Help with Scope selection please

.303

.303

Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Location
Kootenays BC
Hi all-

I have just bought a .300 Savage and am now curious as to what Brand of Scope would be best.

I am considering 3 different brands....

Bushnell 3200/4200

Leupold VXII

Nikon Monarch

Either would be in the 3-9x40 or 50.

I am using it for general hunting- deer, elk, moose, bear.

Also if anyone could tell me the difference between a 3200 and a 4200 (I am assuming it is just the amount of light that is retained) and whether or not the DOA 600 on the Bushnell is accurate for all types of rifles (ie. is the 300 or 400 yard crosshair accurate for a .300 as well as a .338 or a .270?)

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks
 
I have 3200's and 4200's on all my toys. I prefer them over my Leupolds that I had. Much crisper and no problems on 300's or 375 H&H. Now sitting on 22 and 270 Roy. Actually traded a 3x9x50 target Leopold for a 4200 to a buddy. We are both happy.
 
I have a Nikon Monarch, a Nikon Buckmaster, and a 3200 as well as some more expensive scope brands. All of the scope brands you mentioned are fine and comparative with each other. Every person has different sight, opinions, and ideas about what they want in a scope.

What do you want in a scope?

I have found that Nikon was the best scope for the amount of money I wanted to spend at the time. I never could buy a Leupold scope they always seemed over priced for what you get, and I could always find a comparable scope I liked better for less money. The difference between the 3200 VS 4200 is mostly the glass, and coatings being better in the 4200, as well as some of the 4200 having better mechanic adjustments inside. I haven't used the DOA system but it has ranging hash marks that would be "calibrated" for a certain caliber / bullet velocity usually. So if it was calibrated for 308 Winchester shooting a 165gr bullet, then it would be different then a 300 Sav shooting a 150gr bullet. Having said that most of these scope reticles can be made to work with your rifle caliber if you do some shooting and find out at what range each line/dot is lining up with your gun/load. So the 600 yard line in the scope might test to be the 550 line for your 300 Sav, but you have to shoot to find out. Most of the hold over reticles don't actually work (as accurately) like they are advertised and will only get you "closer" to your target then guessing alone. If you plan on shooting out past 500 yards I recommend you get a range finder, know you guns hold over at those ranges, and practice actually shooting the distances you want to shoot.

So in less you are after a special feature in a scope or scope brand I would tell you go look through the ones you are interested in, view same out doors, and buy the one you like most.

You may surprise your self when doing your own direct comparison and come home with something you would not thought of like a Vortex, Burris, etc.

Good luck.
 
Last edited:
If it's a Savage 99 go with an old steel tubed Weaver. The K-3 in particular looks great on this gun and is dead reliable. Something about matching the era of firearm with the era of scope appeals to me. To me it just plain fits the rifle better. The Old K series doesn't give up much optically to new scopes and is as tough as any.

I feel most hunters are over scoped. Jack O'Conner was right about a 3X scope. Great for bush and usable to 350 yards on big game.
 
Something to perhaps keep in mind about the Bushnell Elite series is the rainguard coating....it is nothing less than spectacular. The Nikon looks great til you get it wet.....same with say a Leupold Vx-1. Once wet, they both darken up quite nicely. The Bushnell stays quite bright and sheds water like the proverbial duck's back. The day I bought my Elite 3200 it was raining; I took it, the Nikon and the Loopy outside and purposely got em all 3 wet. The Bushnell was easily the clearest.

...my 2 cents worth :p
 
You are going to hear a ton of different opinions which is going to make your choice hard lol. The best, if you can, is to take some of the opinions here, and go look through the glass at them at the store.

I have always used Bushnells and now still own a 3200, but this year I hunted using my Burris Fullfield II, and I have to say I like the glass better than the 3200, especially in low light situations. Early morning and late afternoon shots is where I noticed the biggest difference with the Burris. I will still keep my 3200 on a one of my hunting rifles strickly for rainy day and snowy hunting situations because of how well the rain guard works.
 
I have two Savage 99 s in .300 (one F and one EG) and both wear 3x scopes. One is an old weaver and the other a Leopold. Both are great but I prefer the Leopold (brighter and better cross hair).

Enjoy your .300 Savage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom