Scope suggestions
I am planning on ordering a .243 Cooper and need advice on scope selection. I have been using Leupolds and have been happy with them; however, I keep hearing how much nicer Nightforce and Swarovskis are. Do you think they are significantly better quality than Leupolds, worth the extra money, etc., etc.? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated...
0
-
I'm looking at scopes for my new FN FNAR .308. It will be for hogs, possibly deer at up to 300 yds., and target practice up to 500 yds. I plan on also mounting an Eotech or Fastfire for closer work. What are your recommendations as far as scope power? Fixed at what power, or variable at what powers? 0 -
I have owned , Swarovskis, Kahles,Leica, leuopolds and burris scopes I seem to always go back to my Leupold. they tend to be much lighter( I sheep hunt so this is important) and the optics are superb. I have never had one break on me and more than one outfitter has told me that he sees very little problems with them compared to other scopes. So for the money, they are a bargain. Burris is great also, but tend to be heavy.I do have a friend that likes Nightforce scopes but again they are very heavy. 0 -
one other thing. Those other scopes are great, but I have found that even though people are impressed that you own one, it does not make it a better option. At this point in my life, I just want something that does the job well, no matter the cost. 0 -
Just remember that Cooper gave old democrap party some money for the election. Take that in mind when you spend my on that there rifle.... 0 -
Check out the warranty, if it isn't a no questions asked, no paper work need warranty then I'd go with the appropriate Burris or Leupold. My own assortment of scopes has tended heavily away from Leupold and towards Burris on the last several years. The Cooper tends to be nice compact, light weight rifle. The scope you put on it should be too. Leupold scopes tend to be the lightest scopes out there, but the equivalent Burris scope are generally pretty close to the same weight. And remember unless your eyesight is really good you will probably never be able to realize the difference between a really high end scope and a middle or the road quality scope. Ok, I know that didn't come out well and folks will argue, but work with me here...... 0 -
Why such expensive scopes? I have over 75 high power rifles. Half of them have the old 4 power Weaver scopes on them and are all over 30 years old, the rest of my rifles either have a simmons or a tasco and I have never paid over $30 for either of those 2. They work great and I am allowed 3 antelope and 5 deer a year in my home state and I have never had to throw an empty tag away. The cheaper scopes will work for a deer out to 500 plus yards but why would you ever have to shoot that far or any further. Become a hunter and get closer. 0 -
centerfireman,
If you have ever looked through a Swarovski, Nightforce, or a Zeiss, you would see what they are talking about. Yes they are significantly better. The optics just flat outdo a Leupold hands down. It gets even better at dusk.
This is not to say Leupolds are not functional. They are. Just not to the point that you can get in some quality glass. They do have filters now that help factor out non-game colors. Meaning when you glass the greens of trees and dark browns of bushes are subdued. And the tawny color of a deer stands out.
My personal preference is for Meopta, or Zeiss Conquest. Although I owned a Swarovski 3-12x50 PH. For hunting it was an outstanding scope. In these tough times I found it helped pay the mortgage better than selling the lower end scopes I had. I still own a 3-9x36 and don't plan on selling it.
Bottom line: You would do well if you can to put the best glass on that rifle that you can. If you can upgrade to a Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica you would definately see a difference when you get out in the field.
Briguy,
I'd like to qualify your statement if I may. You are in a town in Montana where you can walk out your back door and shoot deer or antelope. Under those circumstances yes an old Weaver K-4 would work just fine. The difference here is what if you were over in the Bob Marshall or Scapegoat and on a sheep hunt you get once in your life. It's legal to shoot but you are down in a shadowed canyon....that K-4 ain't gonna cut it. I know. I've been there, done that. My dad won't get rid of any of his old Weavers. Even though he was amazed at how good a Nikon Monarch looked. For shooting in bright sunlight a Weaver scope would work. Normally, in good hunting that is about half the time. I suggest the better glass.0 -
I have never had any trouble with light or anything and I do most of my shooting as early into the legal a.m. shooting hours possible or as late into the legal shooting hours just before dark. I am usually in a deep creek. I have also done plenty of hunting in the mountains, never had a problem. 0 -
I have simmons aetec scopes and some expensive burris scopes and would sell them all just to have a bushnell 3x9. All of my deer rifles have a bushnell trophy 3x9 on them and are the most accurate scopes I have. I can beat them and scrath them and let it rain on them and it don't matter because I consider them a tool to use. I paid less than 75 for them on fleebay and have yet to have a problem. Iam selling two of my aetecs to a friend of mine just to buy two more trophys. Yes it is nice to have an expensive scope but a less expensive one will do the same job for alot less money.Just my two cents. Oak 0 -
IMO Zeiss is better than Leupold, though the difference isn't nearly as dramatic as say the difference between a Leupold and one of the low-end scopes.
Never tried a Nightforce or Swarovski, so I can't compare, though assuming they are as good as the Zeiss (if not better), they should also be better than Leupold.
The question, I think, isn't whether or not they are better (I think they are), but whether or not its worth it to you to spend the considerably greater sum on the better scope, and whether or not you really want to knock around in the brush with a gazillion dollar scope.
In other words, its up to you to decide if the improvement is actually significant, and that depends mostly on what you intend to do with the scope.
Like everything else in the consumer market, you hit a point of diminishing returns where you pay more and more money for less and less additional benefit.
So I'd say you have to weigh the cost of the scope against the "cost" of the shot. How much did you spend on the gun, how much are you going to spend on hunting with it, how often are you going to use it, what exactly are you going to use it for, and how much money have you got to spend altogether?
For example, if you are spending $10,000+ to fly on a once in a lifetime guided Safari in Africa, and mounting the scope on a $2000+ custom rifle, and you expect to get maybe one shot total. . .then what's another few hundred dollars or even a $1000 for the very best possible optics? EG, what is a "miss" going to cost you?
Alternatively, if its a gun/scope combo that you are going to use a lot over many years, then the cost per use of the better scope may not be quite so much compared to your cost of travel, and other expenses over that time.
On the other hand, for just "a deer" where there are a zillion of them running around and you have a bag limit of several (which you easily and consistently fill), then you may derive no practical benefit from a super-duper optic, and you may be better off spending your cash elsewhere.
On the subject of low-grade optics, sure you can "get it done" with a $50 Simmons scope. Ultimately your skill as a hunter and shooter are FAR more important than the quality of glass. If you're a good hunter and shot, you can fill your tag with iron sights too, right?.
Better optics really help the most in low light situations. Buying an extra 15 minutes hunting time at dawn or dusk *could* make all the difference, and again, the more is at stake, the more this matters. While they might not make the difference between a hit and a miss, better optics make seeing the target easier under *any* circumstances, and that's worth something too.
Lastly, apart from noticeably poorer image quality, low end optics may not hold their zero quite as well under a high volume of shots, and may have other less obvious flaws like poor click adjustment, etc. There are reasons why some scopes cost $50 and others cost $2000.
Making an analogy, even though you can drive yourself to work every day equally well in a Buick or in a BMW, that still doesn't mean you aren't going to have a nicer drive in the BMW! Further, the harder you push things (ie on the track or even just a highway in bad weather), the more the differences will become apparent.0 -
quote:Originally posted by briguy
I have never had any trouble with light or anything and I do most of my shooting as early into the legal a.m. shooting hours possible or as late into the legal shooting hours just before dark. I am usually in a deep creek. I have also done plenty of hunting in the mountains, never had a problem.
briguy,
If you are so impressed with the Weaver, Simmons, and Tasco riflescopes, you wold not know what to do if you ever got your hands on a Nikon, Burris, or Leupold. Let alone a Swarovski, Ziess, or NightForce. All those headaches you most likely suffer from after a day at the range would be gone.
To answer the original question...yes there is a big difference. If you ever get a chance to look at a NightForce, Ziess, or Swarovski, side by side with a Burris, Leupold, or Nikon, you will notice it. Get a chance to use one for a day, then you would buy it. out of the lesser scopes that were mentioned, I would pick Burris. Their optics and warranty are better than Nikon or Leupold.
Best0 -
I Agree with TSR1965, the high end euro scopes like Ziess, swavorski and kahles will out perform most U.S. scopes in just about every way.. I also agree with Beantown, that if you can justify the pricetag, go for it. 0 -
The bottomline, consider everyones' advice/opinion, but get the one that you can afford and works best for your shooting/hunting situation.
Here are some optics reviews for your consideration ...
http://www.6mmbr.com/optics.html
I too am a big fan of Leupolds but at this time I cannot afford the NFs, Zeiss', S&B, Swaros, US Optics, IORs, etc ...
Good luck!0 -
Leupold hands down 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
14 comments