Scope questions for deer rifle

[JMPhoto]

I am getting a new Browning X-bolt 270 win and I looking for a scope for it. I was looking at the Nikon Monarch http://www.nikonhunting.com/riflescopes-monarch-monarch-3-12x42sf.html#1. I was curious about the reticle. Do you suggest the standard reticle or the bullet drop compensator? What do you all think of the Nikon's? I am a photographer by trade and use Nikon equipment, so that is why I was partial to their scopes. They seem to get a good rating. Anything else I should seriously consider in the 350-$400 range?
Thanks

 

[dakotasin]

zeiss conquest should be looked at, and leupold is a contender as well... the bushnell elite series should also be looked over.

as for the bdc... hehe, it works, sort of, but don't too much faith in it. i tried it per instructions on my 308 and it was way off for the 100 yard increments the instructions said it would work for (16 clicks at 500 yards... 16*5/4 = way off). however, if you spend a little time with it, the circles are useful for 'in between' measurements (ie 425 yards instead of 500, etc etc).

the glass is good, but i don't have full faith in the turrets yet.

overall good scope, and there may be better available for your purposes and eye.

good luck!

 

[dullh]

I have two Nikon Monarch's and I love them. If you want a Monarch, get a Monarch. Some people (and I may be one) are brand-lovers so try a Monarch side-by-side with a VX-III or a Conquest and I'll bet you will not be able to see a head-and-shoulders difference between the three - plus the Monarch is the same quality for less money.

I would get the standard Nikoplex reticle. BDC reticles clutter the view and are of dubious worth. Since they are usually caliber/load specific, the ballistic reticle may or may not be correct on your rifle. I don't do ballistic reticles for both those reasons. Set yourself up for a 200yd zero and you'll keep a standard reticle hold out to 300yds, maybe a bit further.

I will tell you between the two Monarchs and two Buckmasters I have, Nikon quality is tops - I say get one and you won't be disappointed. Both my X-Bolts wear Monarchs (2.5-10x50 in my case).

 

[JMPhoto]

Thanks Dullh. I was also looking at a Buckmaster 4.5-14 for about $100 less. How do you compare the buckmaster to the monarch? I don't know if I saw a $100 difference. Am I missing something or is the buckmaster that good too?

 

[Maverick223]

Do you suggest the standard reticle or the bullet drop compensator?

I would go with a good BDC (which Nikon doesn't make IMO, but is better than nothing), the Rapid-Z 600/800/1000/Varmint from Zeiss are great reticles but I think a Conquest is just out of your budget (but is great and worth spending the extra $100 for http://www.zeiss.com/c1256bcf0020be5f/Contents-Frame/c6b062a1c5089a5585257546006e354d ).

What do you all think of the Nikon's?

I think they are great and if you are going to hold firm on your budget are the right scope.

 

[rangerruck]

nikon, I would say, is the best overall value in scopes. all great products, but their higher end stuff is even better. and they also carry a no questions asked lifetime warranty, just like Leupolds. buy with confidence. i would get a bdc reticle, if you think you will have loong shots, but anything centerfire, with a even little bit of power; inside 300 yds, you are basically gonna aim for the powerstation, and you will get your hit.

 

[rangerruck]

oh yeah, don't forget their sister company, Pentax. and if Hakko makes scopes like their other fine Japanese instruments, I wouldn't overlook them as well.

 

[lipadj46]

Here is a monarch for $220. It's called a Team Primos but it is last year's Monarch UCC 3-9x40 with a BDC reticle, comes with the monarch warranty too:

http://swfa.com/Nikon-Team-Primos-Riflescopes-C1407.aspx

oh yeah, don't forget their sister company, Pentax. and if Hakko makes scopes like their other fine Japanese instruments, I wouldn't overlook them as well.

As far as I know Pentax scopes are no longer made by Burris and are now made in China.

 

[dullh]

JMphoto,

There is a noticeable difference between the Buckmaster and the Monarch...to my eye the Monarch let a little more light in. The Monarch is the next step up from the Buckmaster in terms of lens quality, kinda like a VX-III is better than a VX-II, etc...but know that I would not turn a Buckmaster down, and would go with one over most others. In fact, I think the Buckmaster is the best scope you can buy in it's price range. I have a Buckmaster on my Encore 209x50 and I have one on my Marlin .44 lever rifle. Both are 3-9x40. I like to keep my scopes simple, meaning no side-focus, BDC reticles...just basic variable style. You won't go wrong with a Buckmaster or a Monarch.

 

[natman]

The Nikons are good. I would also take a long look at the Leupold VXII, in 3x9 or 2x7.

Maximum point blank range on a 270 is just over 300 yards. In the real world, 300 yards is a long shot, despite what you read on the internet. BDCs are a waste of time. The last thing you need on a hunting scope is a knob that gets knocked around and you have to fiddle with instead of shooting.

 

[Maverick223]

BDCs are a waste of time. The last thing you need on a hunting scope is a knob that gets knocked around and you have to fiddle with instead of shooting.

I think he was referring to a ballistic reticle, not a BDC turret. I agree that target turrets are detrimental for hunting, but a ballistic/ranging reticle is the ticket.

 

[Art Eatman]

What I've found in some 45 years of messing with Bambi:

My 3x9 scopes spend almost all the hunting time set on 3X. An old Weaver K4 would have worked just as well, which is what I used before my billfold got fatter.

"Set it and forget it." I've never messed with the knobs once I've sighted in.

Duplex crosshairs work just fine.

I've killed one buck at 350 yards and one at 450. All the forty+ others were somewhere inside of 200 yards.

IOW, we all seem to want a bunch more scope than we really need, and worry way too much about trivial BS.

 

[lipadj46]

BDCs are a waste of time. The last thing you need on a hunting scope is a knob that gets knocked around and you have to fiddle with instead of shooting.

It's a BDC reticle. You may or may not ever use it but it's still a decent hunting reticle. The team primos is just a great scope for the money. You get a monarch quality for a prostaff price.

 

[dullh]

Mr. Eatman is spot on. He should be...he has more experience than I do!

Nobody I know uses ballistic reticles. Nobody. Now I know this is the internet, so different strokes for way more folks, but I have asked questions of at least two dozen local hunters I know and they helped me shape my opinion. One theme I always hear:

Keep it simple.

Now if you're a bench-rester or something twiddle knobs to your wallet's max. Otherwise, if you're hunting something as fast and skittish as a deer, leave extra knobs and ballistic reticle clutter at home.

Sometimes I think we have too many choices in life.

 

[lipadj46]

Do you know what a BDC reticle is?...

You can pay $380 for a monarch with a nikoplex or $220 for a team primos with a BDC your choice, same tube, same glass, same turrets. If the 3 extra dots of a BDC reticle is too complicated for you, well, this is the high road so I won't go there. You do realize there are no dials involved with a BDC reticle correct? It just gives you extra point to aim for different distances. It is actually very simple and fast and if you want you can just ignore the other dots. Here is what it looks like:

http://swfa.com/images/nikon_bdc_st_popup.jpg

Compare to this:

http://swfa.com/Nikon-25-10x42-Monarch-Riflescope-P7650.aspx

 

[dullh]

"Do you know what a BDC reticle is?..."

Uh, err, uh, duh...yes I do.

I do not like them. Never have, never will.

If you like them, buy them. Whatever. I'll pass.

No need to get defensive because I don't agree with you.

 

[lipadj46]

Actually you were on the KISS soapbox and you keep mentioning twiddling knobs which no one ever mentioned or recommended. I'm just pointing out you can get an equal scope for $160 less if you deal deal with a BDC reticle which is not complicated or even that different from the duplex.

As far as KISS goes I can't imagine who would not think a straight up 3-9x40 scope is not simple.

 

[22-rimfire]

Don't worry too much about the scope. You are looking at a good scope and it will be fine. I prefer the duplex reticle for overall use. They are popular because they work.

The 3-9x is a good choice. In my case, I pretty much leave it set on 4x most of the time unless I'm shooting targets. I suppose if I were trying to make a 300 yd shot, I'd crank it up to 9x with a good rest. I hunt in the woods and a 75 yd shot is a long shot. I could see a long shot being necessary at times, but 300 yds would be my absolute limit with my rifle. I'd have to want it real bad.

If by chance you have thoughts of making 300 yd shots with your 270 win, I would shoot targets 100, 200, and 300 yds to get a feel for what it takes to make a shot like that on paper. You may be pleasantly surprised or really disgusted with your shooting at long distances.

 

[P.B.Walsh]

I'm going through the same thing, but with a .308, and my question is; are parralax adjustments neccesary for 300 yards? Right now I'm looking at a Super Sniper 3-9x or a Super Sniper 10x?

I hope I'm not thread jacking, and if I am, please tell me and I will start my own thread.

Thanks,
P.B.Walsh

 

[robctwo]

I have Monarch and Leopold 3x9s on a number of deer rifles. Started with Leupold and migrated to Nikon. Great scopes.

 

[rangerruck]

to P.B.; most centerfire scopes are prllax free at 100 yds, so no need to worry.
the supersniper scope is a good choice as well.

 

[P.B.Walsh]

Well ranger, if I was to take a shot at say 235 yards, would the picture in my scope be distorted? With baisic hunting scopes I've only taken deer at less than 100 yards, so that's why I'm asking.

Thankd

 

[Maverick223]

if I was to take a shot at say 235 yards, would the picture in my scope be distorted?

No, but at 23 yards it may very well be, it is typically at lower ranges that the parallax error comes into play.

 

[blackops]

The BDC recticle is great for a hunting application. I can't knock on Nikon, but I'm a Leupold guy. I have a Winchester M70 Featherweight and My Leupold 3*9*40 is perfect for my rifle. Never loses its zero and with limited light the glass is great.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Parallax is not distortion. It is apparent reticle shift with head placement on the target at ranges other than that the scope is preset for. Nearly all hunting scopes for centerfile rifles are set for 100 yards parallax free. Unless you know how to test for parallax effects, I would ignore it. I assume that you will not be shooting for a national bench rest title at 300 yards? To 300 yards, it should not be a problem with a decent scope.