Leuplod Rifle Scopes


PDA






dusty14u
January 6, 2011, 03:26 PM
I am looking for a scope for my new levergun. I think I have it narrowed down to two choices. The Nikon Prostaff 3-9 x 40 and the Leupold Rifleman in 3-9 x 40. The Prostaff is less in dollars but I know nothing in the feature comparison to Leupold. Anyone have any preference between the two? Pro's and con's?



My shooting will most likley be southeastern brush and woods with field shots of up to 250yds. I will be using Hornaday Leverlution flextip ammo. I will most likely handload these too as you can now purchase the bullets from Hornaday. I imagine most shots would be between 60-150yds.

If you enjoyed reading about "Leuplod Rifle Scopes" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BrocLuno
January 6, 2011, 03:36 PM
The ProStaff is pretty well respected. I have two and they work fine. The ProStaff is my go-to inexpensive scope and where I often start out friends looking at their first build :)

I have not tried one of the Leupold Rifleman scopes, can't comment on that one.

As a reference - I have about 30 odd scopes of most mid-priced brands. I was also a surveyor for decades and looked through a LOT of high quality scopes (Zeiss, Wilde, etc.). The Nikon glass is fine and I have not broken one yet :)

CraigC
January 6, 2011, 03:49 PM
A 3-9x is way too much glass for your typical levergun. IMHO a receiver sight is best but a straight tube low powered variable is a much better choice than anything bigger. Something like the VX-II 1-4x or VX-III 1.5-5x.

Par8head
January 6, 2011, 03:59 PM
Either are good choices, maybe Leupold warranty if you ever sold it would make a difference.
I put the Bushnell Banner 3X9 on my 30-30 336 last year. That gun hunts at 30 to 200 yard ranges and worked very well this past season. The extended eye relief it offers gave me the adjustment room my grandson needed.
On the "you get what you pay for".........if possible, try any scope out you're considering in low and very low light situations. I'd go for the "brightest"scope on a hunting rifle, all else being similar.(the Banner is just so-so in this respect)
I'd probably go with a Leupold if I re-scope.

nathan
January 6, 2011, 04:38 PM
I compared the Nikon Buckmaster $ 209 and Nikon Monarch $350. They are almost the same in clarity but Moarch an edge better. Now i havent seen a Nikon Primos, supposed to be like Monarch around $ 250. We taking here of 3 x 9 x 40 scopes.

Rancho Relaxo
January 6, 2011, 04:39 PM
I would consider something like a 2-7x with your lever gun. I have both Nikons and Leupolds, both are excellent. I prefer Nikons because I think they are a better value, Leupold knows they have a great product and price them accordingly.

d2wing
January 6, 2011, 04:45 PM
Leopold. You can't go wrong. Either is ok though.

gkdir
January 6, 2011, 04:56 PM
I have a Bushnell XLT Trophy 3-9x40 with a 250 DOA reticle hanging on both my 336, and an older Glenfield/Marlin 30A. Makes for faster target acqusition with my older eyes. I think I would take the Bushnell before the Leupold "Rifleman". I have several high end Leupolds, but that Rifleman is really low end--just my $0.02.

bp_cowboy
January 6, 2011, 06:15 PM
I know people frown on this, but I have over/under rings on my 336 with a fixed 4x Bushnell. I've shot lots of deer with type setup and seems to work for my hunting style.

JDMorris
January 6, 2011, 06:34 PM
I like my Prostaff, 3-9x40 BDC.
It has fantastic clarity, and the parralax works very well.

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