Nikon Rifle Scoes


PDA






coop923
August 12, 2010, 02:55 AM
My dad is thinking about re-scoping his Browning BAR Lightweight .308. He likes a Nikon Buckmaster that he saw with the BDC reticle. He thinks it's more clear and brighter than his 2-7 VX-1; although he was looking at the Nikon in 3x9-40. The Leupold has a 32mm objective lense. If he does change scopes he would go to a 3x9-40. Do any of you have any experience with Nikon scopes? are there any others he should look into in this price range ($219 at Cabelas)? I know Nikon has a similar reticle on their Monarch, but that jumps the price up to the $400 neighborhood. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.

-Mark

If you enjoyed reading about "Nikon Rifle Scoes" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
HunterBear71
August 12, 2010, 03:40 AM
Nikon primos comes with the BDC at about the same price from certain outlets (manventureoutpost).

Lloyd Smale
August 12, 2010, 08:10 AM
In my opinion the buckmaster are an average scope. Better opticaly then a vx1 but not as good as a vx2. For even a bit less money a bushnell 3200 is in my opinion a superior scope. Nikons arent bad scopes if you stay away from the prostaffs. Weaver are also in my opinion superior to the nikons. Another one to look at is the new redfield. Just yesterday i picked up a 4x12 and the jury still out but is seems like a good clear scope for about the same money as a prostaff. time will tell on that one though.

viking499
August 12, 2010, 08:41 AM
I like the Buckmaster scopes. I have a complete handful and have had no problems. I also have the Primos mentioned above. In my opinion, for under $200, it is the perfect 3-9 scope.

heeler
August 12, 2010, 08:44 AM
I own two Nikon Monarchs and two Leupolds among the many scopes I have.
Of the two Monarchs one being a 3x9x40 and the other is the 2x7x32 both are very clear and both perform quite well during low light sessions.
The Leupolds are a VX-l 2x7x33 and a VX-ll 3x9x40.
Both of these perform very well during low light operations as well.
The Nikons,unlike so many Asia made scopes have very good eye relief but the Leupolds are a bit better there.
Eye relief is one issue many people over look when buying a scope and on hard recoiling rifles that can be sometimes problematic.
Another issue I particularly like about the Leupolds is they are generally shorter and lighter than other scopes they are compared to and I for one dont like bulky weighty rifle scopes especially on carbine style walking rifles that I use such as my old favorite Remington 600's.

Al LaVodka
August 12, 2010, 09:09 AM
I have seen much Nikon stuff directly from a VP there (in the States) and know the guy who launched their latest lines -- scarily bright, sharp, stuff.
Al

Glocked-N-Loaded
August 12, 2010, 09:13 AM
I have a Buckmaster 3-9x40 on my sons Remington 700 Buckmasters youth model. Glass is clear as a bell, holds zero, BDC is accurate. Good scope for it's purpose.

jimmyraythomason
August 12, 2010, 10:16 AM
I have one Buckmasters and three Prostaffs and love them all. All are in 3x9x40 and compare well with my Leupold VX-1 also in 3x9x40(slight edge to the VX-1 for clarity and ER).

Arkansas Paul
August 12, 2010, 11:42 AM
I have a Prostaff and have never had a problem. I would buy another in a heartbeat. Nikons are one of the best for the money IMO.

dodge
August 12, 2010, 01:09 PM
I have a Pro staff and a Buckmaster both are 3-9x40 and am very happy with both. I also have another Buckmaster in 6-18x40 with side focus and a target dot on my Remington .223 vls which is very bright and the adjustments on all three are accurate and repeatable. I paid $150 for the prostaff, $200 for the 3-9 buckmaster and $299 for the 6-18 buckmaster.

ArtP
August 16, 2010, 11:51 PM
I guess I'll post the dissenting opinion. I bought a Monarch in 4-16x42 was unhappy and sold it in favor of a Burris Signature Select. Even though it left a bitter taste in my mouth for Nikon, someone I trust very much talked me into another Monarch 1.5-4.5x20 for a lever carbine. The scope will stay put but I'm not all that impressed. Distorted around the edges, overall a fair optical image.

A Burris Fullfield II in 3-9x40 can be had for a little less than $200 and for that kind of money I've seen nothing that beats it.

Admittedly, I'm picky with optics. I would rate them this way- VXII ($350) and Fullfield ($200) very similar, Nikon Monarch ($400) taking up the rear. I also own a VXIII and a Burris Signature Select, both better and more expensive than the latter scopes mentioned, the sigselect I find the best of all of them. All of the scopes mentioned track very well and hold zero, different only in optical quality.

MrBob
September 3, 2010, 12:26 PM
I haven't used it, but by coincidence MY dad has the Nikon Buckmaster scope and loves it :)

Sky
September 3, 2010, 12:41 PM
The Walmart here in my area had a scope behind their display that I looked at. It was a ?-14x44 I think? I only got to look through it in their super store. It was well made and did not have cheap fixtures. The only reason I bring this up the price was $59.00! I have 2 extra scopes already but for that price I would have bought it just to see if it was any good.

My personal 2.8-10x44 is a Simmons that usually sells for $199 to $239 depending on the source. I got it off Ebay for $89 new in the box...It has held zero for me but I have probably only shot 150 rounds with that scope rifle combo.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nikon Rifle Scoes" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!