Scope quality....

Schmidt n Bender, Nightforce, US Optics, are all A+, definitely not a Ziess Conquest... that is a B or B+ at best... now a Diavari, that is an A or A+. Leupold, a B maybe, I know I am going to get trashed for saying this, but saying a Conquest is an A+ means the big three are what, A+++++? Same goes for Leupold, both great scopes, but not even close to the class the first three I listed are in.
 
AlexF said:
How much reliability/durability do you want?

B+ : Bushnell Elite scopes are often the "best buys".
A : Leupold scopes A are often excellent but not as cost effective.
A+ : Zeiss scopes are the "gold standard" of hunting scopes but are expensive.

When you pay less, you simply get lower quality materials, engineering and workmanship, end of story.

Alex
Click to expand...

By that logic a King Optics trumps Zeiss, Leupold, and Swarovski?
 
Thanks for the offer, but having owned both I don't require photos. To my eyes there is not such a significant difference that it would affect my hunting in any real world scenario. Feel free to take them for anyone else though.
 
Cleftwynd said:
Schmidt n Bender, Nightforce, US Optics, are all A+, definitely not a Ziess Conquest... that is a B or B+ at best... now a Diavari, that is an A or A+. Leupold, a B maybe, I know I am going to get trashed for saying this, but saying a Conquest is an A+ means the big three are what, A+++++? Same goes for Leupold, both great scopes, but not even close to the class the first three I listed are in.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should stay in context to this thread. The thread is about scopes in the range of $600 and less. Although not specified the Conquest sure does get an A+ in that catagory. Good luck finding your S&B, US Optics in that price range.
 
The big 3 belong at the top, in the middle in random order Sightron, Zeiss, Leopold, 6500, etc... and all the rest below... JP.
 
scott_r said:
Perhaps you should stay in context to this thread. The thread is about scopes in the range of $600 and less. Although not specified the Conquest sure does get an A+ in that catagory. Good luck finding your S&B, US Optics in that price range.
Click to expand...

My bad, I was more or less replying to some of the other replies in the thread. My apologies to Waterfowler and others I may have offended.
 
scott_r said:
Perhaps you should stay in context to this thread. The thread is about scopes in the range of $600 and less. Although not specified the Conquest sure does get an A+ in that catagory. Good luck finding your S&B, US Optics in that price range.
Click to expand...

Is that whats its about? All he said is that the $300-600 thread got him thinking, not what the best under $600 scope is.
 
What are "the big three"?
Click to expand...

Exactly, and given that this is the hunting and sporting arms forum, the scopes should be rated as hunting scopes. Scopes like Nightforce and US Optics are highly recognized as target scopes, but they are far from popular as hunting scopes.
 
Three items I do not recommend when a wife wants to buy her husband a gift: rifles, scopes and knives although I recently added binoculars to the list.
The Rocky Mountain Rifle site was checked the other night and their list of scopes (as Listed) were Nightforce, Leupold, Zeiss, Kahles & Swarovski and Bushnell 4200 (replaced as the Elite).
 
Just started a thread on the 6500 Elite and the perfect fit on the MR-1 due to the long eye relief... JP.
 
stubblejumper said:
Exactly, and given that this is the hunting and sporting arms forum, the scopes should be rated as hunting scopes. Scopes like Nightforce and US Optics are highly recognized as target scopes, but they are far from popular as hunting scopes.
Click to expand...

I agree: you can't compare a $2500-$3200 Nightforce or S&B long range scope with a 500-600$ Zeiss or Leupold scope.
Also total rifle weight is a big issue for hunters and while most target and varmint shooters don't mind using a 14-15 pound rifle, the maximum hunting rifle total weight is around 9-10 pounds maximum.

One recommendation: for large game hunting in medium-long range, Zeiss 3-9X40mm Conquest with Rapid-Z 600 reticle is an excellent buy at around 600$.

Alex
 
Woodbeef said:
I have Clay bringing me in a Kahles CL 3-9x42 with Multi-Zero I found in the States. It's going on my FN built Winchester Model 70 that's being rechambered to 308 Norma Magnum.
Click to expand...


Nice set up. I just put together a m70 ew with talley lw and 3-9 conquest. I have an older Kahles (1962 iirc) on a muzzle loader still works perfect!
 
Boomer said:
These days its difficult to get a poor scope from a major manufacturer. Even the inexpensive lines are optically very good, where they fall down is in the quality and longevity of their adjustments, but if you are someone who zeroes his scope and seldom touches the adjustments again, that is of little concern. Now and then a scope that is exposed to temperature or humidity extremes will fog up, and this can be a nuisance, particularly if it should happen with an expensive model. The worst scope I own at the moment is an old Springfield Professional, that I acquired used, the scope tube had been dented from over torquing the rings, the adjustments won't track near the ends of their adjustment, it will no longer focus, and I know of no one who'll fix it. I do own some pretty nice glass though including S&B, Khales, Nightforce, Burris, Zeiss, and Leupold. If you want a well made dependable piece of glass, at a reasonable price, Leupold is my go to brand. Aside from producing a broad product line that should answer most questions, they have a Canadian repair and warranty center that has a fast turn around and produces quality work.

That said, the high priced manufacturers have their place. The adjustments on my S&B PM II repeatedly and exactly shift my bullet impact the correct amount. The etched reticle on my Nightforce will never break from powerful rifle recoil. And my old fixed 6X steel body Kahles, is arguably the best general purpose big game hunting scope I own. But a scope doesn't need to cost 3 figures to be good quality. I had a 3-9X40 Bushnell Trophy that I had mounted on a .30/06 M-17 Enfield. I couldn't do anything wrong with that thing, it just worked with boring reliability until it was lost in a house fire. It never fogged up, and the adjustments, when I switched back and forth between long range target shooting and my standard 200 yard zero, never varied and when I threw the rifle to my shoulder, I didn't need to go on a quest to find the sight picture.

The key to getting satisfaction from your scope is to first define what it is you want it to do, then buy an appropriate model based on that requirement. A big game hunter will sometimes choose a scope with too much magnification, with too small a field of view, that results in a scope that is both too large and too delicate; the huge objective bell requires mounting so high above the bore that a reasonable cheek-weld is impossible. The purpose of magnification is to enable the shooter to see his target, and seeing a moose doesn't require as much magnification as seeing a prairie dog at the same distance. Throwing a rifle to your shoulder and seeing only a patch of hide in your scope doesn't provide enough information to enable you to make a good shot. Conversely, a target shooter or varmint hunter who tries to use a hunting scope with a heavy reticle, will have his target obscured, even at close range.
Click to expand...

I agree. Good post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom