Originally Posted by bsa1917hunter
Originally Posted by Goat
In particular I'm looking at the discontinued 4.5-14x 44mm. What are its strengths and weaknesses for a 7mm Rem Mag that likely will not get hunted often but could potentially go on a once in a lifetime trip.
I am now braced for impact... Tell me what you have experienced.

The only Zeiss I've had to send in for repairs. The glass is pretty good, on par with the newer Conquest V4. The bass ackwards turrets I can live with, but the standard turrets are not numbered. So there is no reference for dialing purposes. So, for me, it's a "set and forget" scope. No real useable reticles, to offset that, like a longrange ballistic plex reticle for example. That would be a plus, if they had it, but no dice. The scope is also long, but it's still fairly lightweight. It's not a horrible scope, but it is highly dated. Similar to a Bushnell elite 4200. Great scopes, but are outdated, and limited in its use. Most times they are pretty robust scopes, but not my first pick. The older Zeiss Conquest models hold their value pretty well. The 3-9x40's often sell for around $400. The 3.5-10x44 around $450.00, and the 4.5-14x44 around $5-$600.00.
I have two Conquest 4.5-14x44 and one Cabelas version of the same scope. All three have ballistic reticles that work great. The Cabelas is on barrel #2 in 204 ruger which I use for prarie dog shooting. It's never missed a beat and has always held zero. The two Zeiss versions are on a 300 Ultra and a 270. The 270 only has a few hundred round under its belt, but the one on the 300 Ultra is on barrel #3 and has been hunted hard for 20 years. The 270 zero has never changed. The 300 zero has changed once when I fell and smashed the scope into a cattle guard. Put a nice ding in the bell and needed 6 clicks of windage to correct.

Last edited by BWalker; 03/06/24.