Since I haven't fully turned over to fishing season and I'm still working putting together a new rifle for next season, I would love some input on the scopes I'm considering ...

- Leo VXIII
- Zeiss Conquest
- Cabela's Alaskan Guide

I have heard great things on the Alaskan Guide series from Cabela's. Anyone have first hand experience? Next to that, I'm torn between Zeiss and Leo. I've looked through both and I feel like the Zeiss is slightly better quality with an equally good lifetime warranty. I'll be looking at 4.5-14X44 and 6.5-20 power. Say I'm overscoped, but our management plan requires us to make correct decisions in the field. I need the power age correctly, keep my bullet away from nubbing bucks later in the season, and put down the doe 300 yards out in the wheat field.

With that info, any extra input would be great along with other scope suggestions. I've looked through the Bushnell Elite and Nikon Monarch. I think the Alaskan Guide is better than or at least as good as both. And cheaper.

I've got a Zeiss Conquest in the 4.5X14 on a 223 WSSM and I love it. All of my other scopes are Kahles or Swarovski. The next rifle that I'm currently having built is a 22-243 Ackley Improved. I'm definitely putting the 6.5X20 Conquest on it. The quality of the glass is far superior to a Leopold - IMHO.

" Big coons walk at night !"

i'll second that...I have a leopold and it doesn't even sniff the class that my zeiss conquest and swarovski are in...However I do have a simmons (which I love) and that leopold I have fits nicely into that class

btw-back to the question, I have a 4.5x14x44mm zeiss conquest and it has been a great scope

NW80 - How does your Zeiss compare to your Kahles and Swar ? Same class, or does that extra $$ step it up?

Nikon Monarch UCC has the same waranty as the Leopold and the others - lifetime. The optics are outstanding. Check them out before you go after the others.

Zeiss Conquest, I have the 3.5-10 and it is amazing. Actually sold my Leupold 4.5-14 to help pay for the Zeiss...

Quite frankly, I think the Zeiss is comparable. I'm not sure that, for th money, the Kahles and Swarovski are that much better.

That being said;however, if you're talking about spotting scopes or binoculars go with the more expensive glass. You spend a hell of alot more time staring through those than you do a rifle scope.

" Big coons walk at night !"

I have an Alaskan Guide....3 - 12 52mm. It is a good scope, holds zero well and is quite repeatable, tracks accurately. Mechanically speaking a well built scope but it doesn't match up to the Conquest optically, pretty close to the vxIII though. I agree with a previous post to check out the Nikon Monarch UCC. Very good glass for the $$$, especially right now as they are clearing out the old for the new Monarchs coming out this year. I just picked up a Monarch Gold(30mm tube) with BDC reticle and have been impressed by the clarity of it's glass

First in line to buy all your old VXIII's so you guys can buy the big $$$ names.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Germans (and you guys haven't even mentioned Leica) but they cross the point of diminishing returns by a mile for me when it comes to scopes.

Spotting scope - different story. Hours behind the glass justify the $$$.

Get ready to be advised to get a $1500.00 scope by asking on this board.

Actually, you can get a 3 - 9 power Conquest for $399.00. Nikon Monarchs with 1" tubes are value priced for what you get also. You will be hard pressed to find a comparable VXIII cheaper. Leupold makes very good scopes, but the main gripe from most about them is price...

I can say from experience that $ for $ you can not beat the Bushnell Elite 4200 series. (Let the bashing begin).

Notafraid, I don't know if that's a fair categorization.

I think most of us would say that if money is no object one of the $1500 scopes is the best way to go, because it is without a doubt the best quality.

But generally that is quickly qualified with, "but how much do you want to spend?" There's no doubt that you can get great optics for reasonable prices these days. But if you lead with an open ended, "I have a new rifle, what's the best scope" type question I'm going to answer with the BEST scope. Period.

This topic is a perfect example. He qualified with three specific scopes.

On that note I have 0 experience with the Cabelas. I know the knock on their glasses is that they're a touch heavy. I would highly recommend the Conquest in that price range.

I seem to hear more and more about hunters being impressed with and enjoying the Conquest line. I'm looking long and hard at a 4.5-14x44. Thanks for all the info guys.

quote:

---

I can say from experience that $ for $ you can not beat the Bushnell Elite 4200 series. (Let the bashing begin)

---

No bashing from me. Elite 4200s are tremendous scopes without the big price tag you would pay for a comparable scope. They have very clear, high quality glass. My only gripe about them is eye relief. A little short on most models....

The Leupold VXIII has an option for the Boone & Crockett reticle. Does the Zeiss Conquest series have an option for this type of reticle as well? I am about to buy a Browning Stalker .300 Win Mag to use as an all around big game hunting gun (elk, mule deer, bear, caribou, etc) and really like the idea of the multiple crosshairs for distance shooting. Probably going to go with something around 4.5-14x50. Thoughts?

What the hell is a B&C reticle?

" Big coons walk at night !"

I buy the expensive stuff, Leica Geovid binoculars, etc. However for scopes I have bought two Leupold 4.5X14 since I bought a Zeiss. The Leupold are very good scopes. I bought mine on ebay. Killed a 6X6 Bull Elk at 360 yards last year using one of those scopes.

So do you like your Leo's better than the Conquest line? Or are you just telling us all that you can afford the expensive stuff

Zeiss is great glass. I currently have a Nikon Tactical and it has unreal glass and is built like a tank. Doing it all over again, there is a new nikon monarch similar to the tactical that I would look into or the Conquest.

Thanks reef. I've nearly sold myslef on a 4.5-14x44 Conquest, however I want to take a look at the new Monarchs before I do anything.

[This message has been edited by lostboy (edited 3/4/2007 10:51p).]

I've got a VX-III 4.5-14x40 on my .25-06. I have nothing but good things to say about it. It has been nothing but deadly on the local coyote population. If there is any moonlight out, I can see and shoot fine.

Have you evet tried a Mueller Optics Sport Dot? I have one and love it. It has as good a glass as my VXIII, but not as good as my Swarovski. For $190 + or - it was a steal.

I picked up a Nikon Monarch Gold 2.5-10x50 with the BDC reticle a couple of weeks ago. It does have excellent glass plus I like the tactical turrets and 30mm tube...