Shooters Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Ok I'm a newbie here so HI. I have been searching around for quite some time and have narrowed my search for a new scope. I have a rem. model 7 7mm-08 that is my ALL purose hunting rifle. From pig, coyote, deer and elk. I have been using a cheaper tasko(varmit 6-18x42) on it for about 12 years and have killed everything I shot at. I am looking to finally get some better optics on it. I have narrowed it to the burris fullfield 2 with BDC reticle, the nikon buckmaster with BDC and the bushnell elite 4200 with standard reticle. All scopes will be in the 3-9x40 size. I would love to throw more money at one but its not an option as all these are very close in price(i can get the elite new for $221). The things i dont like is the BDC on the nikon is dots, the burris has a full rotating eyepiece(no flip up covers can be used) and the 4200 in this power doesnt come with BDC or its sign. higher cost. Let me know your opinions. Thanks in advance.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
668 Posts
The Vortex Diamondback 3-9x40mm with the BDC reticle is very nice for $199. Much better optics than all those you list and has the best warranty in the business.

Vortex will repair or replace your Vortex product for any reason at NO CHARGE TO YOU. It doesn't matter how it happened, whose fault it was, or where you purchased it.​
  • Unlimited lifetime Warranty
  • Fully transferable
  • No warranty card to fill out
  • No receipt needed to hang on to
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,246 Posts
I would go with the Bushnell Elite 4200, hands down. If you read reviews of better glass, the Elite series gets very high marks, for the price range they're in. The thing to do is look through the glass on each before you make any decisions. Also, for truly long-range shooting, I've found any of the BDC reticles to be a hindrance, as they obscure too much of the target.
 

·
Piney Woods Moderator
Joined
·
6,227 Posts
I have both the Nikon and Burris scopes and have been pleased with both. Both scopes have been put through some pretty extreme temperature and service conditions without any problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,848 Posts
I would go with the Bushnell Elite 4200, hands down. If you read reviews of better glass, the Elite series gets very high marks, for the price range they're in. The thing to do is look through the glass on each before you make any decisions. Also, for truly long-range shooting, I've found any of the BDC reticles to be a hindrance, as they obscure too much of the target.
+1 !! I have the Eiite 4200 3-9x40 and it is an excellent scope!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,591 Posts
I have several of the Burris FFII's and have been very happy with them. I think they are a very good value, and the ballistic reticle is truly useful for the longer ranges.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
well with the discount I can get for the bushnells I think I'm going that route. Now do I got 3-9x40 3200 with DOA(BDC) reticle or the 4200 with standard reticle. I will spend a bunch of time at the range with the scope counting clicks and writing it down for every 50 yrds so I can adjust in the field if DOA isnt accurate for my rifle. So do I go 4200 since I will count clicks anyways or do the 3200DOA and use it for fast shots and count clicks for more timely shots? Is the difference in optics worth the reticle or not. I hear alot of people dont use the DOA style reticle anyways so that also has some concerns. I didnt see a 4200 model with the DOA reticle is why I ask between the 3200DOA and 4200 standard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,848 Posts
I'd always go with a better quality scope for my $$ vs a higher magnification range or "trick" reticle. I own both a 3200 3-9 and a 4200 3-9 and the 4200 is a better quality scope (both, however are good scopes). Shooting a Rem model Seven with 18.5 or 20" barrel in 7/08, I really wouldn't think there would necessarily be a need for a BDC reticle, IMO. My vote goes for the better/additional coatings on the lenses that the 4200 gives you. By the way, just back from a hog hunt where they told us to remain in our stands just as long as we could possibly see to shoot (completely legal). A buddy used both a Nikon Monarch and an Elite 3200 on consecutive nights and said the 3200 was brighter in same light. Interesting!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
My experience includes Bushnell, Luepold, Burris & Winchester...all in variations of 3x9 power. I feel the Bushnell & Winchester potics were noteably deficient relative to both Burris & Luepold. I frankly could not tell much difference between the clarity of Burris or Luepold and for the money the Burris gets my votes. I have theBDC reticule on both Burris scopes mounted on a 7m-08 and 30-06. The concept really does work on published bullet weights for both calibers. I have not had any experience with the Luepold "Boone & Crockett" version of the BDC concept. I find the smaller hack marks of the Burris less distracting at the range but perfectly useful under actual field conditions.

I hunt mostly in northern Minnesota and Wisconsin where a 100 yard shot is considered longish. I used the Burris/7m-08 to kill my first antelope at 412 yards lasered. The BDC was right on for holdover; I simply did not hold off enough for the Wyoming wind but that was operator error as the BDC did its part.

Realistically either the Burris or Leupold will perform for you and it comes down to a matter of personal preferences as to adjustment rings, reticules etc.

Brad
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
ok its been a while and some things came up so the scope got put on hold. However I managed to scrounge up some more cash for a scope. I would like to stay with the bushnell elite 4200 due to the discounts I can get. My new scope option is the 4-16x50 and retail is 599. I can get it for 440. I was going to look at getting the 4-16x40 but they dont offer that scope with the discount selection. The 4-16x50 is a side focus scope and hear that some make a bit fuzzier view than a objective focus scope would. Am I better off staying with the 3-9x40(retail: $299, discount: $225) or would the 4-16x50(retail: $599, discount: $440) be a much better scope. My other option is to get the 3-9x40 and the scout 100 ARC rangfinder with it. I dont have a problem buying the pricier scope and saving for the rangfinder later.
Lets hear the opinions...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,848 Posts
I just really do not see a need for a 4-16x50 scope on a 20" barreled 7/08 :confused: I think a quality 3-9x40 is a much better choice.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top