[jdhutto]

I just got a tikka .270 and I want to outfit it with a scope pretty soon. I am most likely going to get a 3-9x40, and I want some suggestions. I just need a good all around scope, I will not be taking any really long shots. I am also not going to spend a fortune on a scope, one day I will, but not now. I have been looking at a Leupold VX-1, and also a few Nikon scopes. I would like a scope thats fairly bright when it starts to get dark. What would you go with (on a budget of around 300 or less)?

thanks, any feedback would be appreciated

 

[bigweatherby]

Leupold VX-II would be a great choice. Nikon has good scopes as does Sightron.

 

[SharonAnne]

a 1.5-6x will cover everything you need for a .270. Most shooters get too much power at the bottom end. I have a 2-7x leupold on my .30-06 and like it better than the 3.5-10x50 leupold I have on my AR15. If Leupold had a 1.5-6x I would have bought one.

 

[brandonsuperglide]

I bought a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 a few weeks ago. So far I really like it.

 

[Gunzzi]

Check out the Burris Fullfield II for under $200.00

 

[bigweatherby]

a 1.5-6x will cover everything you need for a .270. Most shooters get too much power at the bottom end. I have a 2-7x leupold on my .30-06 and like it better than the 3.5-10x50 leupold I have on my AR15. If Leupold had a 1.5-6x I would have bought one.

I think they offer that in the LPS line. But $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

[SharonAnne]

BW, the LPS was not available when I bought the compact 2-7x

 

[TX1911]

Another vote for either the Leupold or the Burris. I had the Fullfield II on my .30-06 until recently. Now it's on my AR. It's been a great scope thus far (6 years and counting)!

 

[Popeye]

In my opinion the Leupold VX-1 is not a good scope. It is over priced. You get to pay for the name and not much else.

A Nikon BuckMaster is a superior scope,
A Bushnell Elite 3200 is a superior scope,
A Burris Fullfield II is a superior scope,
Even a Nikon ProStaff is a superior scope when compaired to a Leupold VX-1.

 

[coach1299]

I bought a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 a few weeks ago. So far I really like it.

I have the same scope and feel the same way, no problems, no complaints, seemed to work real well on it's first outing. My sons have the same scopes on their guns, and after one of them made his kill the guide borowed his rifle for visual assistance because I was looking for a longer shot than expected and he didn't have any optical equipment with him. After he used the rifle with the Nikon Prostaff to spot for me, I heard him tell one of the other guides this: "I was using one of the kids rifles to look get better ID on the deer and I could see evrything beautifully through that Nikon Prostaff. That scope was really good". I had nothing to do with that conversation, but it made me feel that I chose a good product. If I remeber correctly they cost about $150.00 at Dicks Sporting Goods. I don't know that much about scopes but I thought that was a good buy for the money. Friends that hunt alot and spend more tell me that Swarovski is one of the better makes. I've also been using a Leupold 1X4 on my rifled shot gun and that has always served me well. I once asked whats the difference between a high priced quality scope and a lesser quality cheaper one. I was told that the cheaper ones will not hold their zero as well becuase they are not as solidly made, and they have a tendecy to fog up easier.
I have a couple of real cheap scopes on my .22's that I shoot no more than 100 yards and I've had no problems with them either.
That's all I can tell you, good luck!

 

[220combat]

One more vote for the Nikon Prostaff's. I now have 6 of them and I feel that they are a great scope for the price. They are on everything form 22's to 12 ga sluggers. They handle the slug recoil fine.