Author Topic: EYE RELIEF (Read 532 times)

ercjr2001 · « **on:** July 06, 2004, 09:23:02 AM »

I have a Sako 75 Hunter in 300 Rem Ultra Mag.
Which scope should I mount on it and why?
My Choices are.
Bushnell Elite 4200 2.5 - 10 X 50, Largest field of view. ( 3.3 eyerelief)
Ziess Conquest 3.5 - 10 X 50 ,2nd largest field of view ( 3.5 " )
Nikon Monarch Gold 30mm 2.5 - 10 X 56 ( 4.0 )
Kahles 3 - 12 X 56 ( 3.55 )
Saworvski 3 - 12 X 50 ( 3.1 )

How critical of eye relief do I need to be?
I also want the most bang for my buck.

Zachary · « **Reply #1 on:** July 06, 2004, 09:39:29 AM »

With such a hard kicker, you want the most eye relief you can get. I have an Elite 4200 4x-16x-50mm on my 7mm Ultra mag. It has I think 3.6" and has not cut me yet, but the 300 ultra would kick harder.

Ironically, there was an article some time ago and the author was using the Nikon Gold scope you are looking at with 4" of constant eye relief on top of the 300 Ultra mag. He loved the scope (and I do too as I own several monarchs).

All the scopes you mentioned are good scopes. The Elite 4200 2.5x-10x-40mm, of which I also own, has way too little eye relief for what you need. Same goes for the Swarovski.

I'd say go with at least the Elite 4200 4x-16x-40mm or 50mm AO. This is the most bang for your buck. Of course the Nikon Gold and Zeiss Conquests are also excellent scopes as well.

Zachary

TheOpticZone · « **Reply #2 on:** July 06, 2004, 12:30:17 PM »

If you are looking for a big objective scope, I really like the Nikon Monarch Gold. The only thing to consider is that it is a 30mm tube, which is going to add a little more weight. The Zeiss Conquest is a great scope also. Under your situation, it would be a toss up between the Gold and Conquest, but first I would consider what I needed, a 30mm or 1" tube. This will help make your decision.

ercjr2001 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 06, 2004, 12:59:59 PM »

Which do you feel is mechanically superior?
The Ziess or the Nikon Gold

Zachary · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2004, 01:37:19 PM »

They are both excellent scopes, but I think that perhaps the Zeiss Conquest might be a wee bit better mechanically, but it's really too close to call.

The one thing I especially like about the Zeiss is that it's cross hairs are etched, where as the Nikons, and most other scopes for that matter, are not.

Zachary