Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics In Search of the best 4.5 x 14 scope

I just went thru this drill scoping up a semi custom Rem 700 in 7mm Rem mag. I wanted to keep the weight to a minimum everywhere Icould on this rifle. All my current scopes are either Leupold or Zeiss so i am very familiar with the various glass in both lines. I narrowed the field to the Conquest or the VX-3. After a bunch of going back and forth I decided on the VX-3 because of 2 things, price and weight. I think the Conquest is ever so very slightly better optically over the VX-3 but not by very much and certainly not $200 worth IMO. The VX-3 glass has closed the gap on the Conquest line considerably. So this time my money stayed in the USA with the VX-3 Leupold. 163bc

zeiss and leupolds are always gonna get their kudo's, but if you have an opportunity to look through the already mentioned 6500 or a "bigsky", do so

You'll get more for your money and glass as good as the euro's in a 3.5-15 Nightforce.

No offense, but I've never been "wowed" by the glass in a Nightforce. I thought it to be very good, just not exceptional.

seriously? I've been fortunate to own various scopes from Tasco to Hensoldt. If you go dollar for dollar NF offers more than most and great/exceptional glass. So good infact that I've sold all the rest (yes even the Henny and S&B) and bought all NF's. If you think about it you can get 2 NF's for the price of just one of the others.

TIFWIW.

It's not a "wow" thing with Nightforce for me. It's just it is so far better than anything I have looked through for seeing detail. This includes one Minox 62mm spotting scope.

Ringman,

I used a Nightforce scope once and was impressed with it. I don't own one.

SWFA, in their scope quality comparison study, placed Nightforce down in the pack, behind a number of others. Check it out on line.

I read reports like yours about how good they are and am wondering why there is such a gap in reporting on Nightforce scopes.

DF

I really like comparing optics. Once I switched from antlers and tree bark and leaves, I discovered a good glass shows itself to be much better when looking at a line chart or printed words. When my observtion varies from some published observation I don't beleive they printed what they observed or they didn't use the proper object.

Another point: A local and I did some shooting for a magazine writer. In the magazine there were all kinds of great groups. I assumed he kicked my butt. When I talked with him he complimented me for shooting such fine groups. I asked the writer about it. He said,

"I owed Kimber a favor."

One of the magazine ariticles I did had me testing bullets I never fired. I believe anonomous posters more than most of the pros when thye tell us the compared this with that and discovered something.

the NF glass I've seen is not nearly as good as a Diavari or S&B Summit or Klassik just to name a couple. I also don't feel the need for 3 lbs of scope on any rifle I own.

When you post something like this that I know is in error then can I trust the other stuff you posted? My Nightforce weighs two pounds.

At any rate, I have not seen a Diavari or a S&B or a Klassik. I would love to compare them with what I have. I expect them to be better.

Nightforce NXS 12-42X 56mm (Matte Finish) 30mm Tube SF and 1/4 MOA =34oz.

Nightforce NXS 3.5-15X 56mm (Matte Finish) 30mm Tube with SF= 31oz. I didn't even bother to look at the rest of them.

16 oz.= 1 lb.
32 oz is 2 lb.s, not three.

I was shooting yesterday at 300 and 400, and could see my bullet holes with my NF on 22X. I couldn't see them with my 20-60 Swaro spotter...

I AM impressed with NF's glass.

I've seen most high end stuff, most mid level stuff, and several NF's. I remain unimpressed, especially for what they cost. I intentionally posted the weights of the scopes to show I was wrong, and it was indeed around 2lbs. I guess you missed the point. BTW you need another spotter if that's the case.

I've looked through a couple of Swaro spotters and they were great, my .224" bullet holes at 300 were easy pickings. Could something be amiss with your particular scope?

Very well could be. I've been wondering that myself, since the day I opened the box.

I sold a new Leu that I loved. Don't really think I gained anything. Wish I could set it up side by side with another one.

NF glass still impresses me, tho.

yukonal,

That Swaro sounds like the Winchester spotting scope that was not as good my Nikon 7-15X35 binoculars. They would be in the mail tomorrow if you dropped them off here.

Yesterday one of our .com friends and I were at the range. He had some really cool toys. But that's not the point here.

I could see 300 yard .224 holes with the Bushnell 4200 4-16X when it was set on 13X.

By the way he has an outrageous .221 Fireball on a tiny Mouser action. (If I wasn't a Christian I would be coveting his lovely Vixen.) We were hitting the two pound propane bottle that is hanging 590 yards away. Of course we were aiming above the crossbar from which it is hanging.

The scope maxed out at 5X. Something like that is almost blasphemy. I offered to loan him a wonderful Tasco World Class 4-16X40. Can you beleive he declined? I'm crushed.

I'm not at all impressed with the very short/small Zeiss eye relief and eye boxes on that class of Conquest. I also much prefer the super hard coatings on the Leupold. Getting one w/o an AO or a side focus/parallax feature would also be a plus for me.
But that's for a big game/large varmit rifle. For small varmits, these things wouldn't matter as much and I would insist on an AO or a side focus/parallax adjustment. E

The Leupold 4.5x14 seems like a good buy, especially if you are buying for a dozen plus rifles.

You need to narrow your search parameters. Those might be "best" under $500 (or whatever) but they are far from best.

It's certainly "good enough"... actually better than that. However that misses the point. Mechanical reliability and repeatability is where NF makes its stellar rep.