Rifle Scopes optics differences

[_shawn_]

so as ya'll have probably figured out from previous posts that i'm a noob. so i have another noob question

i've never bought a scope before. the scope i have now came with the gun i got from an acquaintace that's never screwed me on a deal yet so i believe him when he says something is quality. i know as technology advances that there's always going to be better in pretty much anything. now i have a 15 year old leupold 3x9 scope on my hunting rifle. i don't know the model since it's not marked on the scope but the guy i got it from said it was a $400 scope when he bought it and i believe he said the newer vx-ii are based off of it. i was checking out some newer leupold mark 4's the other day and i just didn't see much difference other then the magnification levels.

now honestly i'm not impressed my with scope and it cost me a deer this year and my lease for next year because i shot what i thought was a 3 point cull buck a 100 yards away that turned out to be a 5 point cull buck and the land owner was pissed. i honestly couldn't see the other 2 points and they weren't very small. i watched the buck for about 30 minutes before i ever chambered a round.

so anyways the point of this post....

next week i'm getting my tax return and i'm looking at buying the bushnell 6-24 elite tactical the only problem is nobody down here carries it so all i have to go by is reviews and such and the only thing that worries me is i want to make sure it'll be significantly better then the crap i'm looking through now so i won't make the same mistake again. how much cleaner will the optics be on this new scope compared to what's on my old scope?

 

[George63]

Re: optics differences

how can anyone tell without seeing your old scope

if it needs work Leupold does have excellent service

with the bush elite line I would keep it down to 16 power max, I have several and am very happy with the med power models, in the mid 20's power nightforce is tough to beat in the price range, too much magnification relative to the optical quality will be disappointing

 

[_shawn_]

Re: optics differences

my current scope doesn't have any scratches or defects that are visible and it collects light great in dawn and dusk times but once you get past a 100 yards even cranked up to 9x it's just hard to see detail. even shooting at the range at the 200 yard targets they aren't very easy to see. granted my eyes aren't the best at seeing distances due to a childhood bleach in the eye issue but i figured a scope would help with that problem

i picked the bushnell because a friend has a wholesale account through work and i can get it at cost. my other option is the weaver 4-20 tactical and some leupolds but the leupolds are out of my price range

 

[Quackaddict]

Re: optics differences

I own two of the units you are looking at. They track good, have good turrets and the glass is middle of the road. After about 20X it gets fuzzy and clarity suffers. Good enough to 95% of anything in my opinion. I run one on a 17 HMR and really like the setup.

I personally believe that Nikon has the best (sharpest) glass in the mid range category, they make a 4-16 or a 5-20 (Monarch line) that would suit your needs well. I would lean towards the 4-16 because it has .25 inch clicks and 4 power is still usable for close in work hunting.