Author Topic: Elite 4200 or Conquest (Read 1652 times)

goose7856 · « **on:** May 29, 2005, 02:29:08 PM »

Which would you get and why?

Ive narrowed it down to the Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16x40 (plex) and the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44 (z-plex or mildot).

They are both in the same price range. The Bushnell has the raingaurd, but idk how much that should sway my decision. The Zeiss has a known reputation for brillant glass....

Thanx alot!!

muzzleblast525 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 29, 2005, 04:17:13 PM »

I've owned both, and got rid of the 4200. Glass is a lot better on the Zies....

longwinters · « **Reply #2 on:** May 30, 2005, 05:18:33 AM »

I also have owned both and would go with the Conquest any day. I have never had need of the rainguard feature, not to say it would not be beneficial in some cases. I think the Conquest has much better clarity.

Long

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 30, 2005, 09:16:51 AM »

Seeings how you did not list a Leupold, I chose the Conquest. It is a lot better in my opinion.

bigdaddytacp · « **Reply #4 on:** May 30, 2005, 10:22:39 AM »

Quote from: goose7856

Which would you get and why?

Ive narrowed it down to the Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16x40 (plex) and the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44 (z-plex or mildot).

They are both in the same price range. The Bushnell has the raingaurd, but idk how much that should sway my decision. The Zeiss has a known reputation for brillant glass....

Thanx alot!!

..........The Zeiss has the side focus/parallax feature that is nice and I like the simple Z plex reticle for my use.....not knocking the 4200....they are good scopes.....just tried the Zeiss on reccomendation of a friend and it is one of the few non Leupold scopes I own and would buy again.......enjoy..good luck and good shooting!!

goose7856 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 30, 2005, 12:14:47 PM »

wow, just did a price check.....didnt realize the zeiss was about $300 more than the Bushnell.....i guess which scope I get will depend on how much money I make this summer.......hopefully $1200, so if I get the zeiss that leaves $600 for a gun, if I get the Bushnell that leaves near $900 for a gun :lol: .....not sure how much a Browning Abolt Medallion would put me in the hole, but that seems to be what Im leaning towards.

victorcharlie · « **Reply #6 on:** May 30, 2005, 12:41:00 PM »

That's what I was thinking....you'ld almost get 2 elite 4200's for the price of the conquest...........the euro is really strong against the dollar right now........this is not the time to buy european made goods.......wait six months or a year and see if the prices fall when and if the dollar is stronger.......

I'd rather have 2 Bushnell elite 4200's than one conquest.....Just MHO......

goose7856 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 30, 2005, 06:35:37 PM »

victorcharlie......thats kind of the way im looking at it.....but that ill have more money to spend of the gun. If I choose to go with the Weatherby Vangaurd Sporter Stainless steel version then ill have plenty for w/e scope I choose, but if I go for the Browning Abolt Medallion Ill be on stricter budget.

Does anyone know the actual specs. for the Zeiss Conquest Light Transmission? All I have ever seen is "marketedly above 90%", but that is basically every good scope over the $250 range. The Bushnell 4200 is 95%, im just trying to compare.

TIA

victorcharlie · « **Reply #8 on:** May 31, 2005, 04:02:53 AM »

Goose.....no matter which rifle you choose, the Bushnell elite 4200 is a very good scope.......I bought one from Jon several months ago.......I really like Leupolds, but the Bushnell, right now, has more "value" for the money...........

As for Zeiss.........go to yahoo finance and look at the trend over the last year and a half on the dollar versus the euro...........then you'll have a better idea why the zeiss is so much more expensive..........the situation in China is reversed, and the Chinese Remenbe is way under valued......making the chinese stuff very cheap in the US.........

So much for the lesson in Global economics.....

Your a young fellow with no wife......hunting and shooting is a lot easier for you now but this will probably change over the next several years........you want that nice rifle? Now might be the time, as life changes....obligations, commitments....etc.......

victorcharlie · « **Reply #9 on:** June 01, 2005, 05:59:54 AM »

Goose......looks like your ziess might be getting cheaper........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/01/AR2005060100745_pf.html

This won't affect the price for stuff that's already been bought by the importers, but you might see a better price in 6 months to a year.......

However, looks like american made goods are going to be more expensive in Europe.........

Zachary · « **Reply #10 on:** June 02, 2005, 03:09:51 AM »

I own several Elite 4200s and a Zeiss Conquest 3x-9x-40mm.

Optics on the Conquest are a little bit better than the Elite 4200, but not noticeably.

The Elite 4200s are generally the heaviest and longest scopes on the market.

The Elite 4200s generally have the shortest eye relief on the market.

The Elite 4200 has rainguard - which works and that I have found usefull.

The Elite 4200 is noticeably less expensive than the Conquest.

Look at the specific specifications of each scope and apply it to the gun and catridge that you will be shooting and using for your hunt.

Zachary

Buckfever · « **Reply #11 on:** June 02, 2005, 05:59:29 AM »

I tell myself when I buy a gun or scope the following. Is the extra scope image quality make a difference in a hunting situation or is it just prettier?
Same thing for my gun is sub-MOA required or is 1"-1 1/2 " groups enough? I have a Tikka T3 and and Whitetail Hunters, Bushnell, and Grand Slam Weaver. I have never been faced with a hunting situation that these guns and scopes haven't handled.

So is it neccesary or is it style points and bragging rights. I ask myself this before all major purchases. I would rather have the extra money to go on hunting trips than look at my guns. Buckfever

Zachary · « **Reply #12 on:** June 02, 2005, 08:42:13 AM »

Quote from: Buckfever

I would rather have the extra money to go on hunting trips than look at my guns. Buckfever

AMEN BROTHER!

Grubbs · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2005, 11:12:44 AM »

My favorite setup is a Tikka Whitetail in 7mag with a Swaro A-line scope. Mine is not about ego, it's about confidence. It will print 1/2" groups all day long and I can see past dusk.

kenjs1 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 03, 2005, 04:31:14 AM »

Buckfever makes sense - the 4200 is all the scope you could ever need. I would love a Conquest but have tested enough scopes to know I am MORE than covered for legal hunting hours and beyond at half the price. Let me ask you question: Would you rather have the Zeiss or rather have the Elite AND a MOA guarantee? $1200 might not be enough for a Medallion and the Zeiss so why not get the Elite and get the Medallion with the B.O.S.S. on it - not the muzzle brake but the CR. You end up with a gorgeous new Browning, certain of shooting moa (or damn close to it), still using what can only be described as excellent optics. Sounds pretty sweet to me.

JoeBru · « **Reply #15 on:** June 06, 2005, 10:36:45 PM »

Sounds like the smart move would be to buy the Browning and Zeiss combination, if that means saving for a bit longer so be it.
I've gone the less expensive option on occasions and regretted it.
You don't mention the calibre of the rifle and the intended use.
Is short eye relief going to be a problem?

goose7856 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 07, 2005, 06:12:10 AM »

I havent completely decided the caliber, but wither a 257 Weatherby, 25 WSSM, or a 25-06......im probably leaning towards the 25-06 so I dont think the short eye relief on the Bushnell would be a problem. The Zeiss has a 4'in eye relief so that wont be a problem at all....

TIA

Zachary · « **Reply #17 on:** June 09, 2005, 01:30:43 AM »

The .257 Weatherby ammo is the fastest, but also the most expensive and hardest to find.

The .257 WSSM for me is an an anamoly. It has the same ballistics as the .25-06, yet its ammo selection is much lower than the .25-06, and also harder to find than the .25-06.

Between the three - I would say the .25-06. I have one in a Tikka Laminated Stainless and it's an awesome, accurate rifle. I use Federal Premium 117 grain sierra boat-tails and get under 1 MOA.

Zachary

vernonp · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2005, 02:32:14 PM »

I think the two scopes are even opticaly. The 4200 is better in FOV, power range of the two scopes, rainguard and price. The Conquest is better in eye relief and etched reticle. They are two of the best, you will have a great scope either way. Regards-vernonp

kyhunter308 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 24, 2005, 05:22:53 PM »

elite 4200 price 499.99 conquest 439.99 im midwayusa...were did everyones price come from...mine is the 30mm

moontroll · « **Reply #20 on:** June 25, 2005, 07:55:24 AM »

This Is what I think,I own a Zess conquest 3.5-10x44,and a bushnell 3200 4-12x40 The conquest will definatly out perform the 3200 after the sun sets,but on the same rifle the 3200 will definatly out perform the conquest on poi at different power settings,you chose.I also own a Leupold vx111 3.5-10x40 and it will out perform the 3200 in poi and come close to the conquest in low light abilities.the best all around scope IN my opinion is the vx111 then the elite,poi is critical to me.

Zachary · « **Reply #21 on:** June 25, 2005, 03:29:02 PM »

Quote from: kyhunter308

elite 4200 price 499.99 conquest 439.99 im midwayusa...were did everyones price come from...mine is the 30mm

Something is not right. Magnification and lens objectives the same, the Zeiss Conquests are more consistently more expensive. An Elite 4200 2.5x-10x-40mm costs around $350 (in fact, the optic zone sells it for $334). However, a comparable Conquest 3x-9x-40mm is over $400.

Zachary

kyhunter308 · « **Reply #22 on:** June 26, 2005, 04:54:04 AM »

i guess i ment to say the 4200 2.5x10x50 (30mm) iiluminated dot,
is what cost $499.99,and the 3x9x40 conqueat was $439.00...has anyone compared the 30mm tube 4200 to the zeiss conquest,cause my leuplod vii,and sightrons sll were not even as the same class??and the 4200 has fully multi coated glass and 4x magnifaction than 3x which is what the 3200 has and multi coated glass and 1inch tube..there is quite a diff in the 2.. :wink:

Buckskin · « **Reply #23 on:** July 06, 2005, 05:21:04 AM »

All of your prices seem sketchy to me. I bought a 4200 in 4-14x50 and paid about $400. And I was looking at a similar scope in the Conquest. They weren't even close in pricing. I think the 4200 is the best glass for the money. Similar eye relief and brightness to my Leo VX-III in 4.5-14x50. The only thing I wish Bushnell would do is make a fine duplex in the 4200s.

And Moontroll, you can't logically compare the 3200s to the Conquest, different class altogether.

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #24 on:** July 06, 2005, 01:54:14 PM »

I have both and to be honest, I prefer the Elite 4200. The Zeiss just seems much bulkier and heavier (though not much heavier). Hunting season up here doesn't require ringing out the last few minutes of light, though. I think the Zeiss is probably a little more clear, but not enough to inhibit shots to 400+ yards.

Eye relief on both are fine on rifles chambered up to 375 H&H class guns.

The Elite can be mounted using low rings without interfering with the bolt throw on 90* bolt lift guns, though that isn't an issue with the Browning rifles.

Both are really good scopes, but I prefer the Elite vs. the Conquest. I prefer the Leupold VX-3's over both.

UtahMike · « **Reply #25 on:** July 12, 2005, 09:34:44 AM »

I just posted in Varmint Hunting regarding an Elite 4200 in 8x32, maybe I should have put it in the Optics section.

http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=67205

Thanks, Mike

Poll

4200 or Conquest

Author Topic: Elite 4200 or Conquest (Read 1652 times)