New scope purchase

[Moosedown]

I just bought a new scope yesterday. It is a Weaver 3x9x50 Classic. I had a fixed 4 power on my rifle previously, but had some issues picking up horns at lower light and longer distances. Just wondering if anyone on the forum has anything good/bad to say about the Weaver brand. I paid just under $300 for the scope. Not too late to return it if someone feels that there is a far better alternative in the same price range. Thanks.

[sickfast]

weaver has made good scopes for years but the rest of the optics out there are getting better and better...For $ 300 i would have bought the Bushnell 4200 elite 3x9x40..It has better lens coating on the glass and rain guard..The 50mm bell wont help bring in more light only give you a wider field of view..Only so much lite can travel down a 1 inch tube..Its all about lens coatings on the glass in the scope that will bring in more light.You should be happy with your scope but that scope would not be my first choice..

Have a great hunting season and good luck

[Moosedown]

Originally Posted by sickfast

weaver has made good scopes for years but the rest of the optics out there are getting better and better...For $ 300 i would have bought the Bushnell 4200 elite 3x9x40..It has better lens coating on the glass and rain guard..The 50mm bell wont help bring in more light only give you a wider field of view..Only so much lite can travel down a 1 inch tube..Its all about lens coatings on the glass in the scope that will bring in more light.You should be happy with your scope but that scope would not be my first choice..

Have a great hunting season and good luck

This was taken from a website that discusses scopes only. "At first glance, a larger objective (or forward lens of a scope) seems to make sense. After all, larger objectives gather more light, which in turn makes for a brighter view—especially in low-light conditions." A friend of mine owns a Weaver and told me of a hunting experience, where he could make out the horns on a bull moose with his rifle in low-light conditions, and the two people he was with were unable to do so with their scopes. He got the moose. I priced out the Bushnell scope you suggested when I went in to get my Weaver mounted and the cost was a little over $500. More than I wanted to spend on my inexpensive 18 year old Savage setup (purchased for $500). I did consider the Bushnell 3200, but ended up sticking with my Weaver purchase. Thanks for your insight.

[sdeviation]

wouldnt be my first or second choice either ,,,but guy in moose camp has old reliable k4 on his 338 and he gets his moose .....
kinda nice when u got all different optics in camp u can give them a try in the real world and see the differences
if the quality control was good on it ,enjoy it, u will be fine i think....

[Cappy]

I purchased a 3-9x38 Weaver a few years ago when money was tight and it has been a great scope. Holds zero and is actually pretty clear. It is still in use on my wife's 6.5x55 and still get the job done.

[WSM]

You should of got a Leupold off of e-bay. You would of got it at a better price about 6 months ago when the Canadian dollars was worth something.

[Chevy 454]

Shoulda,woulda,coulda, Hindsight is always 20-20.

[roger]

Originally Posted by Moosedown

but had some issues picking up horns at lower light and longer distances.

maybe a 4-18 power variable would be better then it would double as a pair of binos

[fluxcore]

I have the same scope and wouldn't trade it for anything. I ended up going out of town to pick up my savage F-TR and needed a scope for the range (also my .22 needed a scope) I was able to shoot golf ball size groups at 200yrds all day the scope was crystal clear. Its not as good as my leupy but I paid a whole lot more for it and id never admit the weaver is better