Which of these scopes would you get for a "tactical" rifle with a lot of recoil?

Question

Out of these, which would you get? The rifle it's going on is a modified savage 110fp in 300 win mag. The leupold vx III is a "hunting" scope, their tactical mark 4 line is just too much money. The nikon comes with side focus just like the leupold, has the same eye relief and features, and is over a $170 cheaper. Then there is the sightron which seems similar. Don't suggest burris cuz there eye relief isn't up to par.

http://www.swfa.com/pc-8773-2201-nikon-6-24x50-monarch-riflescope.aspx

http://www.swfa.com/pc-3373-307-leupold-65-20x50-vx-iii-30mm-riflescope.aspx

http://www.swfa.com/pc-12947-1512-sightron-6-24x50-siii-30mm-riflescope.aspx

So which would you pick out of these? keeping in mind that the nikon is a lot cheaper than the others. 800 is the max price limit. Thanks for your input.

Answer 1

Nikon, Leupold, and SIghtron all are very good makers

But each maker has many many different models.

Leupold VX-III and Sightron SIII are both considered "4 and a half star" scopes

The Nikon equivalent would be the Nikon Monarch GOLD.

Nikon Monarch is considered a "4 star scope" and is of comparable quality to the Leupold XV-II and the Sightron SII "Big Sky"

Of course, Nikon doesn't make a "Monarch gold" in the 6-25x class

I'd personally choose the Sightron, it has the mildots which is a great feature.

Answer 2

Before pouncing, check Bushnell. http://www.bushnell.com/ . Or the BSA Catseye Series with the improved eye relief, at http://www.sportsmansguide.com/ . You might save some money! Regards, Larry.

Answer 3

The Leupold is a good quality American scope is the best choice in this application for me. Nikon would be second. I don't know anything about sightron.

Answer 4

All I can tell you is what I know ---- I have Nikons on my Remington 700 in .308, Nikons on my Ruger Mini 14 and 30 rifles and have a Nikon on my 12 gauge shotgun........ I cant speak for the other brands but have had excellent results with NiKons..... They have been reliable and a pleasure to use....

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikon-rifles...

Answer 5

I doubt that the Nikon is a bad choice, but I would not buy it.

I own an Armalite AR10-T and a custom built Remington 700. Both are in .308, and both are scoped with mark 4 4.5x14 long range tachtical scopes. I know they are a bit pricey, but lets consider the amount of money invested in the gun. The best weapon is nothing if it is not paired with a good sight system. Both these weapon systems consistently produce 2 inch groups or less at 200 meters, with an array of match grade ammo(175 grain Black Hills being at "1.25 at 200 meters).

I don't think that if you buy such a nice rifle, you should put anything less than the best on it. If the difference were 500 dollars, I would say go with the Nikon, but for under 200 dollar difference, I think you would be making a big mistake outfitting the Nikon.

Over the years, I have shot my rifle with people who enjoy long range precision shooting(200 meters or more).  I have seen many different scopes on different calibers, but the one name that by far is the most used is the Leupold. I fired an associates Remington in 300 win short mag. He had the same scope I use, and the relief was adequate.

I have seen other scopes for much more money, and some for less. I am sure those scopes are money well spent, but dollar for dollar it is hard to beat a Leupold. Most of the police sniper teams in america rely on Leupold because it is a d**n good scope for a reasonable price.

Both my rifles are shooters, and I use them in all weather conditions. My Armalite is 9 years old, and my Remington is 8 years old. I don't shoot like I wish I could afford, but they have at least 2000 rounds combined through them. I have never doubted my scopes, and or their accuracy.

Hold off a bit, work some OT, and spend the extra money. I know this is not what you wanted in an answer, but good advice is always the hardest to hear.

Good luck.

Answer 6

i can't figure out why no one has suggested a weaver scope yet.

i love leupold's, have many, but i've shot 30 year old weavers that look as clean as brand new leupold's or nikon's.

Answer 7

leupold first nikon second

Answer 8

all three will fit the bill as long as the stock length is correct for your build. I was at a range where two guys were trying to sight in a 7mm mag. the first guy I am assuming was the owner and the second was his friend. The owner was having a ruff time getting a tight group. His build was short and stock and what looked like short arm length. His friend offered to help him, his build was tall I would guess about 6'1" or 6'2" and longer arms. This riflle looked like it had a shorter stock and would fit the shorter guy but once the tall guy got behind the rifle it was obvious that the rifle didn't fit right and the scope was too close for him. I was going to tell him he better not shoot the rifle because the scope was too close but it was too late he had already pulled the trigger. The rifle recoiled and the bell "rear of the scope" busted him hard between the eyebrow and the nose and he was bleeding like a stuck pig. I'm pretty sure this poor man needed at least 4 stitches if not more? Here is a website that tells you how to pick out a rifle stock that will fit you best. http://members.aye.net/~bspen/fit.html If you have already purchased the rifle you can either add spacers or a thicker recoil pad to make it longer or have the stock shortened if it's too long.  

Answer 9

Leupold