Terrible luck with scopes, opinions please!

[Wylie1]

I'm pretty sure I have just seen my third Prostaff go South with no reall reason. This one is the 4-12x40 BDC and it's less than a year old with fewer than 300 rounds fired.
I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on a Leupold VX-3L 4.5-14x50 with Boone & Crockett Retical. This would be mounted on my Tikka T3 Lite in .308 which has produced 2 1/4 inch groups from 400 yards with the Prostaff when it was working right.
I'd love to be able to say I shot that group but my friend did it, I got a 4 inch group from 400 in the wind though.

So? Too much scope for the rifle? Too expensive for what they are? A bit excessive for a hunting rifle?

What I didn't mention is this Tikka has been fitted to a Bell and Carlson Medalist stock and has had the lugs lightly lapped. It may be the sharpest shooting rifle I have ever had my paws on.

So tempted to pull the trigger on this scope!

 

[MachIVshooter]

The Prostaff are a pretty good budget scope, I'm surprised you've killed not just one, but three of them. Are you sure you're getting them mounted tight enough? (but not too tight?)

I have an older VXIII on my .25-06, it's probably my all-around favorite scope (though we'll see if that changes with the Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5-16x I'm putting on my 8 mag.)

 

[jogar80]

Not too much scope for the rifle nor for hunting applications. I too am surprised at the failures you're having with them. I have found those scopes to be excellent, especially for the price. I suspect there is something wrong with the way you are mounting them. Have you sent them back to Nikon for warranty BTW? I'm sure they would cover that. Nikon's warranty and customer service dept. has been top notch for me so far.

 

[Wylie1]

I understand what you are saying about the Prostaffs with the reviews I have read and all but they haven't done me very well. Yes the scope was installed with a inch pound torque wrench to spec.
Oops! Another thing I didn't mention was a tossed the stock rings and put Talleys on.
Nice to hear your opinion of the VX! I'll chalk that as one vote toward the Leupold.

 

[Wylie1]

I have delt with Nikon and have far from any issues with them other than my luck with the scopes I have had. 2 3-9x40s replaced with no questions asked. I sold one and bought the 4-12x40.

I'm not running excessive loads either.
47 grains MR 2000, Federal match grade primers and 175 grain Bergers for my Elk loads.
48.5 grain MR2000, same primers, and 165 grain Sierra 2140 HPs for my Deer loads.

 

[Halal Pork]

Given their warranty policy, I would not hesitate to hunt around online for a used Leupold. You might be able to find a good deal on a lightly used scope. If you're looking for new, you might check out Bruno Shooters Supply at this link.

You may find the scope you're looking into could be a bit awkward for that Tikka, making the rifle top heavy (and potentially goofy looking.) Was the 4-12x40 a good fit size and weight-wise?

 

[Wylie1]

Thanks, the 4-12x40 was a great fit for the rifle but I seem to like the 3-9x40 BDC retical better than the 4 although with the loads mentioned the 4 was centered down through the reticals markings. Crosshairs zeroed at 100, first circle 200, second 300 ... when on 11 magnification, or at least real close.

 

[sansone]

when buying a scope these days I first research into where it is being manufactured.
It is not easy because websites avoid stating country of manufacture.
Personally I don't purchase a scope made in china, too many returns, and most companies require $10-$20 included with the warranty return. unbelievable but true

 

[fineredmist]

If you lost 3 scopes on the same rifle I would have to say there is a problem with the mounting system. Tally rings and torque wrenches mean nothing if the bases are not true. You need to check to see if the rings are in alignment and if they are out you need to lap them. If this is new information to you then there may be you problem. If the rings are not true you will put undo pressure on the scope and it will fail.

 

[Kachok]

I have three Nikons, two prostaffs and a buckmasster, and all on high powered rifles (6.5x55, 308, and 270WSM) no issues yet and plenty of meat in the freezer If you just want something different get the redfield revolution, hella fine scope for what it costs.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I'm not running excessive loads either.
47 grains MR 2000, Federal match grade primers and 175 grain Bergers for my Elk loads.
48.5 grain MR2000, same primers, and 165 grain Sierra 2140 HPs for my Deer loads.

I'm not familiar with MR2000, but those sound like pretty heavy loads to me, considering other powders don't even run that much behind a 150 grainer.

 

[bulletboy]

Honestly I've had better luck with those cheap Wallmart CP scopes on my 45-70's than I have with the Nikon Prostaff junk that costs 4X more.

 

[MIL-DOT]

I also have a Tikka T3 lite in .308, scoped with a Leupold Mk4 PR 4.5-14x40 . ( The PR line was a somewhat less expensive line of Mk4 sniper scopes meant for agencies on a budget, or so I've read, but I believe the scope is basically just a Vari-X III, with 30mm. tube,target knobs and Mil-Dot reticle added.)
My point is that the Leupold has worked well, and held up fine on the Tikka, and that's after it spent a couple years on a .308 Remington 700PSS. Add to that Leupold's legendary customer service, and I don't think you can go wrong.
But I also recommend some of the nicer Weavers, the Bushnell Elite series, and I hear nothing but good stuff about those Redfields.

 

[Still Shooting]

Nikon or Leupold?

I have never bought or used a Nikon scope, so I'm one-sided on this. I have hunted and shot a lot of target, including "hot" loads in both my .257 Roberts/Ruger M77 (tang safety) for 30 years, and my Ruger M77 .270 (63gr. IMR4350 with Nosler 150gr.) for 15 years. Both rifles are fitted with Leupold 3-9x40 scopes, and both scopes are still performing flawlessly.

I recently put a Leupold VX II 3-9x40 on my 7mmWSM. That rifle has only been range shooting so far, but it is handling 63.0gr. IMR4350 pushing Nosler 140gr. ballistic tips, and 64.8gr. RL22 with 162gr. SST's. I only have about 150rds. thru the 7mmWSM at this point, but no scope problems. This rifle has Talley mounts.

Right now, I see no reason why I would want to try something other than a Leupold scope.

 

[Driftertank]

I'm not familiar with MR2000, but those sound like pretty heavy loads to me, considering other powders don't even run that much behind a 150 grainer.

Exactly what i was thinking...

But in my Hornady book they list max for 2000 MR @ 46.3 behind a 178-180gr bullet, and Hornady seems to be very conservative in their max loads.

 

[mastiffhound]

I have a Vortex 4-12x40 that has stood up to my Mosin for around 75 rounds now. They also have some of the best customer service ever. It is lifetime warranty and their turn around time is superb. My friend had one of the earlier models (the cheapest one they made at the time) and they replaced it with a newer model. He had it back in about a week.

Their prices even on their upper/higher end scopes are very very reasonable. Mine is as clear and works just as well as my dad's Leupold. He just paid alot more for his. After our recent target shoot, he said he will get a Vortex for his new Ruger American in .308.

 

[CraigC]

Not too much scope for the rifle nor for hunting applications.

That depends totally on where you hunt and how long a shot you can/will take. If you're hunting deer/hogs in the east or northern timber for elk, it's way too much glass. In such a case, a 1-4x, 1.5-5x up to a 2-7x would be a much better choice. If you're hunting pronghorn in the west and are comfortable with 400yd shots, you might want a little more. Contrary to popular belief, you're better off with too little magnification than too much. Although folks seem to want the biggest scope they can find.

 

[Skylerbone]

I want the clearest glass I can afford. Are your Talley rings the type that require corresponding Talley bases? Just can't picture all being well with the mounts.

As for the Leupold, I'd consider the CDS models if used with a range finder in lower magnification. Most of my hunting rifles wear a fixed power or 3-9X and the variables are most often at 5X or less when the all important shot is taken. A second option, again in conjunction with a range finder is the Pride Fowler line of Rapid Reticle scopes. These were built around the .308 MatchKing with a FFP reticle to provide accurate holdover from (depending on model) 100-600/800 yds. Mine is matched to a 30-06 load and a cousin uses his with a .308. Both loads hold true to holdover to the maximum distance either has been fired, just over 450 yds.

 

[AABEN]

I use BSA scopes on 80% of my rifles I like the 1/8 adj for I kill a lot of paper throw the summer! I have had trouble with 2 in 20 years shooting, That is around 400 rounds a week. 223 243 25.06 270 30.06. most is 243

 

[H&Hhunter]

I've got a VX III that has well over 1,000 rounds of .375 H&H under it's belt without so much as a whimper. I have had generally good luck with the VX III series of Leupold scopes I have however had one go gunny sacks on me several years ago. Nothing is perfect I guess.

The new Redfield, I had one and it went south after 20 rounds of 06 I have a buddy who's had two of them both went south in a very short time. Total POC IMO.

Spend the extra bucks and get a VX III they aren't perfect but they are about the best thing going for the money. You have to get into a much more expensive scope to top them.

 

[magnatecman]

I had a buddy with a 300 Weatherby, we put a Tasco World Class (pos) on and it, and the recoil screwed that scope up in less than 15 shots down range.

I talked him into putting a Leupold Vari x IIc on it, new model at the time, and he never had another issue with the scope.

I have a VX-3 4.5x14x40 CDS on my .270 now and I really like this scope.

Dial the range up and hold dead on and shoot. My first elk was 550 yards, second was 571 yards, and the wife dropped an antelope at 370 yards.

Can't go wrong with Leupold.

 

[jgiehl]

Why not try a Redfield scope?

 

[redneck2]

Actually, the new Leupolds are VX-3's rather than VX-III's. There is a LOT of difference.

I was going on a bear hunt to Canada. Had my mind made up to spring for a Swarovski. Hated to spend $800+, but it was a one time deal and I wasn't gonna have the scope fail.

Compared the VX-3 against the Swarovski Z3. Same objective size and same magnification. Side by side, the VX-3 was very slightly clearer. Not much, but you could see it side by side if you looked hard. The Leupold was over $200 less, and made in the USA.

I've got several VX-III's. The new coatings on the glass make the VX-3's considerably clearer, and the old ones were excellent.

I had a 40+ year old VX-III fail to hold zero. Leupold replaced it free with a VX-3.

 

[R H Clark]

Good scopes are always worth the money.I own Zeiss,Leupold and Kahles for my rifles.I would rather hunt with a Savage Axis and a good Zeiss than a Sako and a cheap scope.

I see a lot of high end rifles in the pawn shops with what I consider junk scopes.I have asked several owners if they change out the good scopes.They have all told me the do not.I have often wondered how many of thoes rifles were pawned because they didn't shoot very well,when it was the cheap scope all along.

 

[SwampWolf]

Why not try a Redfield scope?

Why not, indeed. Of course, if you look at the specifications of the Redfield scopes and compare them with Leupold scopes, you'll understand they are nothing more or less (for better or worse) than rebadged Leupold "Rifleman" scopes.