6500 or Conquest, Nikon

[ourabmen]

Hello and thanks from a relative newbie hear. I am looking for a scope for a 25-06 that I am about to finish for a bean field deer rifle. I am looking at the 6500 2.5-16 mil dot, Ziess Conquest 3.5-10 and 4.5-14 , both with target knobs (mil dot or Z Rapid reticle) and a Nikon 2.5-10 mil dot target model.

Is max 10x magnification adequate for sane ranges for a newbie distance shooter? Would I be better of with the 14x or 16x top end? Thanks for your help.

OUrabmen

 

[KRP]

10x will get you a long ways but it is really a matter of personal preference. I like to have a little more magnification available in case I want/need it. Zeiss, Nikon, Bushnell would be my order of preference. Be aware that sanity and I don't talk much.

 

[ScottBerish]

The Elite 6500 is a very versatile scope.

Optically, I'd lean to the Zeiss Conquest. Mechanicaly, they are similar. I'd put the Nikon at the bottom.

Another option, Vortex Viper, since you didn't mention any scope with illumination. 30mm tube, and the 6.5-20x44 with BDC would make a great "bean field" rifle for not alot of dough.

Scott

 

[lerch]

Hello fellow Okie!! Your handle kinda hints you might be a Norman boy???


I personally think the 14x top end power is about perfect for a hunting scope. that top end gives you plenty of magnification but still a good low end for low light shooting. I sold zeiss scopes for years and just never had the best luck with them. no real specific problems, they just never really hit with us or our customers.

I would never rank a Nikon scope at the bottom of very many conversations. for me they are one of the most underated scopes on the market today, and a hell of a way for a shooter to save some money while still getting a great product. the nikon monarch is a hell of a scope and at around $400.00 they rival alot of $500.00 scopes

the 6500 is also a hell of scope!!!!!


have a good un
steve

 

[ScottBerish]

I would never rank a Nikon scope at the bottom of very many conversations. for me they are one of the most underated scopes on the market today, and a hell of a way for a shooter to save some money while still getting a great product. the nikon monarch is a hell of a scope and at around $400.00 they rival alot of $500.00 scopes

the 6500 is also a hell of scope!!!!!


have a good un
steve

Wow, this thread is getting hot!

All three scopes are fine choices. The Elite 6500 are supposedly the finest Bushnell offers. I know the Elite 4200 are some of the most reliable (mechanically) and brightest scopes made, and the Elite 6500 is their new flagship. When Bushnell puts their mind to something, it usually works. That's one reason they were the number one selling scope in 2007 (the other, no doubt, is their low end models you see in Walmart ). The warranty/service should be top notch.

Personal preferences aside, the Zeiss Conquest are very bright, clear, and rugged scopes. If the 1-inch tube and lack of illumination isn't an issue, you can't go wrong with a Conquest.

The Nikon scopes are an excellent value, many positive comments on the Buckmaster series, no real issues. I'm not too big on target turrets for a hunting rig, and the 10x on the max mag is OK but your other choices have 14-16x which Lerch pointed out is probably more satisfactory.

In five years, I've taken one return on a Bushnell Elite, one on Nikon Monarch, and zero on Zeiss Conquest.

Take care,

Scott

 

[BravoEMike]

Good morning...

I stopped at Cabela's yesterday,
looked at some scopes,
Ziess, new Leupold VX-7.
I kept coming back to the Bushnell 6500...2.5-16X50mm, mildot,
I was impressed...
very impressed!

Bruce ~~___/)~*~

PS. Even have it locked into my favorite places.

 

[lerch]

they certainly are a good scope. i sold one to a buddy of mine up on the KS border and he has been very happy with it so far. very nice glass.

steve

 

[srhaggerty]

I have had the Zeiss Conquest on some rifles and have been really happy with them. Bright, clear and well built.

 

[KRP]

I can't get past the lack of horizontal hash marks on the turrets of the 6500. If you don't dial for windage/elevation it shouldn't matter. I'm also one of the few that wasn't impressed with the 4200 series scope I had so that probably factors in too.

 

[edge]

Since the 6500 is on the table, and a 4.5 is on the table with the Conquest, then would the 6500 4.5 -30x be on the table too....I have seen it for 667 which is probably a little bit cheaper than the Zeiss?

I have not looked through the new 6500's , and if the reticle is the same as on a 3200, then I would opt for an etched reticle.
The 3200 reticle flares bronze when looking anywhere near the Sun.

edge.

 

[gyesko]

I have nikons and leupolds and a 6500 3.5-16 mildot. The nikon in low power is a great scope but the 6500 mechanically and user friendly is hands down the best.

 

[WildcatB]

... I'm not too big on target turrets for a hunting rig, ...

Take care,

Scott

Do you hunt long range? It's kind of tough to do so accurately w/o target turrets. Mil dots (or similar reticles) are nice but not nearly as accurate as turning turrets and holding dead on.

 

[ScottBerish]

Do you hunt long range? It's kind of tough to do so accurately w/o target turrets. Mil dots (or similar reticles) are nice but not nearly as accurate as turning turrets and holding dead on.

No, I do not.

However, I'm all ears. Tell me how target turrets are necessary, and why capped turrets that were accurate, finger adjustable, and repeatable would not work for long range hunting. I will say that having the exposed knob would be a bit faster if time is of the essence. However, I like the turrets protected when banged around, dragged through the brush, and at other times when Murphy raises his head.

It's just a preference, is all.

Scott

 

[WildcatB]

No, I do not.

However, I'm all ears. Tell me how target turrets are necessary, and why capped turrets that were accurate, finger adjustable, and repeatable would not work for long range hunting. I will say that having the exposed knob would be a bit faster if time is of the essence. However, I like the turrets protected when banged around, dragged through the brush, and at other times when Murphy raises his head.

It's just a preference, is all.

Scott

I didn't say they where necessary. It's just tougher w/o them. Here are the articles that guided me. All are on THIS site.

- Long Range Hunting Rifle On A Budget

- Setting Up Your Long Range Scope

- Reading The Wind

- The Ultimate Shooting Challenges - Long Shots and Movers, Part One - Long Range Hunting

- Setting Up For The Long Range Hunting Shot

It seems the main reason you're here is to sell optics - which is fine - but you might also want to give long range hunting a try. Not only will it give you insight into your customers' needs, it's a whole lot of fun.