Looking at a 3-9x40. Opinions on a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 or Leupy VXI 3-9x40. Dale
I have used both Nikon and Leupold scopes. Had a Prostaff 2-7 on a BLR and had no issues with it performance-wise. Currently have Nikons on 2 rifles (Monarchs) and Leupolds on 3 (M8; VariX III. and Vari X 3). Honestly feel that for my purposes the glass is pretty much a toss up. I kind of like the Nikon reticle better by a slim margin. I much prefer that I can use Butler Creek caps on the Leupolds, whereas the Nikons pretty much are relegated to rubber band type scope covers, as any twist on the eye piece can affect focus. Both are good optics; what you decide on is up to you.
In my opinion, customer service from Leupold is light-years ahead of Nikon - which almost certainly will, sooner or later, be very important to you.
Not even a remotely fair comparison. The VX-1 is far and away a better scope. I have some of each and will be ridding myself of all the Nikons as funds permit.
In my opinion, customer service from Leupold is light-years ahead of Nikon - which almost certainly will, sooner or later, be very important to you.
I agree. Sooner or later (it is inevitable), you will be using Leupold customer service. Just a proven... That's why I would pick Nikon..
In my opinion, customer service from Leupold is light-years ahead of Nikon - which almost certainly will, sooner or later, be very important to you.
I agree. Sooner or later (it is inevitable), you will be using Leupold customer service. Just a proven... That's why I would pick Nikon..
Certainly, when the Nikon goes TU, just toss it in the trash because their CS will be no help.
Looking at a 3-9x40. Opinions on a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 or Leupy VXI 3-9x40. Dale
Splurge. Get a VX2 3-9x40. The $100 dollar difference is worth it.
Think about this before you buy:
Nikon camera division, which I understand to be 90% of the company, is not pro hunting and will not allow their cameras sold along side their hunting products which means we cannot carry them.
Splurge. Get a VX2 3-9x40. The $100 dollar difference is worth it.
I agree. If the $100 simply isn't in the budget the VX-1 is a very good scope. The VX-2 is as much scope as anyone actually needs.
This isnt even close. Leupold by far. Prostaff is a very low end scope and nikons cs sucks. VX1 glass is far superior.
Splurge. Get a VX2 3-9x40. The $100 dollar difference is worth it.
I agree. If the $100 simply isn't in the budget the VX-1 is a very good scope. The VX-2 is as much scope as anyone actually needs.
Agree with this if you can swing it.
I guess I'm in the minority regarding Nikon reliability. I have several with one dating back to the early 90's and have never had a problem with any of them. I've had exactly 1 Leupold and it would fail to hold zero on occasion. This was with a 1.75-6x36 mounted on a light kicking rifle.
For clarity, you've got to go pretty high up the Nikon line to get a comparable view, though.
Splurge. Get a VX2 3-9x40. The $100 dollar difference is worth it.
I agree. If the $100 simply isn't in the budget the VX-1 is a very good scope. The VX-2 is as much scope as anyone actually needs.
+1
I would skip the VX-1 or Prostaff. The option for me would likely be to spend less and get a Burris Fullfield which I think offers more than either or save a bit more and get a VX2 as other suggested.
Bottom line, look down the tube, check out the features and see which one you like the best. Even though I do freelance PR/Shooting Event's for Nikon I am not going to tell you which one to choose. It's going on your rifle and you have to pick the one that works the best for you and your requirement's. I will tell you Nikon has a PROMO going on right now that includes the PROSTAFF 3-9 and 4-12 BDC scopes.
As for Nikon CS or Nikon warranty, watch the below 30 sec. video on Nikon's No Fault Warranty. 6 years of doing this job I have never had 1 scope go belly up or fail to hold zero during numerous event's and probably over 500,000 rounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IweRfw4vMEY
Lot's of people know on the forum that I really like my VX3's w/CDS as hunting scopes. If you will remember I posted a month or two ago that I acquired a Monarch 3 w/XTR. I only have about 100 rounds with it so far on a 7-08, but it has been very reliable so far, and I can't tell much difference optically between it and and a 3.5-10x40 VX3. It has tracked reliably out to 500, back to 100, and in between. So far, so good, and time will tell.
I agree that the Burris Fullfield II is better than a Prostaff and a VX-1.
In my opinion, customer service from Leupold is light-years ahead of Nikon - which almost certainly will, sooner or later, be very important to you.
What he said!
Natchez sells the Nikon 3-9x40 with a Nikoplex (Duplex) reticle for $160 amd the Leupold VX1 3-9x40 with a duplex reticle for $199.99. I would pay the $40 difference and get the Leupold. Always.
I know that a lot of people disagree with my philosophy of amortizing scope costs over a twenty year life span, but it is a philosophy that works for me. If you amortize the $40 difference over 20 year, the additional cost is $2 per year, $0.17 per month, less than $0.05 per week.
I realize that a quality rifle scope will last more than twenty years, but the technology is changing such that a scope sold in 2015 is likely to have superior optics when compared to the same make/model scope from 1995, like comparing the 1995 Vari-X IIc optics to the 2015 VX1 or VX2 optics for the 3-9x40.
Yep.
It's not even close.
I have sold all my Nikon Monarchs. Not because it's not good glass but because Nikon Corp. is very anti-hunting and treats the sports optics division like a stepchild.
I have no interest in doing any more business with them.
I've had a few Pro-Staffs and Buckmasters. Never had a mechanical issue, but for my money, I do prefer either the Redfield Revolution or Leupold VX 1/2. I buy a lot of lightly used scopes in that $125-$250 range, and most wind up being made in Oregon.
I've had a few Pro-Staffs and Buckmasters. Never had a mechanical issue, but for my money, I do prefer either the Redfield Revolution or Leupold VX 1/2. I buy a lot of lightly used scopes in that $125-$250 range, and most wind up being made in Oregon.
I whole heartedly agree. I find less tunneling and better image resolution. The Made in the USA of the Leupold certainly helps, too.
I really like my Nikon scopes and binoculars. the costumer service comes through, it just takes longer which I don't like vs Leopold costumer service. Leupold/Redfield stuff is in and out vs month at nikon. HonestIy I would skip the redfields. Just save up little and get a Monarch or VX2 and get much better glass.
Yep. Can't believe this was even a question.
Leupolds eye relief is better then Nikons by far