Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Zeiss 3-9x40 vs. 2.5-8x32 for mountain rifle |
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Author | |
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: December/10/2008 at 05:16 |
I know from past experience on another rifle I sold that the 3-9x40 is an excellent scope. However, I am considering the 2.5-8x32 also. I lose a little top end power for a little more field of view and less weight and length which is what you want with a lighter weight rifle like the Remington mountain rifle. But does the 2.5-8x32 perform in the field as good as the 3-9x40 does? |
|
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would have to say YES. I have both the 40mm Conquest and the 32mm Conquest. My conclusion is that there is nothing lost by going to the smaller size, other than weight and bulk. My 32mm is the fixed 4X32. I was hesitant at first to use this scope as I had similar concerns like you. I had absolutly no problem at all with field of view, eye relief, sight picture, and most of all - its ability to perform in LOW light settings. No problems at all picking out deer up to 200+ yards at early dawn and late dusk. If your shots will mostly be under 200 Yards, i would highly recommend the 4X32 - it's a little lighter, alittle less expensive, and very simple - just aim and shoot, no need for zooming in and out. This scope has really grown on me after this last hunting season, I can definately see more in my inventory in the future. Hope this helps, bricat
|
|
|
|
Big Squeeze
Optics Master Extraordinaire GOOGLE NINJA Joined: August/30/2007 Location: Anaheim, Calif. Status: Offline Points: 3143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The 2.5x on the low end, gives a better FOV for shorter range brush and timber, while 8x on the high end is more than good enough for the 500-600 yard shots if needed.
For a mountain rifle, you have the best of all worlds using a 2.5-8x32; lower weight, lower profile and a great overall balance in magnification for just about any hunting situation. I even like them a little better than the 3x9`s.
|
|
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for the replies!... Yea, 4x32 would be another good choice. I traded in my Schmidt and Bender 4x36 when they were still $400-450 and what a mistake that was. Not only did the scope skyrocket but it worked extremely well where I whitetail hunt right now. #4 reticle on that one, what a scope. Anyway, this new rig will be my "go to" rifle and I might need a little more power for longer shots down the road so I think anyway. Not like making a 300 yd. shot with 4x cannot be done! I really liked that 3-9x40 Conquest though, great scope for the money, and I've had Swaro's PH in 2.5-10-42 30mm. That scope is unbelievable but is bulky. NOt meant for compact lightweight setups. Did great on my 7mm Magnum Wichester MOdel 70 super grade.
BagderRed
|
|
jetwrnch
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/03/2006 Location: Knoxville, TN Status: Offline Points: 294 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just mounted a 2.5-8x32 Conquest on a Tikka T3 .270. Seems to be a perfect match.
|
|
BuckeyeArcher
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/27/2008 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If in your price range the Swarovski 3-9x36 American would be an excellent choice for a Mountain Rifle.
|
|
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes, excellent choice but not worth $500 MORE dollars. IMO
|
|
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Actually, the 2.5-8X32 is only about 1.25 oz lighter than the 3-9X40, so the weight difference probably wouldn't be noticeable on the rifle. However the lower profile objective of the 2.5-8X32 would be, and you could pretty much use the lowest rings available with that scope. Interestingly, Zeiss lists the same weight for the 2.5-8X32 as for the fixed 4X32. Incidentally, I have the 4X32, and I agree with Bricat -- it's a fantastic little scope in every respect and there's something to be said about the simplicity and optical excellence of a good fixed 4X or 6X on a hunting rifle.
As a fan of good moderate to low magnification variables, I think the 2.5-8X32 and the 1.8-5.5X38 are two of the most intriguing models in the Conquest line. However, I don't understand why the 1.8-5.5X38 is listed as 3 oz heavier than the 3-9X40.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Kickboxer
MODERATOR Moderator Joined: February/13/2008 Status: Offline Points: 23679 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was going to say something here, but got lost watching Bricat's avatar...
Maybe someday it will come back to me. I still think her name should be Nancy Callahan...
Edited by Kickboxer - December/10/2008 at 17:34 |
|
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.
There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living |
|
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hey Kickboxer, so some respect to the wench - Her name is Lolita, NOT bricat's avatar!!!
|
|
|
|
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's "show" not "so" some respect - lost my spelling in a fit of rage.
|
|
|
|
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's the first thing I noticed when I came back on board recently... that baby has some moves!!! Swaro's out, too much for me, although would that would be a sweet combo. Decision goes to the 2.5-8x32. Thanks for the help. BadgerRed
|
|
Big Squeeze
Optics Master Extraordinaire GOOGLE NINJA Joined: August/30/2007 Location: Anaheim, Calif. Status: Offline Points: 3143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Take a look at the 2.5-8x32 Monarch too @ $289. The same scope in the VX3 is also being discounted down from the $399.
|
|
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Haven't looked at a Monarch but the price point is nice. I'll take a look. I had a VAri-X III 2.5-8x36 and was my first "real" scope you could say. Good scope, was considering this one too because of the current discounts. Then I took a look through my dad's vari-x III 2.5-8x36 which is NOT index matched whatever and I jumped right to the Conquest. I basically liked everything about the 3-9x40 Conquest besides the plastic turret caps and especially how the Z-plex looks compared to Leupold's duplex reticle. I hunted with that Conquest alot and it held up fine. Maybe just maybe there not as tough as the Vari-X III but hard to say.
|
|
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
How about this one from the samplelist.com:
|
|
take em!
|
|
bagderRed
Optics Apprentice Joined: May/17/2004 Status: Offline Points: 159 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yea, that is still out of my price range these days, if only I was single again haha. $250 above the 2.5-8x32 Zeiss is more than I want to spend but no doubt about it that is an outstanding scope.
|
|
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I understand! I put a Conquest 3-9X40 on my son's 700 CDL in .270 and he loves it! If it wasn't a lefty, I'd probably be fighting him for it! Can't go wrong with a Zeiss!!!!
|
|
take em!
|
|
trigger29
Optics Master Extraordinaire X = 180 Y = 90 (X+Pyro)+(Y-Pyro) = ? Joined: September/29/2007 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 4353 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
After the spill mine took on a Black Hills hunt this year, I'd be hard pressed to believe they are not as tough. I nearly cried when I looked at my rifle laying there. Then picked it up, and killed a deer with it. No problems with the scope.
|
|
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." |
|
bricat
Optics Master Joined: April/24/2007 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 1881 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Nice signature line!
|
|
|
|
Ed Connelly
Optics Retard God of no Chihuahua Joined: December/16/2007 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 24225 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Mr. Anti-Pyro!!! Boy! Are YOU gonna get a full mailbox!!!
|
|
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |