Best 3-9 for hunting? (Udate 6/16 with a surprising scope comparison.)

Looking for a non A/0 scope with a standard duplex type reticle. Not set on 40/44/50 mm objective and target turrets won't be needed.

Leupolds obviously come to mind, would like to look through a Zeiss as well.

Hope to keep it under $400-500.

Suggestions?

I just picked up a Vortex Diamondback 4-12X40 that is the same size as a 3X9. It was $200 shipped. Haven't mounted it yet (still waiting for my 111 to arrive). Looks to be of fairly good quality. And there warranty is unbeatable. So far I'm impressed. We'll see when the range report is complete.

Take a look at the Leupold VX-3 and VX-R with the CDS turrets in 3-9x40. Simple, no-clutter duplex reticle with the ability to dial in long distance dope if the need every arises. The Fire-Dot in the VX-R model is a nice addition for low light conditions when it's hard to see the reticle against a dark background. I like the lighter weight and compact design of the Leupold scope, plus the high quality Alumina accessories. My old eyes don't see anything wrong with the new VX-3 glass that's as we would say is not just being nit-picky. I've tried and sold about every brand of scope in this price range and a Leupold seems to hold its resale value the best. You mentioned the Ziess Conquest, but other's I've owned that deserve a look are the Vortex Viper and Sightron II Big-Sky models.

Thanks for the replies.

I have a Vortex on my 20 Practical, great scope for the money.

I also have a Redfield Revolution, it too is a great scope for the money.

I'll have to look through the others to see how they compare. I'd really like to have something a little clearer and crisper on this rifle. I don't mind paying more for better glass, I just don't want to pay 80% more money for 10% better quality.

In a 3-9x40 I'd go with the Zeiss Conquest or the Bushnell Elite 4200. Simply superb glass for the money. Especially the Bushnell being as it's so inexpensive.
That said, I'd seriously look at the Minox ZA5 1.5-8x32. Wonderful optics, magnificently useful mag range, relatively lightweight.

I'll check it out thanks.

Also- good point regarding weight. I'm actually looking to add a little weight to this rifle so a heavier scope wouldn't be a disadvantage.

ive got a weaver grand slam 3-10x40 thats pretty good glass.

Based on your additional input, I'd have to agree with nsaqam, the Bushnell Elite 4200 has superb glass for a great price, it is a little heavier and also features the Rainguard glass coating which works as advertized. However, Bushnell has discontinued them and I am not sure if the new Bushnell Elite model has the same glass as the old Elite 4200.

Thanks for the tip, I'll check them out. I've never owned a higher end Bushnell, didn't know the glass was that good.

The new Bushnell Elite Series which replaced the 4200's has glass just as good as the previous model and also has a new Rainguard which is more scratch resistant.
I and others have been of the opinion for many years now since the 4200's came out that there wasn't a scope which could compete with them for the price. They rival scopes costing much much more.
Not only is the glass superb but the construction is stout, the adjustments crisp and repeatable, and the warranty top shelf.

I agree that the bushnell 4200 is an excellent scope and I havent looked through a scope that as better than it in that price range. Next step up from it is a sightron or zeiss conquest. After recently spending a lot of time behind my vortex viper, I will not own another one. the scope functions great, I just can't get over how horrible the eye box is on it. I say go with a bushnell or nikon monarch and will you will be more than pleased.

Not knowing what cartridge or the weight of the rifle, is eye relief a concern??

Eye relief is always a concern for a hunting rifle. Even if you are shooting a mildly recoiling deer rifle there are a number of factors that come into play. Quick shouldering, multiple layers of clothing, various shooting positions, an unexpected opportunity etc. A narrow eye box on a bench gun is irrelevant, on a hunting rifle it has a bigger impact.

Leupold VX 2 or 3. Cant go wrong.

From what I understand the glass in Bushnell Elite scopes comes from the same factory as the glass in Nightforce scopes.

For the price the Nikon Pro-Staff can't be beat. I have one on my Rem 660 in 308 with no problems. Very clear.

i agree. dollar for dollar, the Pro-Staff is gonna be hard to beat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeffreyC

From what I understand the glass in Bushnell Elite scopes comes from the same factory as the glass in Nightforce scopes.

---

Might come from the same factory (I believe Japanese for the Nightforce) but definitely not the same quality. Glass is graded kinda like high end wood stocks. Just because one lens might be twice as good as another, doesn't mean it costs twice as much. It can cost 10 times as much.

On another topic... What exactly is an "eye box"? I've never heard that term before.

Eye box is the left to right, up to down leeway one has behind a scope where you have a full view through the scope.
Some people include the fore and aft leeway as well but that is really eye relief.

Nightforce glass is not impressive given the price. They are stout, reliable, repeatable, accurate, and precise but the glass is simply so so.

I agree that nightforce is a great scope, but their glass isn't quite as nice as its reputation would lead you to believe. My shooting buddy has one, and my weaver t36 was very similar in clarity, brightness etc.

Anybody compare scopes on an optical resolution chart. That would give a better idea of how good the glass is in a particular scope as far as clarity. Also, ones own vision contributes to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nsaqam

Eye box is the left to right, up to down leeway one has behind a scope where you have a full view through the scope.
Some people include the fore and aft leeway as well but that is really eye relief.

---

That is one of my complaints about Leupold is you have to be exactly straight behind them to get a full view. I have several Vipers and Leupold VXIIIs and Sightron IIIs, and so far the only complaint with the Vipers is I wish they were a higher power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmg8550

Anybody compare scopes on an optical resolution chart. That would give a better idea of how good the glass is in a particular scope as far as clarity. Also, ones own vision contributes to that.

---

John Barsness ( Mule Deer on 24hourcampfire.com) does those comparisons.

I agree on the point about ones own vision having a lot to do with perceived clarity.

I really like the Zeiss Conquest in that price point, and for a little more the Swarovski Z3 3x9x36 is an incredible scope.

Going to go this wknd and look through as many as I can. The Zeiss, Leupold, and Bushnell are leading the pack right now.

Just got back from looking through a number of scopes and to be honest I was pretty surprised.

Conditions were very cloudy and a bit dark, little rain spits from time to time. Thought that would be a good indicator of how the scopes did under adverse conditions. Looked through everything mid afternoon, then came back to see how they did at dusk.

Looked through the Zeiss, the Vortex, Leupold, Redfield and the Nikon, couldn't find a Bushnell Elite series. These were all 3-9 with a duplex reticle except the Vortex which had their dead hold bdc, looking through the window of a sporting goods store at known distances of 50 to 600 yards. Scopes were all secured on a tripod with a series of mounts so that you could compare them quickly.

The first thing that surprised me was that the Zeiss did not, in my opinion, distinguish itself from the crowd. I had high hopes for the conquest, was really leaning that way, but to my eye it was neck and neck with the others.

The Leupold impressed me the least, and was the first to be dismissed.

The Redfield and the Vortex were very similar, I could not tell a difference in clarity or brightness between the two. Once I started reading real estate signs at the longer ranges they both became a little fuzzy.

The scope that really took me by surprise was the Nikon. I hadn't really paid them much attention, and only looked through one because the salesman was being super cooperative and recommended it. I looked through it to humor him but was amazed that it was at least as bright as the others, and when trying to read small print on signs at various distances it was clearer than the others by a fair margin.

I realize that this was far from a scientific test but the Nikon is now in front of the pack.

Dollar for dollar, hard to beat

It is hard to tell the differences in these scopes. Try comparing the scopes in the evening while looking at something in the shadows. between the nikon, bushnell, and zeiss it will be very hard to find a clear winner. I say between these three choose the one that has the reticle you want. That is the deciding factor.

That's why I went back later in the day, to compare the low light resolution, and all the scopes mentioned had the same reticle except the Vortex as noted.

I have a Nikon 3x9 on my hunting rifle with no complaints. As I stated in a prevous post, glass is clear and no problems through about 6 soggy deer seasons.

Picked up a Nikon 3-9 from a member here, couldn't be happier with it so far.

One thing I think is worth mentioning: a lot of times you hear reviews saying this is "the best scope for the money". I was looking at scopes that cost 5x what this Nikon did. It was not in my opinion, the "best scope for the money". It was the clearest, brightest, sharpest scope period.

Mattri, your making my heart go pitter patter! I just posted about my choice of the Nikon for exactly what you discovered. Feels nice to see I'm not the only one. I bought a Monarch 8/32-50 for my 6.5 Lapua build. I have never spent anywhere near that kind of money on a scope in my life! and never intended to, but I wanted something fairly high power in a level of quality I've never owned. I can't wait to get this gun shooting!
When I first came on here I posted a question about what rings I needed to mount a Nikon 50mmobj on my Sav- no response. So I assumed I might be the only poor bast... to buy a Nikon. BTW- since I didn't get any help, I ordered 3 sets of rings- and used them all remounting other guns- fwiw, it takes high rings :)

PS- In the box with my Monarch, I got an additional two sets of target turrets, turret caps and a sunshade. Pretty sweet package.

I have a Nikon ProStaff on my AR build right now, 3x9x50 and have shot it at 500 yd with no issues. Will admit I had my doubts, but for the $ it is one heck of a scope. It is my new rifle scope, meaning each new rifle gets to wear it until I find a scope I want to mount, buddy of mine has borrowed it for 3-4 new rifles until the scope for the rifle shows up.