Nikon Pro-Staff, Leupy Vx1?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ken B

ken B

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Messages
66
Location
D/FW Texas
Not really trying to nickle and dime things, but was wondering if the Nikon Pro Staff line of 3x9s were exceptional values? at that price, they have the life-time warrenty, clicks in their turrets, etc. the Leupold VX-1 I was thinking of doesn't have elevation and windage clicks, and is a bit higher. The Rifleman from Leupy doesn't either. I kind of like the clicks for sighting in, even it is only once or twice ever. I ask because my local dealers don't have any of the above (it's almost gun season, so out of stock, etc) for me to look through and compare on the counter. So I'll be ordering from Midway USA.

I'm putting together a Weatherby Vanguard (Howa) 30-06, and I know I want a 3x9, maybe a 2x7. At $124 dealer price on the Nikon 3x9 Matt Pro-Staff, I admit it caught my eye.

Then again, I'm thinking of waiting till the Spring to put this girl together, and getting past the Xmas $$$ and saving up for a VariX-II or a Monarch.

opinions appreciated, just thinking out loud on a slow Sunday evening,

Ken B
North Texas
 
I see this question hinging on whether you're going to use the rifle primarily for rough weather trip-of-a-lifetime hunts or not. If so - I'll be the first to advise you to save your pennies and buy a Leupold. However, if you're going to use the rifle primarily for local weekend hunts and range work, then don't let the Leupold KoolAid drinkers :) talk you into buying more than you need.

For example, you can get the Burris Fullfield II's on sale @ Midway for $200 including a spotting scope. I have one (bought on Ebay for around $150 NIB), and so far I'm impressed with its optics, its repeatability, and (so far) its durability. I know more than a few folks who've had their ProStaff/ Buckmaster/ Monarch fog up, while I don't know anyone who's had an issue with their Burris. The Fullfield II is, IMO, far better optically than the ProStaff or Buckmaster and probably the optical equivilent of the Nikon Monarch but in a more robust design.

Just a thought...
 
Nikon's the way to go

I just bought the Nikon 3X9X40 ProStaff and I'm very pleased with it. I've been a photographer for more than 30 years and have always counted on and used Nikon lenses. The optics are bright and sharp. I don't think you can go wrong with the Nikon. I got it from WWW.DICKSSPORTNGGOODS.COM for $148.67 including shipping.
 
ken B said:
Then again, I'm thinking of waiting till the Spring to put this girl together, and getting past the Xmas $$$ and saving up for a VariX-II or a Monarch
Click to expand...
Don't mix up your Leupold model lines.
The old VariX-II is the same as the current VX-I.

As far as the VX-I vs ProStaff I'll give my input.
In my eyes, the optical quality of a Leupold's VX-I and VX-II line is slightly better than any other scope in comparable product classes.
Say, a VX-I is better than a Bushnell Elite 3200, Burris Fullfield II, etc and a VX-II is better than Bushnell's 4200.
When I say optically I mean IMO the Leupolds are a tiny bit more clear, have much less distortion from center to edge, have better color definition and other stuff even though models like the VX-I have fewer coatings than compeditors.
They also usually have the longest and least critical eye reliefs.

Having said that, any scope in the $200 range from any big company will most likely serve you fine in big game hunting without any problems.

What you have to decide for yourself is whether the features like click adjustments is worth the tradeoff in visual quality.

If I could do it over again I would not have bought my VX-I and would have waited til I had enough for a scope in the next dollar range.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top