I've only had a few scopes fail, and I've had/got a bunch over the years. The failures I've had have all been Leupolds. Once upon a time (over 15 years ago) that was about all I had though....
Had a Nikon Omega BDC 250 give up the ghost here recently. I wasted about 40 charges and bullets out of my ML'er...what a frustrating PITA! We'll see how Nikon does with customer service, the dealer I bought the scope from told me "I can't help you, you HAVE to deal direct with Nikon" oh well--we'll see.

The thing seemed to track well when looking through the scope while making adjustments, but after a shot or two, the adjustments were gone--very sporadic so thus the long time frame to confirm scope failure--the bore scope confirmed it for me, should have tried that earlier. Put a known good scope on the rig, and problem cleared up...I really did like the BDC reticle on the scope, it matched up perfectly as advertised on the distances for the ranging feature.

Every company will turn out an imperfect product from time to time. I just recently saw a 2-week-old Zeiss Conquest that gave up the ghost while on a hard-kicking .22 K-Hornet...

My experience with Nikon customer service has been excellent, and I'd wager your situation will be rectified quickly.

I don't have any Nikon products and most likely never will. Having said that, I believe they will take care of your problem with expediency.

As with everything else and scopes are no exception, you get what you pay for. The problem with cheaper products and reputable companies is that they build a product in a price range to sell it. The issue then becomes a matter of how often do you have to send it in. Every time you send it in you have to take it off the gun and then ship it. Then when you get it back you have to spend more money on ammo to get it sighted in.

Many hunters shoot their weapons so few times a year that they never put the scope or rifle to any serious test. If you are a serious shooter and want a very reliable product, you may need to spend more money. If you are an occasional shooter, you will probably do well with the product you have.

Bobby Tomek is correct, any company can turn out an occasional imperfect product. However, I have heard from a number of people who have had similar experiences with Nikon.

I occasionally go to a range where there is a lot of hard core shooters and I talk to them about their experiences with scopes, rifles, etc. They have given me a lot of advice based on their trial and error. I also talk with the Range Masters and they offer a lot of useful info too. One thing I was told by the person who manages the range is that he sees a number of problems with Nikon and with the scope that I have which is another manufacturer. I will post on that when the issue is resolved.

I just bought a Nikon Buckmaster to go on a rifle that had two cheap scopes go bad on it. Anybody know if the Buckmaster gives a lot of problems. Sighting in went just fine. Most of my scopes are burris fullfield (old versions) and old weavers with two leupolds. The two leupolds I actually bought new. One is 25 years old and I still use it. My preference would have been a 6x leupold, but cash is tight, but I am saving for one, and I know stores that have them.

The Nikon BM series offers good, solid performance at a reasonable price.

Well guys, true to their statement on the web site, they responded within 2 days and told me to send them the scope, interestingly to me, no RA number or anything, and they specified to NOT ship it in it's original carton--also found that curious.

338, I hear you, and typically don't set price as a limiting criteria. The reason I went with this scope was because of their BDC reticle specifically calibrated for muzzleloaders. It did work as advertised. If I knew of a higher end scope with a reticle that would match up, say a Swaro or a Conquest or Diavari or even a Leupold (not my favorite) I would try one.

I hate when a relatively new scope fails, it makes it very hard to keep confidence in it when you take it afield. I will be setting up a back up scope with regular reticle for this rig if I go anywhere other than the local camp where I will always have an optional rig available, that's for sure. I will also keep the peep site and front bead in the pack just because...

Anyone know of a scope that matches up reticle wise like the BDC that is of higher quality??

Being a "hard core shooter" and having a number of Nikons, I or my fellow gun club members haven't had the same experiences as related by 338zmag. Must be the different parts of country we live in. But then in the 40+ years of owning most scope brands I've never been unfortunate enough to have to send one back for repair.

Ahab,
You are extremely lucky or have a different definition of hard core shooter then I do. All of the brands have problems from time to time. I have read about various issues with high end scopes as well, but I talk with people who shoot way more than I do and their advice is consistent. The range I am talking about is in Myakka, Florida. There are a lot of former military shooters there. The manager is a former Marine.

I had a Burris Signature Select on my 338 and sent it in several times. Their service is excellent, but I got tired of sending it in after two times in two years. I have shot it quite a few times and the 338 does rattle equipment. The third time I said I wanted a new one and they sent me a new one with warranty card, which I have for sale. Not many low end scopes made these days will hold up to its kick when shot frequently. That is the advice many hard core shooters have told me.

I know a guy who has a Remington BDL 280 and has a Bushnell Trophy scope on it. One of their cheaper models. However he only shoots it several times a year, so it is fine for him. I would never put a scope like that on my guns, because I would rattle it apart.

338zmag, please share with the rest of us your defanition of a "hard core shooter". I ask because I own a Encore 209x50 magnum muzzleloder that I have scoped with the same Leupold VariX-II shotgun/ML scope in 2-7x33mm since day one. This scope has withstood over 2000 (yes thats 2000, not 200 misprinted) magnum loads, 1500+ of which comprised of three, 50-grain pellets of Pyredex RS and a 300grain saboted bullet and a additional 500 loads comprised of 120 grains of loose powder 3-F/777 and a 300 grain saboted bullet. Also worth noting is because this is a muzzleloader the location where of which the scope is mounted on the Encore is the worst most punishing in terms of transmitting the forces of recoil to the scope, as the scope is mounted directly on top of the barrels chamber. The scope is still going strong.

My other muzzleloader is a 10ML-II. I have it scoped with a Weaver Grand Slam in 4.5014x40mm. That scope has withstood around 450 loadings/firings equal to the recoil of a .375H&H by me having fired various 300 grain bullets out of it at 2350-2400fps with charges of smokeless powder and that scope is still going strong. The same GS was previously on a 7mmSTW and saw about 200-300 maxs loads with bullets ranging from 139grns to 175 grns.

I have two other Varix-IIs that have withstood well over 400+ magnum 12ga Foster and sabot shotgun loads and still function perfectly. My 3-12x40mm VariX-II that sits on my 338wm has obsorbed well over 700 rounds, still going strong.

Now add into this the fact that every last one of the scopes, rifles and shots I have listed n were fired while the rifle sat in of one of two different recoil obsorbing rests that by their design expose a scope to even more to the forces of recoil, and the fact none of my scopes (knock on wood here) have experienced any problems trely is saying something about how well they are made.

Lastly, I did not include in my shots totals of how meny rounds I feel or estimated I have fired off hand as I have no idea how meny that would be, but take my word it is ALOT as I love to shoot and do not mind recoil. BTW this post is in no way to be misinterprited as a Leupold indorsement, it just terns out thats the scope that sits on 90% of my rifles.

So how meny rounds a year do I need to fire to be considered a hard core shooter and how meny high recoiling rounds does a scope need to withstand before it is considered a hard core scope? I fire off the top of my head without counting target holes:
Magnum Rifles-500 or so
Magnum Muzzlolders-350 or so
12ga magnum shotgun slugs 150 or so.

Forgot to list my oldest VariX-II shotgun scope that sits on my marlin 512. It has seen at least (dont let my wife see this) 500 12ga 1.25oz magnum sabot slugs at a average cost of $2.50 ea and its still fine as well.

ARTJR338WM,
The manager at the range told me that Leupold scopes were good ones. I was told to by some shooters to avoid Bushnell, Tasco, Nikon and Burris. Now I am really going to stir the pot. Keep in mind that some of the hard core shooters rebarrel about every year.

The point I am making is that low end scopes made in recent years don't have a good track record from shooters who I have talked with. You can buy all of those scopes that you want, but my next purchase will be a Nightforce or high end Leupold or Swarovski. To each his own.

Nikon scopes are as durable as anything out there. Anyone who says different has no clue.

And for the record: I do know of a couple of individuals who have had multiple scope failures -- from inexpensive to high-end optics. I personally inspected a few of those. They had a common denominator: human error (or inability).

Mounted incorrectly, even a .308 WCF will batter a high-end scope into disarray.

I knew I would touch some nerves. Well I'm talking about the low end models. I did consider a Bushnell 6500 and looked at the Nikon Monarch X, but don't like their reticles. I suppose the low end scopes come back to zero every time you do the box test, right?

I have 3 Nikon scopes.

First one is a 3.5-10x50 Monarch that I put on my 338 win mag when it was new in 1993. It's still on it and I've hunted that rifle very "hard core" over the years. It's been in rain, blizzards, 120 degree summer heat, fog, you name it. I don't just carry it in a precious hard case back and forth to the range and shoot it from a table. It's a hunting rifle, and it shows a few scars from 15+ years of hunting. I've also loaned it out several times to other hunters to take on elk hunts over the years (I have some good friends).

Moral of the story is the scope has never "rattled loose" and the zero has never changed. I only shoot one load from it, a full power 225 partition load and it still shoots sub-moa groups, as it has from day one.

My other 2 Nikons are buckmasters, one's a 6-18 and the other is a 3-9. I've only had the 6-18 for about 6 months on a 22-250, but it's been satisfactory so far, it's just a range gun though, not a "hard core" hunting rifle, so it'll probably last much longer. My 3-9 is new, and just put on my 223 recently for a coyote rifle. Only one hunt out of it so far, but it seems fine so far.

I agree with Bobby T, sounds like you have no clue there z.

I also have a couple Leupolds and a Burris. I haven't managed to break any of those either. I guess I'm not "hard core" enough....

My second Nikon, a 3-9 x 40 Monarch UCC, somehow could not pass the "drop from treestand at 15 feet" test. Broke the wrist on my Remington stock, but not a mark on the Monarch. However, the fall scrambled it's eggs internally. I sent it back to Nikon, and, after a short delay, they decided to replace it. They said they didn't have a 3-9 "in stock", so I could pick any model I wanted. I got a very nice 5.5-16 x 44, which was considerably more at retail than the 3-9.

Yes, I was a happy camper.....

mkane160

I just had a 3-9x40 Pro Staff here on a 7mm-08 Encore barrel that a gentleman wanted sighted in. Knowing the individual pretty well, I asked if he would mind if I ran a couple of my accuracy loads through it to test the scope. He said go for it.

After boresighting, I first fired a group to see how my loads did, and I was rewarded with a 0.68 group from this new Bullberry barrel -- not bad for the first rounds through it.

So I shot the box twice with the Pro Staff, and both times, it returned to perfect zero.

So, 338zmag, even this low-end Nikon was up to the task.

I bought a Nikon 1.5x4 for a Ruger RSM 458Lott and have shot quite a bit with it and that is pretty "hard core" recoil wise and the Nikon has yet to fail. Bought another one for tactical style AR15 and is clear as a bell and adjustments being .5moa are dead on after several hundred rounds of adjustment both wind and elevation. Complaint I do have is the turret cap threads are very fine and easy to cross thread. Had that happen and contacted Nikon and in a couple days had two new ones in the mail. Am a bit more careful in screwing the caps back on now, but overall, Nikon has been a good quality, serviceable piece of optics for me. Have Leupolds also, but spent more money. Would buy another Nikon without hesitation.

Well, Nikon has had the scope for 8 business days, and no intel yet on their individual 'intenal' web system, nor a reply to my e-mail address.

Will keep fingers crossed for a response/update next week.

Received scope back from Nikon yesterday, they had it since early Novemeber, tracking said they received it on 11/8/08.

The packing slip in the box said, 'Scope Received--No Note'. I had put a full letter sized note in the box and in the packing slip on the outside, as well as posting it on the Nikon 'internal' web system.....

The slip also had a whole laundry list of repairs they had made, 'Re-Collimate' 'Adjust Parralax' purge nitrogen and 'refill nitrogen'
'Replace Spring controller'

Geez, this scope had never taken as much as a hard lick, seems like a lot to re-do/replace, I'm a little bit surprised they didn't just replace the thing.

I'll put it to test next week-- about 5 weeks turnaround, a little goofiness on their handling it--seems like decent customer service to me....how they lost both letters is I guess in the goofiness category, but seems pretty incompetent--hopefully all ends well with the scope working well from now on.

Fish30114 wrote:

quote:

The slip also had a whole laundry list of repairs they had made, 'Re-Collimate' 'Adjust Parralax' purge nitrogen and 'refill nitrogen'

Actually, that's pretty much standard procedure and really not considered "repairs."

Let us know how it works once you put it back into circulation.

Yeah, that's stuff you have to do if the scope is taken apart.

But I feel your frustration about the letter. I once had someone tell me I hadn't sent the letter I claimed I had sent or if I had sent it I had sent to the wrong address. There was a defeaning silence when I offered to fax them the USPS certified mail return receipt where Mrs. So and So had signed for my letter.

LWD

I supposed as much on some of the listed 'actions' (vs repairs) I guess you have to get at the internals to get what's wrong fixed, so I guess that's the why to some of the list.

I'm right there with you Bobby, anxious to know what the performance will be now!

You know LWD, it's just that you take so much effort in packing stuff, typing up a nice specific letter for them, and it's almost inevitable that they screw something up on the inbound side. A letter in the box, and in the packing list external plastic 'sleeve' and a comment of 'No Letter' just pisses me off......

Hope the scope works right, that'll be good enough for now, but it will be in QD rings of some sort, and a backup set up for this rig.