Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Nikon Buckmaster durability?

After comparing several different scopes in the 4 to 14 power variable range, I have just about settled on a new side focus Nikon Buckmasters. Frankly, I preferred it to a Leupold VX-III in a side by side comparison. The brightness and clarity seemed comparable and the eye relief didn't seem to be greatly different either. The Buckmasters even seemed to have less critical eye relief, too. And it is a nice fit for my budget, as I already have sufficient funds on hand to purchase one. My only remaining concern is the Buckmasters ability to withstand recoil and other bumps and bruises in hunting situations. It will be mounted on my Winchester Model 70 Super Shadow in .270 WSM, so recoil won't be too extreme, but it does come back a bit with the full house 140 gr Accubonds. Anyone been subjecting a Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14 scope to a bunch of short magnum recoil? Any problems?
For what it is worth, I have also looked at the Leupold VXIII, the Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14 (which I currently have a 3x9 mounted on the rifle and have had no problems with it for the past 2 years, just want a little more than 9 power magnification for range work and long range varmints), Sightron SII 4-16x42 and the Weaver Grand Slam 4.5-14 as well as the V16 and I liked the Buckmasters the best, and not just because it was the least expensive. I hope someone out there can provide a little additional information on whether or not it can handle recoil, and I should be ready. Of course, if a dozen people report scope failures and nightmare customer service from Nikon, I may have to go to plan B (starting over again, or say the heck with it and live with the FFII 3-9X) Appreciate any comments.

2ndtimer:
I've used a Buckmaster 3x9x40 on my 7mm Weatherby for a couple of years, without mishap. I don't know why a higher X one wouldn't work OK, as well. I prefer my Nikon to the more expensive VXII of the same power, that is my spare, for that rifle. Why don'tcha give the Nikon a try?
Smitty of the North

I had one of the standard A/O 4.5-14 Buckmasters on a 7.5 lb .300 Win. Mag. that worked great. They're pretty tough because that particular rifle wrecked more than one scope.


Hope this Helps,

HBB

i have a 3to 9 model buckmaster .it has been on all of my rifles.it seems to work great.no problems whatsoever.

I have a 3x9 Nikon Bushmaster on a Remington 700 in 7Mag that's work great for several years. It is very clear. I plan on getting another soon for a Remington 700 in 260 that I aquired a few months back.

I had the chance to look through a half dozen scopes a couple of times lined up side by side, same light and distance, etc. and the Nikon beat the others in my eyes. However, I would not buy a Nikon and would choose the Leupold every time and have done so.

A few years ago Nikon ripped me off totally on a pair of binoculars that were under their warranty. Charged me to fix them, returned them so minimally repaired that the same problem developed within hours, and then insisted that I pay again to have them fixed because they insisted that I had damaged them again. We baby optics and hadn't damaged them in the first place.

Yes, I am still angry. Take it as you will, either a vendetta or a caution from another hunter that if anything goes wrong you are at risk of having a worthless warranty. Trace old threads on this site and you will find other complaints against Nikon warranty, on sport optics, apparently not on their camera division.

By way of comparison, my son has a pair of Leupie binocs, used for two years and they fogged up on the rainiest hunting ground in N. America the last day of season this Fall. "Send them back," said Leupold, and they immediately returned him a brand new pair with slightly improved features.

You pays your money and takes your chances. Some people have had good luck, but the chance of having a bad experience is a lot greater with Nikon.

Okanagan,
I would be the same as you if that happened to me, but so far so good.

I have a Buckmaster 3-9 on my synthetic stocked Ruger .338. It was all I could afford at the time and I was leary of the Nikon,but its held up superbly in the 3-4 years its been on my .338.

I'd be real tempted to go back and take another look at that Burris. Ive got several Nikon scopes and they are very crisp and clear, and I've had no problems with them at all.

But over the last 2 years I've bought a total of 3 Burris scopes, and to me, the eye relife is much better, and the ballistic-plex system used in their scope is supper easy to use once you get your loads flight path corresponding to the post. I also like their ring inserts to use when mounting the scope. It make it much easier to get proper tube allignment to elliminate torque on the scope body, and allows you to start zeroing your rifle from an almost zeroed posistion. No malor clicks required to fine tune it in.

Lastly, you can have them put on target turret type adjustment knobs for aout $80.00. My nephw just sent hisback for them to install those target turrets. He sent it to them 2 days before Christmas, and got it back completed this last Thursday. Good turn around time I'd say.

Thanks for the responses. I am still leaning toward the Buckmasters in the hope that it will hold up well enough. The only optical instrument I have ever had to send back was an old Tasco World Class spotting scope that had its' tripod knocked over and broke the eyepiece. Tasco fixed it for free and I am still using it twenty odd years later. I gambled on a couple of the then new Weaver scopes from Japan years ago, and had good luck with all three of them, a V9, V10 and KT15. So even though the Nikon is assembled in the Phillipines, I am willing to gamble on it. (After all, both my Burris Fullfield II's were also Phillipine assembled, so why not?) Thanks again for the replies, keep them coming since I won't be ordering until Monday. I could still change my mind, but it looks like I will be trying out the Buckmasters 4.5-14 matte finish Nikoplex scope on my .270WSM.

I have a 4.5-14 sf mildot buckmaster and have had great luck with it. it has been on a 22-250,7 ultra mag, and it now sets on a 300 winnie. very repeatable and it will take a ton of abuse, (I dropped on a big rock, stii held its zero, but had pretty dent in the bell)

the scope is well worth the money and then some

I just got a Weaver 2x7, and it was hard for me to decide against a Buckmaster, which was the only other contender in the price range I wanted to stay in. I favored a V7 because of light weight (>3 oz lighter), size (3" shorter) and brightness (seemed a bit brighter). But I am still contemplating a Buckmasters, this is how much I liked the insensitivity to the eye positioning. I think it is better with the Nikon than with any other scope I looked through.
-P

I bought a 4.5-14 40 AO Bucknmasters very soon after they came out with the line. It sat in the safe for acouple of years then got mounted on a friends 300 wthby. lots of load developement and animals later its still working great.

I have a 3-9 on my 350 Rem. It has taken a lickin and kept on tickin.

2ndtimer,

I found your old thread in the archives. Did you ever get that Buckmaster? I have a 4.5-14X40 sf mil-dot on my .25 Souper and am going to get another one for my .338 Lapua. I really like the scope. The Lapua will give it a hard run for durability as it's quite a thumper. I have no doubt the BM will be up to the task. If you got one, how's it holding up and do you like it?

1flier

Question for the owners of the side focus. Is it pretty stiff or is it always moving around when carrying it? I was thinking about one of those scopes, but not if I am constantly having to adjust the focus.

I have a Nikon Buckmaster but not on a high recoil rifle, a 6.5-06. It's a 3-9x and I have only one complaint. The crosswires are to thick. But I think that if Nikon did to me what they did to another poster, that would end that. A couple years ago I broke the crosswire in a very old Redfield 2 3/4x widefield, just befor they shut down. I sent it back and it was fixed and back in a couple weeks. Unfortunately it came back with a duplex rather that 4 plex reticule.