Need opinions on a scope for a Marlin 336 in .35 rem

[kc5rkg]

Picked up a Marlin 336 in .35 remington yesterday.  I hunt in the east Texas pineywoods and all my shots will be under 100 yds.  I want to put a 2x7 on this rifle, but don't have a whole lots to spend.  I am considering the following scopes:

Nikon Monarch 2x8-32  ~$250
Leupold VX-I 2x7-33  ~$200
Bushnell 3200 2x7-32  ~$175

Your opinions on these three or any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks!

[cwlongshot]

1ST Choice Leupold VX-I 2x7-33  ~$200

2ND Choice Bushnell 3200 2x7-32  ~$175

3RD Choice Nikon Monarch 2x8-32  ~$250

 Better yet, look for a VXII Used for the same 200 beans!!  You get what you pay for with LEUPOLD, there quality and service is second to none. the 2X7 IMHO is the ultimate variable scope. I must own a dozen of them!!

Bushnell has been making a quality scope for years, the 3200 is a good line.

The Monarch line of Nikons is also a quality scope, just overpriced for what you get. Nikon in general is banking on the NAME and respect people have for the NIKON CAMERA lenses. Its NOT the same!!

 Only LEUPOLD will be there for THE SCOPE. What I mean is any owner, anytime that scope is covered FREE of charge. Like I said, you get what you pay for with a Leupold.

CW

[CoffeeInMe]

I too will be doing most all hunting 100 yards and closer. You might be one of several that like the variable magnifications but I for one do not. Ive had them in the past and dont care for them. I have just about decided because of my simple hunting situations that if I cant see it with a fixed 4x or 6x then I dont need to try it. Unless you have to have variable I would consider fixed scope. Some people will give you situations where variables are advantageous and thats great for them and it might be for you as well I certainly cant answer that.  I currently have a Sightron 4x32 on its way to me and from what Ive read from several reviews is that it is just as good if not better than many of the top line scopes. I hope Im not disappointed and I hope you are not with your choice.
Good luck.

[eye shot]

 IMO the Monarch has better glass than the vx1 and even brighter than a vx11's that I've looked through. Haven't used a 3200.

[JimFromTN]

I second what eye shot says.  I have owned both a Monarch and a VXI and a VXI doesn't come close to a Monarch.  A VXII would be a better comparison.  If you want to compare a Monarch to a Bushnell Elite, you would need to put it up against a 4200.

If you were comparing Monarch vs VXII vs Elite 4200, it would be a very close call.  Of the 3 you listed, the Monarch is way ahead of the rest.

[Swampman]

Bushnell Banner 1.5-4.5X32

[Siskiyou]

 


Kc5rkg:  Speak of timing.  Your post caught my attention because I have a Marlin 336 in 30-30 Winchester that I have an itch to re-scope.  In 1968 the rifle was a K-Mart package gun with a 4x Tasco scope on it.  I replaced it with a 4X Banner what I had re-cycled from another rifle many years ago.  The rifle produces good 100-yard accuracy with the 4X scope.



A couple of years ago I was out hunting a close cover area for which the combination was idea.  But I broke out into a Pine plantation area with long shooting lanes.  My Nikon rangefinder indicated that I was looking at ranges from a 160-yards out to 200-yards plus.  I do not have fighter pilot vision and felt that while the 4x scope provides idea balance on the Marlin 336, a good field of view for quick shots, it does not provide the magnification  my eyes need for targets over 100-yards.

The next day I switched to a Remington 760 with a Burris 3x9 on it to hunt the same area.  During the hunt while in close cover I snapped the rifle to my shoulder and I had an excellent sight picture.  In low light, close cover and long range the Burris FFII 3x9 fits my needs on the M760. 

Recently I started thinking again about replacing the 4X Banner on the Marlin.  I pulled out an old Weaver V7(2.5x7) which has a profile close to the 4X Banner.  This scope was a pre-nitrogen filled technology scope.  The weather was rather nasty and I stuck the scope in a dry location in the woodpile outside.  After a couple of hours I brought the scope inside and took a look.  It was fogged. 

I like the 2x7 profile for the Marlin 336 and other rifles.  The rifle is not a GoTo or primary hunting rifle.  I want to install a 2x7 or 3x9 on the rifle.  Saturday I made a post New Year tour of some sporting good stores after pre-scouting scopes on the net.  One scope that I came close to buying was the Nikon Pro-Staff in 2x7, but passed.  The primary reason was that it is a shotgun/muzzleloader scope which has a factory parallax setting of 75-yards.

I think you are on the right course with the scopes that have small objective bells.  But I may go off course and ask other what their experience with scopes having a 40MM objective bell?  This requires higher mounts and may make the rifle awkward to use.  It would be interesting to hear the opinion of those who have actually used a scope with 40MM objective bell or larger on a Marlin 336.

A few scopes that I will be looking at my budget is a lower on the food chain.

New generation Weaver V7 Classic, (2.5x7x32MM)       $149.00
             V9 Classic, (2-10x38MM)         $165.00
 I have the V9 Classic on the rifle I took last years buck with in 15-degree weather.  I am happy with it and no fogging issues in 15° temperatures.

Bushnell Legend,  (2-7x32MM)                    $125.00
Burris FFII, (3-9x40MM)                       $200.00+-

My wife keeps talking about January White Sales, I will be looking for the January Scope Sales.  I will be checking a couple local shops because I know if I pickup a product from them with a problem they will exchange.

[Swampman]

It's nearly impossible to beat ebay for scope prices.

[cwlongshot]

IMO the Monarch has better glass than the vx1 and even brighter than a vx11's that I've looked through. Haven't used a 3200.

 I agree that the Monarch is likely better than the VXI. But mine isn't brighter than any of my VXII's. BUT the monarch I have is a 4-16 so compairing that much Glass to the likes of a 2x7 isn't really fair.

Swampy is right!!  You could pickup a VXII for about 200 or less and have a much better scope!!

CW

[dpe.ahoy]

I have a Weaver K2.5 on mine.  I like the straight tube on my lever guns instead of a large objective bell out front.  If your shots are under 100 yds, I don't see much reason for more magnification than 2.5 or 3 power.  Thats just my opinion of course.  DP

[Troyboy]

Burris timberline. Put one on my marlin 30-30. nice compact package

[Swampman]

Of the 3 choices listed the Bushnell 3200 would be the brightest and have the best optics.  I still say the Bushnell Banner 1.5-4.5X32 is the perfect scope for this gun.  The Nikon Prostaff 2-7X32 is also excellent.

[Graybeard]

The 2-7 power range is really an excellent choice for most any hunting rifle and when the longest shot is expected to be under 250 yards is for sure all one will ever need. A 3-9 is like wise versatile but if expected shots will be under 200 yards it's more than needed and for those really up close shots the FOV is more limited so I kinda like lower magnification scopes for woods hunting. Even the various 1.5-5 or 1.5-6 scopes are plenty for woods hunting and offer yet more FOV for those up close and/or running shots.

As to brands all three mentioned should be fine. Leupold makes good scopes you cannot take that from them. They are NOT the best tho but their warranty certainly is. That warranty is really what sells Leupold scopes not their quality. If that warranty were the same as everyone else's their market share would drop in half. I suspect it alone sells more Leupold scopes than any and all other factors about them.

[BBF]

 Fixed 2 1/2 or 3 is what I used. That was long before the LE  ammo came out.