Simple question about 2 scopes

[kestak]

Greetings,

A simple question that can become more complex...

I am looking at Nikon Buckmaster 3x9x40 and Burris Fullfield II 3x9x40. They are both at the same price (+-10$).

Which one????????

or, would you go with another brand with more bangs for the bucks around the same price (+-50$)?

Thank you

 

[shootr]

Never used or owned a Nikon scope, but used Nikon cameras and optics for years and trust they make a quality product.

IMO, if the Nikon scope is made in Japan and not some low-cost place such as either the PI or China, I'd go with it. The Burris FFII is made in the PI and I don't think they're quite as good as they once were. JMHO. YMMV. WTFDIK.

 

[heeler]

They are both very good scopes for the money and are comparable in performance to each other.
I would chose the one that had the most eye relief.

 

[kestak]

Greetings,

They both have the same eye relief....

Nikon 3.6
Fullfield II 3.1 to 3.8
per opticplanet

Thank you

 

[hometheaterman]

I know Nikon makes great scopes and I wouldn't hesitate to get one. However, I got a Burris FFII last year as I got a awesome deal on it and it's probably my favorite scope I've ever used. Super clear, colors super bright through it, good in low light. Overall, it's just an awesome scope. Seems to hold zero fairly well too. I've had it bumped around a little but not a ton and it's never moved from where I set it. Overall I just love it and would highly recommend it.

That being said I can't comment too much on the Nikon as I've never personally owned it. I'd probably go with whichever was cheaper as I know Nikons are great also.

I can compare my Burris to a Leupold VX-I and the Burris seems like a much much better scope.

 

[chas08]

I vote Burris. I own three of them. Two Fullfield II's and a Timberline. I'm partial to the Ballisticplex reticle. It really works, they are IMHO great scopes for the money. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Nikon either. I know several folks who swear by them. So pick the one YOU like best.

 

[skoro]

I am looking at Nikon Buckmaster 3x9x40 and Burris Fullfield II 3x9x40. They are both at the same price (+-10$).

Which one????????

You dilemma is a good one. Either way you go I think you'll be pleased. I have a Nikon Primos and a Burris Timberline. Both are very good. I'd give the edge to the Nikon, but it's a more expensive model so it's not a real fair comparison. Both represent good performance.

 

[rangerruck]

well, the buckmaster is the top of their line, but you are looking at 2 very fine scopes; the nikon proly uses japanese glass, so I like that, but still...
My guess is they are completely even, so then the deal comes down to warranty, and price.

 

[cal74]

The Burris is a great scope for the money, don't have any experience with the Bushnell your asking about, but I did just get off the phone with Bushnell/Simmons a little while ago and after talking to the two people I did talk to I can't say as I'll ever buy anything from them again.

Need a replacement rubber eyepiece for a Simmons scope that was mounted on a rifle I just bought.

Or, just buy a used Luepold VXII 3-9 for 175-225.00 and have something with a great warranty and it'll hold it's value for as long as you have it (if taken care of).

You could also look at the Pentex Pioneers, same specs as the Burris Fullfields and less money.



http://www.cameralandny.com/

 

[Speedo66]

well, the buckmaster is the top of their line...

Then where would that place their Monarch Golds?

 

[viking499]

Never had a burris, but do have 4 buckmasters. Would buy another if I needed another scope.

 

[Legionnaire]

Most of my scopes are Leupolds. I have a couple Burris, and one Nikon. All of them are very good. Don't think you can go wrong with either, and that from a Leupold fan.