magnification, but given two identical scopes, would the 3x9x40 give better light transmision? That is my ultimate goal here, get the brightest optics in a given price range. anywhere from 2-5 or 6x is plenty of power for me and open sights are not an option for me either.
In the burris scope would you guys recomend the 2.5x7x32mm or the 3x9x40mm toa llow for the most light transmision? I know its a close range gun and a I don't need the extra power, but I am after extra brightness here.
 
manbearpig said:
20mm is a bit extreme. thats not even an objective - its a tube :)
Click to expand...

Lots use them, especially for bear.

My point was that this scope, price-wise, was considerably more expensive than the Bushnell Sportsman 3-9X32 that I was using prior. Better dawn/dusk performance with the Bushnell, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom