.30-.378 rifle scope

O

osborne

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Location
Mount Pearl Nfld.
I'm looking to put a scope on a sako trg-s that I've had for about a year now. Iron sights just don't so this cartridge justice. My problem is this. The LGS recomended a burris fullfield II model so I ordered the rings and bases, the scope was in the store. I've been waiting for the bases for a while now and in that time another shooter with the exact same rifle, bought around the same time, brought his gun back. The LGS had also recomended him the burris at the time of purchase. After a few hundered rounds the internals have been "shook to pieces" (the LGS words not mine). So I've got to decide on a new type of scope. He might been unlucky with a bad burris but why take a chance.

So I'm thinking of the following and any advice or other suggestions would be great.

1. Weaver Grand Slam ---- Don't know much about them but I have heard good things.
2. Bushnell 4200 series
3. leupold varix II
4. leupold varix III ???what's the advantage over the II and is it worth the 2-$300???
5. Zeiss Conquest --- Who doesn't want a Zeiss. It's at the very high end of my budget but if I wait a little longer it's do-able.


Oh I'm interested in a 3X9 variable with 40mm lens, and 4" eye relief (3.5 minimum). This is solely a big game hunting rifle for me so no high mag scopes for little critters or paper please.

Thanks for any replies
osborne
 
I would go with Leupold. It has good eye relief and is sturdy. If it breaks it is easy to get it fixed. Dollar for dollar the VXII is prety dam good for optics compared to the VXIII wich is obvously better but more expensive. Both have the same intetrnal construction. One is just as strong as the other.


The Bushnell 4200 is nice but not as much eye relief and weighs a bit more. More weight = more stress on the rings and scope under hard recoil.

Ziess is nice but heavy and I don't think it is as strudy as Leupold but that is just my opinion.
 
IMO anything that kicks good needs good eye relief. I have a 3-10 grand slam on my 7RM. Excellent optics and brighter then my leupolds. I have leupolds on my 300 wby and 375H&H for the eye relief and their reputation to take the beats. The leupolds have around 4 inches of eye relief which is very nice. The weaver has a little less as do the bushnell optics. Just FYI the new leupold VXI is the old Vari X II. If money is an issue I'd opt for the VX I. You can get them for 299 at wholesalesports and they come with the usuall leupold life time warranty.

Good luck
 
I've got a Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x44 on my TRG-S, in .338 Lapua. So far I haven't had a problem, and am extremly happy with it. I've got mine mounted in Leupold super high Sako style rings. I have only put about one hundred rounds through it though, so time will tell if I've made a good decision. I'm quite surprised to here of the Burris scope going to pieces, and wonder if this was just a coincidence. I like Burris scopes, and have a couple already, but they are not mounted on heavy recoiling rifles. Perhaps a Burris Signature scope would have held up better.
 
A 30-378 is most certainly a long range cartridge. Don't think a fixed power scope is appropriate for something that can shoot way out there.
 
Teh eye releif of the conquest would be a big decider for me, I have on eon a 300 wsm and like it very much, so far after about 100 ounds no problems, but a 300 wsm isn't a 30-378 weatherby the most wildly powerful 30 calibre going. I would hesitate putting a heavy scope on it, I would probably go with the fixed Leupold 6x42 the enw fx111.
 
Kman said:
A 30-378 is most certainly a long range cartridge. Don't think a fixed power scope is appropriate for something that can shoot way out there.
Click to expand...

Did you fail to read this part?
"This is solely a big game hunting rifle for me so no high mag scopes for little critters or paper please."

A fixed 6x is more than adequate for this purpose.
 
Thanks for all the imput guys. I'm going to take a good look into leupold VXII and III series. I like that boone and crocket recticle. The LGS quoted me $350 for a VXII in the store so I'm going to see how the III series stacks up against it and that price! I agree that a fixed power makes sense for durability but I like the flexibility of a variable. The only rig I own with a scope is an M-305, which is used occasionally for big game and some half plinking/range work, and I'm always changing the power on it.

I'm still going to get a price on an FX at 6x in case I change my mind and the conquest but i think it may be a tad too high for now.
 
I don't know about the Conquest. I had one for a few days and returned it. ( 3-9x36) I think the Leupold is just as good or better for less $. As a side note I had a Japanese made 3-9x40 Scopechief ( it was about $300 20 years ago) on a .416 RM. It was kunk after ~150 rounds. Aren't the Leupold tactical models used on .338 Lapua snipers? I can't see that having much different recoil than a .30-378.
 
There has never been a 3x9x36 conquest.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? This was quite a few years ago, when they first came out. I took it back and got a 3-9x36 Swarovski Habicht, which at the time was only $250 more.

Actually I just did a search and....

In 1996 the company brought scope assembly into the U.S. The Diavari C 3-9x36 MC got too little press. It was a fine scope at a modest price. In 2001 Zeiss replaced the Diavari C with a trio of variables called Conquests.

So I guess it was called the Diavari C at the time. Never-the-less it was not even comparable to the Habicht, and was IMHO, at best equivalent to the VXII.
 
I'd pick a Leupold VariX III 2.5-8x36. I put one on my .338 and the eye relief is great. The smaller size optics are actually adventageous when dealing with heavy recoil. Smaller scopes have less mass so they don't absorb as much "punch" as the larger, heavier scopes. I'd also avoid the older style VariX II that has the friction style adjustments as the 50+ ft. lbs. of recoil that your rifle generates could cause the adjustments to move and change zero. Likely wouldn't happen with a Leupold :wink: but why take the chance...KF
 
1899 said:
There has never been a 3x9x36 conquest.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? This was quite a few years ago, when they first came out. I took it back and got a 3-9x36 Swarovski Habicht, which at the time was only $250 more.

Actually I just did a search and....

In 1996 the company brought scope assembly into the U.S. The Diavari C 3-9x36 MC got too little press. It was a fine scope at a modest price. In 2001 Zeiss replaced the Diavari C with a trio of variables called Conquests.

So I guess it was called the Diavari C at the time. Never-the-less it was not even comparable to the Habicht, and was IMHO, at best equivalent to the VXII.
Click to expand...

If your diavari 3x9x36 was comparable to a varxii you got a bad one.I owned one german made diavari 3x9x36 and two american made 3x9x36 diavaris as well as a 3x9x40 conquest,two swarovski 3x9x36s and four swarovski 3x10x42s.The 3x10x42 swarovskis are the brightest of the bunch but all of the ziess and swarovski scopes were brighter than the two 3.5x10x40 varixiiis that I owned.I have since sold all but the 3x10x42 swarovskis but I would still buy the conquest if I couldn't afford the swarovskis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom