# Which Scope to Buy



## YoteSlayer04 (Mar 20, 2008)

I'm looking for a scope for my Remington 700 that I mainly use for big game, but am getting more involved with predator hunting. I've narrowed it down to the Leupold VX-II 3-9x40, VX-II 4-12x40, or VX-II 6-18x40. Is there much advantage of going with the 50mm obj.? Any input would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

If you are going to stick with a lower quality glass like the VX-II, I would stick with the 40mm objective but spend a little extra and get the adjustable objective.


----------



## wurgs (Mar 3, 2008)

I would spend the little extra and get a Zeiss Conquest. Better in low light and clearer detail at long distances.


----------



## bontop2 (Feb 21, 2006)

I would look into the weaver grand slam i looked thru it and compared it to the nikon buckmaster and monarch weaver won hands down it also killed the vx2 and was comparible to the vx3 but for 400.00 clear winner for a 4.5x14!!!!


----------



## iwantabuggy (Feb 15, 2005)

I'd get a Nikon Buckmaster. Great scope for the money. For big game, you shouldn't need any more than 9x. For varmints and predators, the 18x would come in handy at times, but you may find it more troublesome than useful. If you get something with an AO as another poster has suggested, make sure you get the side focus variety. They are much easier to use.


----------



## headshot (Oct 26, 2006)

I am a fan of the Bushnell Elite 4200 series. I have a 4-16x40mm. Clearer then all other similar priced scoped. I use it varmits and deer and it is probly the best 500$ I put into big game hunting.


----------



## iwantabuggy (Feb 15, 2005)

I have an Elite4200 4-16x40AO and a Nikon Buckmaster 6-18x40SF. I'd take the Nikon over the Elite 4200. :2cents:


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Another vote for the NIkon Buckmaster, much better IMO than the VX-II.

huntin1


----------

