Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Best $400 Range 3-9X Scope

It is difficult to evaluate scopes because of all the preconcieved perceptions. If you put the name Zeiss,leupold,swaro. etc on a tasco scope and passed it around most likely it would have excellent reviews.
If you intend to spend 400 dollars then spend it all and on a scope that fits you ,your application and your rifle, then spend enough to buy a very good mounting system.I hate it when someone says they want to spend x amount of money and then someone else tells them then can get just as good a scope for 1/2x.
It amazes me how often one sees expensive scopes in cheap mounts.A quality scope , mounted correctly in quality mounts will not need to be resighted regularly.I have rifles I have never needed to resight.Having to regularly resight a scope should not be accepted as normal, it indicates a problem with scope or mounting.Good equipment and mounting does not move.
If you buy one of the prominent brands and spend your 400 you will not be disappointed.Price is a great indicator of quality in a market like scopes where there are lots of competitiors.These posts have a lot of good recommendations for scopes in this price range from guys with experience I don't have.Good luck,have fun.

If I were gonna spend most of it I would buy a VXIII 3.5-10x40.

Gonna be my next scope..

Pell123 - where did you get that #4 in the conquest? #4 are IT.

I have a Conquest 3-9X40 and VXIII 3.5-10x40... The Conquest is a better scope opticly. I like the ease of focus and the reticle better than the Leupy. I don't like the huge eyepiece though. I couldn't get the Conquest to fit a pre64 M70 without going to high rings. However, I like the size and weight of the Leupys. The Leupy is so close to the Conquest its very hard to tell the difference. And nobody can possbily argue that Leupys warranty is the best. To me, its a tossup for these two scopes. It would come down to the rifle I was mounting it on..

As far as optical qualities, there is nothing with anything significance to offer at that price, or any other, to my knowledge. As far as value goes, the VXII Leupold, and like scopes from Nikon, the Bushnell 4200 and probably several others are every bit as good and cheaper. Some, I'm sure are tougher as well as cheaper. For real value, at half the cost, check out a Burris FFII.
For a long time, I've heard how the Conquest's image is sharper, brighter etc. than the competition. Then I started discovering that the difference is in their focusing system, not their optics. I can see every bit as much detail with my old Leupolds as the Conquest owners can see with their Conquests. The difference is that I've learned that the focus adjustment on a Leupold, or any other of that design, can focus the image as well as the reticle of the scope, not just the reticle as some still insist. It does take longer to do, but, after you do it, you can lock the focus ring and not worry about it moving when ever you rub the scope against something.
Some do find this focusing system of value, usually shooters with less than great eye sight. But you don't have to buy a Conquest to get this. Again, try some of the others. I understand the Burris FFII offers this feature as well.
I know of no reason why your Conquest would not be a good choice in your application. E

Another vote for the Conquest here. I have 3 and love 'em.

Same here. If you can live with the size of the ocular bell (I've only had an issue with this on one rifle), then I think the 3-9x40 Conquest is the best thing going for $400 or less. I've owned 4 myself, going back to the first one I bought in May of 2001.

Zeiss Conquest no doubt.

Dunno nuthin' about no stinkin' Conquest (never used one), but I do know that I really like the Leupold VX-III 2.5x8 with the B&C reticle. The older Vari-x and now the improved VX-III 2.5x8's have been good to me. And the B&C reticle works great.

-jeff

Zeiss Conquest, easier, faster diopter focus - good in low light etched reticle - constant eye relief - best glass in its price range. Used to have one conquest and a bunch of leupolds........now its a bunch of conquests and one leupold left to sell....

My Ultravids are what I look through until I'm ready to shoot. Once I'm ready, my priorities go to the scope that makes it easiest to get my bullet where I want it, even if the image is a little less sharp than another scope might provide. Accordingly, my vote goes to the VX II 3-9x40 with the LR dots for a hunting scope. If punching paper or "glassing" with it, the image in the Conquest may be better, but:

1. The ability to mount the scope low on the rifle;
2. Excellent eye relief and forgiving sight picture without precise head placement (for flexiblity in mounting the scope and quick target acquisition and comfort level on big kickers);
3. Great warranty - speedy, done right, no questions asked if you're the 1st owner or the 21st;
4. Tough, robust scope;
5. Excellent resale value if you tend to swap 'em around;
6. Weight;
7. Appearance (OK - so it's not ALL about hunting and getting the bullet to the target...grin);
8. Durability;
9. Locking focus ring which stays where you put it and is clear and sharp when you throw the rifle to your shoulder when an opportunity is suddenly presented;

...make the Leupold a better hunting scope in my opinion.

The Zeiss is a very fine scope as well - I've owned a couple and was impressed. I particularly like the etched reticle and the ease of seeing the Zeiss reticle in low light, and the image is excellent; however, the advantages of the Leupold put it in the lead for my hunting situations. I think the VXII 3-9x40 is the most scope for the money, although the VXIII's in 2.5-8 and 3.5-10 are dandy as well.

For hunting, the advantages of the Leuppy really shine IMHO.

One disclaimer...I don't like the higher powered Leupolds as much as the 3-9, fixed 6, etc. I might go Conquest for magnification over 10 power...I think lower power is more forgiving of lesser quality glass; however, be sure to check eye relief on the higher magnification Conquests - their plain old 3-9 is tops of their line for eye relief.

DJ

+100 DJTex speaks the truth. IMHO the VXII 3-9x40 is the best deal on a quality hunting scope when all factors are considered. I also like and use FXII fixed 6 Leupolds.

I also use and like Burris FFII but Leupolds excell in number 2 on DJ's list.

Agree with DJ; I've owned Zeiss and Leup. Were I inclined to buy a 3-9, it would be the Leup.Glass is better on the Zeiss, but I trust Leups, to the extent that I "trust" any variable.

if you dont mind changing rings that gold monarch n the classifieds will impress the hell out of you. bit on the heavy side but the glass is a cool drink of water.... FWIW..

for less the vx2 3-9 shines.. dont see a need to jump on the zeiss wagon. very happy with the leupys....

woofer

I have been looking at scopes for the .257AI My smith is working on.
I like the conquest and the new nikkon monarch 2.5X10 is dynomite.
The leupold 2.5X8 is one of my favorite scopes too (I have 2) And the good old VX2 3X9 I put on my standard Roberts is excelent.
If no clear choice emerges for you , you might remember leupold scopes help keep americans in jobs.
I wish I could get a look throug a burris signiture select.
...tj3006

The 3x9 Zeiss Conquest is the best over-all scope, price considered, that I have ever used and that includes Swaro, S&B, WG-Zeiss and about everything from a Weaver 330 and a Wollensak target scope to dozens of Leupies that I have owned.

My most treasured and tuned rifles are slwoly all getting Conquests with their current Leupies kept as spares; I have seldom been so impressed with any given outdoor gear product.

For a Sako rifle in .222 a Weaver Grand Slam 3-10x40mm for $260.00 would be my choice. Its a great scope the glass is just as good as the VXIII and Conquest! Just dont have as long as eye relief as the VXIII and Conquest but in the .222 you dont need a full 4inchs. The GS 3-10x40 has 3 to 3.5 inch of eye relief and that would work great for your rifle!!

Then why they gotta be stinkin?

I gotta be different and go with a Burris FFII in 3-9x40. I may be biased though, I bought their FFII in 4.5-14x42 with Ballistic Plex for my 270WSM. I absolutely love it.