Help me decide between these scopes...

[cwgtex]

I am trying to decide on a scope to mount on my Remington 700 BDL 30-06. It will be primarily a whitetail and hog gun, but I want to be able to use it for mule deer down the road if the opportunity presents itself. I know I want a 50mm objective to see good at dusk and dawn. I want a little bit more zoom than a standard 3-9. Here are my top choices so far:

Swift 4-12x50
$224.95
http://www.opticsplanet.net/swift-4-12x50mm-premier-riflescope.html

Alpen Apex 6-24x50
$292.00
http://www.opticsplanet.net/alpen-apex-6-24x50-waterproof-adj-obj-matte-black-riflescope-4045.html

Bushnell Elite 3200 5-15x50
$319.00
http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnel...escope-rainguard-multi-x-reticle-325155m.html

Which of these scopes would be my best bet? Is it worth the extra dough to get the Bushnell or Alpen over the Swift?

Feel free to suggest any other scopes that you might think would be good for me. I want to stay under $300 if possible.

 

[LEVRLOVR]

Hey CW.

Weaver Grandslam 3.5x10x50.

Read the reviews at Midway on this scope.
It is a better deal than those you are looking at in my opinion.

 

[jmr40]

Stay with a 40 mm objective. Better glass for the money. I'd rather have good glass in 40mm than average glass in 50mm. Weaver, Bushnell and Nikon, and others all make good scopes in a 3-9X 40 that will cost less and be of better quality

 

[Maverick223]

If not over-budget, a Ziess 3-9x would be my first choice (additional magnification is superfluous and may even be harmful), will run in the $500 range. Nikon Monarch 2.5-10x would be my second choice at about $100 less, and the Bushnell 3200 3-9x would be my third choice at less than half the price of the Zeiss.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Definitely the Swift - 4x is the absolute "maximum minimum" power you want for hunting, unless you KNOW you're going to hunt ONLY over fields with this rifle. Actually, I like a scope to dial down to 2 or 3 minimum, for woods hunting.

 

[oz_lowrider]

I have just been through the same exercise and I made the wrong choice. I bought a Bushnell Elite 3200 4-15 x 50. While the optics are sharp and clear no matter what magnification, the scope is too big physically. It's on a M98 action with a light custom stock and Douglas 24" barrel. The caliber is 25-06. The scope is so big it puts the whole rifle out of balance and it's a mongrel to handle in the field. It's ok on the bench but it's totally useless in the field. Don't make the same mistake. I wouldn't go for anything more than 3-9x 40, possibly a Leupold VX 1.

 

[SwampWolf]

Every thing else being equal ( a hard thing to accomplish), the smaller the scope in terms of the general configuration and weight, the better. Large, heavy, bulky scopes only detract from handling and appearance (in terms of proportion when hooked up to a particular rifle). Unfortunately, the quality of the optics (which, other than magnification, is why most of us buy a scope in the first place) is often tied to size and weight which can translate to "the bigger, the better".