.243 Win Scope??

Status
Not open for further replies.

firme67

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
39
Looking for suggestions for a good scope (& magnification reccommendation) for my Savage BTH .243, gun will be used to hunt deer and coyote with shots up to 350 yds. I have a .223 Vanguard with a Nikon ProStaff 3x9-40 w/BDC that I really like. However, I would like a little higher quality scope for the .243. Up for consideration right now is the Nikon Monarchs & Redfield Revolutions. Would like to here all your ideas. Would like to keep scope/rings/mounts under $475. Thanks.
 
3x9-40 is plenty for 350 yard, or 450 yard coyotes.
Don't overdo it on power, as you will miss way more coyotes with too much magnification then not enough.

I can't really comment on the brands you mentioned, but $475 will buy a pretty good Leupold, with the rings and the base.
And still have money left over.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-mark-ar-mod-1-3-9x40mm-p5-dial-riflescope-matte-black.html

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-rifleman-qdmanager-3-9x40mm-riflescope.html

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold...th-matte-black-finish-and-duplex-reticle.html

rc
 
The Monarchs are a cut above the Redfields and ProStaffs.
I own a 3x9 Monarch UCC that is crisper than my Leupold VX-II.
I would venture to believe the ProStaff and Revolution are probably closer to equals
They are all good scopes though.
 
Heh. I have a 30-year-old Leupold Vari-X II 2x7 on my .243. Good for prairie dogs to 300 yards. Probably more, but I just never had to reach out any farther. :)

IOW, it's not critical. Any decent 3x9 would do plenty good.
 
3x9-40 is plenty for 350 yard, or 450 yard coyotes.
Don't overdo it on power, as you will miss way more coyotes with too much magnification then not enough.

I can't really comment on the brands you mentioned, but $475 will buy a pretty good Leupold, with the rings and the base.
And still have money left over.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-mark-ar-mod-1-3-9x40mm-p5-dial-riflescope-matte-black.html

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold-rifleman-qdmanager-3-9x40mm-riflescope.html

http://www.opticsplanet.com/leupold...th-matte-black-finish-and-duplex-reticle.html

rc
The higher the magnification the less field of view.

rcmodel is on target in his comments.

The Pro-Staff you now have on your .223 is a good scope. It`s quality is good enough.IMO.
 
Maybe step up to the Nikon Buckmasters. That is all I use on my rifles. They can be had all day for $200 or less when on sale. They are a little better optically than the Prostaff and they have the finger click dials instead of the kind you have to adjust with a coin or tool.

Still, if you have a Prostaff, you don't NEED to upgrade. Save your money, or spend it on some ammo and cool stuff.
 
MidwayUSA has some good prices on Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14 and Monarch 4-16.
 
Monarch 4x16-50 for me, I rarely move it from its lowest setting though, maybe
crank it up to 8 or 9 for a long-shot, but I have used it as high as 12-14 to head-shot
a wiley-one that wouldnt stick his head out from behind a fallen tree stump
The 50mm really makes a difference in low-light conditions, and the Monarch for the money has awesome glass and almost 4" eye relief,
 
For the money, I like the Nikon Buckmasters. Little better quality and more options in magnification over the Prostaff. My 243 wears a 4.5-14x40 Buckmaster and I like it.
 
Nikons are hard to beat, I like my Redfield and Leopold too but my baby wears a Nikon and she is staying that way. I stepped up to a Buckmaster on my new Model 70, worth the extra $$$ in my book but not a big difference IMHO. Have Pro Staffs on the 6.5x55 and 270 WSM neither has ever needed to be re-zeroed, both have given me years of service without a seconds worth of trouble.
I don't think the Redfield is a step up from the Nikon, I use my Nikons to see where my Redfield is hitting at the range and they are both 3x9s
 
I have experience with Burris & Leupold and they're both great. Like others have said, a 3-9x40 is all you need and I wouldn't feel under-scoped in the least with a 2-7 as Art mentioned. It seems men and scopes are like men and pickups; they usually buy WAY more than they need.

35W
 
I put a Nikon 4.5-14 "coyote" reticle on my 243, and have been very pleased with it. It took some getting used to, but once you have it figured out, you are never going to want something else for coyote calling. Really remarkable in that use.

I finally figured out how to use the circles for load development by shooting the round, black, "shoot-n'-see" type targets. Circle in a circle, simple!

I have other scopes I really like for other uses, but I really must say that in this use this scope is darned good.
 
My(wifes).243 wears a a Burris Fullfiled II in 3x9x40 with no complaints! if I were scoping another one I'd go with a Leupold VXII of the same size! Nothing against the Burris its a fine scope!
 
I'm following others here on the Nikon Monarch. I have the 4-16x50 and it's a great scope with great glass. I agree better than the Redfield.
 
I am very pleased with my Redfield Revolution 4-12x40 with BDC reticle. Clear optics, holds zero, is Leupold owned/supported and was under $200 when I bought it.

The only possible negative I can give it is that the knobs are a bit mushy, so you do have to actually pay attention while making adfustments or you may be off.
 
I am also in the process of picking up a scope for a new .243... I had been wrestling with whether to opt for a 3-9 or a 4-12, but judging by what the folks on this thread are saying, I should be fine sticking with the tried and true 3-9.

I think my scope price range is a little lower than the OP's, but I had pretty much narrowed my decision down to either the Vortex Diamondback, or the Redfield Revolution. I'm pretty sure am going to get the Diamondback, but I may have to check out a Nikon Buckmaster. I had veered away from a Nikon up to this point because I have a Prostaff Rimfire on a CZ, and while it's not a bad scope, it's really not on the same level as the Diamondbacks and Revolutions I've looked at.... maybe it's not a good representation of Nikon's other Prostaff and Buckmaster Scopes.

I believe if I was working with the OP's price range I would pick up a DNZ Game reaper mount for ~$50, and spend the rest on one of the decently priced Ziess Conquests currently up on Ebay.
 
thanks everyone, maybe I will look into the Nikon Buckmaster series, and stick with the 3x9-40, I know that Cabelas has the Nikons on sale now:D
 
I have a Burris 3-9x40 Fullfield II on MY .243 (not my wife's, not my daughter's, MINE!!)

I tried out a Prostaff on it, and really liked it quite well. Gathered plenty of light, clear, nice reticle.

The Burris came with a BDC reticle, which I decided I really did want, so I pulled the Nikon off and put the Burris on. It's quite a nice scope as well.

For deer, coyotes, etc., I wouldn't go for more magnification than 3-9. I would be fine with a 2-7, depending on where I was hunting.
 
My 700 wears a Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10x40; my Model 7 a Leupold Vari-X IIc 2-7x33. I picked both scopes up second hand. Like them both a lot.
 
I'll tell you why I like my Nikon Buckmaster 6-18 so much. I can leave it on 6 power if I want but there are days where I shoot paper out to 300 yrds and that 18 power is nice to have. Some of the guys I shoot with have 24 to 32 power and laugh at my lowley 18 power but I do just fine !!! Love the side focus also. Comes with different caps and a sun shade also and the clicks are so positive.
Dave
 
Take a look at the Sightron SIII scopes. If you are shooting out there a ways, these do well. They have various magnifications, very good glass, and outstanding tracking on windage and elevation.

Very good scope for the money.

http://info.sightron.com/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top