I would appreciate your opinions on the purchase of my next scope. The naked rifle is a pre-'64 model 70 Featherweight in 30-06. This rifle is nothing fancy, just a good shooter that needs a good four-power scope. I'm leaning heavily toward Leupold but am curious about Nikons. The former is a 4x33 and the latter is 4x40. Price is not significantly different. Which would you buy for general North American hunting?

Hello Joe

I have stuck with Leupold since I don't have the money to experiment much.

Tom

I have seen a lot of Nikons, they don't impress me much. I would get a Leupold.

Well... I'll pick the Meopta Riflescope. If you know the ZEISS, you must know, that ZEISS is assembled from parts made by Meopta, but Meopta is two times cheaper! Meopta has the solid steel frame, crystal optics and it's filled by nitrogen. Try Meopta Artemis 2000 6x42. It'll exceed your expectations.

Schmidt$Bender
4x36 any reticle $465.00 0r best choice for general hunting 6x42 any reticle $517.00
Karel
potyka1391@home.com

No need to be curious about the Nikon's, they're crap - nice optics but doesn't seem to withstand the recoil of a farting mouse. Meopta seems to be as well made as the Kraut scopes, but cheaper.

Best buy is still spelled L-E-U-P-O-L-D though...

-- Mats

Joe - You truly have a fine rifle there. I have hunted with a custom made .308 pre-64 Win. w/19" bbl. full stocked, full length bedded and a 3X Leupold with a 4 Min. dot. Deadly! I often wonder why I hunt with anything else. So many rifles - so little time!

PK when you first posted about Meopta (I think it was you who posted first) I looked them up, they seem like nice scopes but if I remember correctly there is only 1 US distributor for them. I sent an email asking for prices on a pair of scopes, as I was looking to equip a matched set of rifles. Anyway, haven't ever received an email back from them so even if they are the greatest thing they still need a bit of support here in the US. If you don't get a prompt reply when asking to purchase two items, you might get an even longer wait if one of them needs warranty work done. Also, with the prices listed I seem to remember they were not that far from zeiss price wise here, but again that is a published retail price, might be less than that in reality. Oh well, bought a different pair of 2X7's anyway.

Oh almost forgot Joe!

I'd look at Burris and Redfield too before I chose a Monarch. I'd definately choose a M8 over the Nikon, but the best thing is to go to the websites if you cant get to a large gunstore. Also, an objective lens over 32 mm in a 4 power fixed scope is unnecessary, doesn't make it any brighter and as Ray Atkinson says they get hung up on a lot more trash in the woods.

Joe,

Don't debate. Don't hesitate. Get the Leupold. I would rather have a used Leupold of the model you describe than a new Nikon. I like your fixed 4x plan.

Good shooting, Talus

Joe

The biggest part of buying any Leopuld is service! service! service! What other scope can you send in for repairs after you accidentally drop it down a mountain and get a new one sent to you FREE!!!

------------------
Protect our heritage, take a kid hunting!

"De Oppresso Liber"

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Bigbore:
Joe

The biggest part of buying any Leopuld is service! service! service! What other scope can you send in for repairs after you accidentally drop it down a mountain and get a new one sent to you FREE!!!
"

I dropped one of my leupolds and they charged me $180.00 to fix it. Nothing is free.

My first rifle scope ever was a Nikon 4x12 variable. I used it for several years until I was told it was crap (which really puzzled me). I went to all Leupolds and one NightForce.

To this day, for my vision, the Nikon was a better scope. Much more clear than any Leupold I own, and they are pretty clear. The Nikon transmitted light better at dusk.

My brother has a nikon one of his rifles too and loves it. There's nothing wrong with them. But, you won't beat Leupolds service.

Leo M8 6X42 multicoat is perfect and you can find a good condition one very reasonable. Check ebay.

Leupold - period.

Hello the Campfire:
Why scope it at all? A good pre-64 70 should have good iron sights. Does any one remember how to shoot iron sights? We used to shoot 100 yards with irons and even further with a ggod peep.

Otherwise I would put a Zeiss on it with Talley rings. Don't go cheap go with class.
Just my humble opinion.

Judge Sharpe

Amen to that JudgeSharpe!

JoeZ: I would go with a nice older (used) Leupold 3x9 scope for your classy "Riflemans Rifle"!
I have a couple of the older Model 70's set up with Leupold's.
They compliment the lines of the pre-64 Winchester quite well and as far as performance afield they are wonderful!
Your Rifle can easily use the extra power that a 3x9 reliably produces. I see these used for $150.00 everywhere.
If you are dead set on a 4 power then contact the Bitterroot Trading Company in Dillon, Montana - they have a nice older Leupold 4 power for $95.00 (IIRC!).
The phone number is 406-683-9844 and the web address is:

btpdillon@bmt.net

Remember the leupolds have the lifetime guarantee (warranty!).

Best of luck with your scope selection.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

The inexperience of dyed-in-the-wool bashers of anything other than Leupold sure rings true in this thread.

The Nikon Monarch 4x40 is clearly (pardon the pun) superior to any 4x33 Leupold ever produced. The transmission of light, resolving of critical detail, range of low-light contrast in the shadows and sharpness around the edges -- not to mention a number of other areas of comparison -- decidedly favor the Nikon, a scope that ALSO BOASTS A LIFETIME WARRANTY.

The comparisons above are based on fact. But as for opinion, I have that, too: I even like the Nikoplex reticle better than the Leupold duplex and feel that it is somewhat superior, especially late in the day. But again, that's a matter of aesthetics and not something carved in stone and proven by simple science.

'Nuff said...

The Nikon may be a bit brighter and sharper, but it is also bulkier , likely heavier , and has shorter eye relief.

The 40mm objective is overkill on a 4x , adds nothing to the view of a 4x, but does add weight and bulk.

The 4x Leupold is PROVEN one of the toughest scopes ever manufactured , and it's hard to wrong with one , if a 4x is what you want.

sdgunslinger:

Yes, I agree: the Leupold is certainly a proven performer. And yes, the Monarch is larger, but I have never noticed a difference of mere ounces in the field, when my mind is on the game and nothing else.

As to eye relief, I have never encountered any problem with Nikon products, but then again, I don't shoot the bone-crushing, overbore magnums, either.


But back to the issue at hand: From an optical perspective, which I was specifically addressing, the Leupold 4x33 simply does not measure up to the Nikon Monarch 4x40.