The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Gear and Accessories

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 6, 2010, 06:44 PM   #1
precision_shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 1,640
Nikon vs Redfield

I'm looking for a low power variable scope for my AR.

I got "Momma's" blessing to spend about $200 (I know, I wish it was more too).

So anyway, I was comparing the Nikon Prostaff 2-7x32 against the Redfield Revolution 2-7x32.

Both are $139.99 at Cabelas
Both have same Reticle
Both have about the same eye relief (not a big issue on .223 AR)
Both are about the same size and weight

The Redfield looked a little brighter and clearer than the Nikon. I must admit, I expected the exact opposite. I have heard that Leupold owns Redfield but don't know the truth or facts behind that.

In your opinion, which would you choose and why?
Does anyone have any actual experience with either scope?

Thanks,
P-S
__________________
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, 1776
precision_shooter is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 07:04 PM   #2
Abel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Posts: 1,161
Both are great and I've heard of two people picking up one of each, and each person saying that the other is brighter.

Flip a coin.
Abel is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 07:10 PM   #3
srkavanagh6621
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 188
I would go with the Nikon myself but I would get the 3-9x40 so you get a little more light in there and I personally think the 32 mm objectives look funny. Also check out manventureoutpost.com They have some great deals and you will be able to get a prostaff for quite a bit cheaper than that! They also have redfields if you decide to go with that! hope that helps and good luck.
srkavanagh6621 is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 07:35 PM   #4
precision_shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
I would go with the Nikon myself but I would get the 3-9x40
3-9 is more magnification than I want or need on a 16-inch barrelled AR.

2-7 is more than I want, but it's cheaper than a good 1.5-4 or 5x...
__________________
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, 1776
precision_shooter is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 07:48 PM   #5
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,949
I've got 1 of each. I can't tell any real difference in clarity. I think the Redfield may be an ounce or so lighter if that matters.
jmr40 is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 08:05 PM   #6
BusGunner007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2001
Location: Upper Left Coast
Posts: 2,061
...that would be a tough call.

I'm interested in which one you end up with and why.
__________________
"...if you're not havin' fun, you're workin'..."
BusGunner007 is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 08:24 PM   #7
Alden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 265
I have one of each as well. I have to say there is something about the Redfield I like better. It seems a bit brighter, but both give sharp images. I think the Redfield might have a bit wider FOV, but don't quote me on that.
Alden is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 08:55 PM   #8
700sage
Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2010
Location: Rio Rancho
Posts: 90
Redfield is indeed now owned by Luepold. They get the same coating on the lenses with one difference. The Redfield lenses are only coated on one side while the Luepold lenses are coated on both. That is the only real difference. Does it make any difference in clearity or light transmission? I haven't been able to see any even on my Redfield 6-18X40. Everything is so crisp in that scope that I won't go to another brand. For the price I don't think you can beat them. Nikon is, however, a good scope. I own several that I picked up on sale. I personally lean towards Redfield but make your own choice. If one looks clearer to you then go for it. After all, it's you who's going to have to do the shooting. Good luck and have fun!
700sage is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 09:00 PM   #9
fast-eddie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 10, 2009
Location: Tigard Or,
Posts: 342
It's a toss up I have the Nikon and like it a lot. I've shot the Redfield ands see little different.


Heres a couple better prices if you're interested.


Here's the Nikon for $117 w/ free shipping.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikon-ri...ff-2-7x32.html

Here's the Redfield, $129, ships free too.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/redfield...e-reticle.html
fast-eddie is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 09:11 PM   #10
Ozzieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 4,964
I recently asked a similar question and ended up with the Redfield. The two main reasons are 1. It’s built in America. 2. Built in America at the Leupold factory.
I have been very happy with my purchase and the scope on the Ruger 77/44 has performed flawlessly. Don’t try to compare Nikon scopes with Nikon cameras. They are not the same. My old Nikon cameras were built in Japan and are very high end optics. Nikon scopes are built in the Philippines. I have shot a gun with a Nikon and they are good scopes. But for me, when I can I buy American

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=426921
Ozzieman is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 10:38 PM   #11
RGPM1A
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2010
Posts: 133
I recently bought and returned a Nikon Prostaff 3x9x40 during a black friday sale. It would not hold zero and the parallax/focus was awful. I was very disappointed because I have other Nikon glass that works great.

BTW I got a Leopold instead. Put it on the same rifle with the same mount and rings and it holds POI fine.
RGPM1A is offline  
Old December 6, 2010, 11:03 PM   #12
Fusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2010
Posts: 388
You would be much much better off spending the $175 on one of the Vortex Viper 2-7x32's on clearance right now. They are the best deal going imo. They glass wise are very comparable with the Nikon Monarch and the Leupold VX-III's. They are so much better glass wise than a Redfield or Nikon Prostaff it's not funny. The other really good deal going right now is the Nikon Monarch UCC in 3-9x40 for $199 on sale at some places. Vortex will have better customer service if you ever have a warranty issue, but the Nikon is a great scope too.

Those two scopes are just amazing deals being on clearance and sale right now. If it wasn't for those two, I'd normally recommend you look at a Vortex Diamondback or Burris FFII, but those two are better and a similar price.

That being said, I have a Nikon Prostaff and a Burris FFII and a Leupold VX-I, and the Burris is by far the best of the 3 when it comes to glass quality. I like the Prostaff better than the VX-I, but it's not close to the FFII.

Here is a great thread to read that compares many of the sub $200 scopes.
http://opticstalk.com/inexpensive-sc...opic21176.html

This doesn't have the Vortex Viper or Nikon Monarch as they weren't on sale at the time, but they are a step above all of these.
Fusion is offline  
Old December 7, 2010, 01:38 PM   #13
Poodleshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2000
Location: Floating down the James River in VA
Posts: 2,539
I'd choose the Redfield over the Nikon. The Redfield is optically a little better, has better turrets than the Prostaff, and Leupold's warranty service is alleged to be a bit better than Nikons (though both are good).

That said, I agree with the poster above me, there are better choices well under the $200 price point. SWFA has the 2-7x Viper's for $170 in several choices of reticles. They have glass that is slightly better than Nikon Monarch's or Buckmaster and about on par with a Bushnell Elite 4200, have a reset to zero turret system that works very well (I prefer it to my Nikon Buckmaster turrets,which are also nice), a fast focus ocular ring, and they track very well. I've gotten perfect tracking with my Viper out to 300yds. I can dial in at 100yds, dial up to my 300yd setting,and then dial back down to my exact 100yd zero.
They also have a lifetime transferable warranty,just like Nikon and Leupold/Redfield.
Poodleshooter is offline  
Old December 7, 2010, 01:40 PM   #14
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,527
Quote:
The two main reasons are 1. It’s built in America. 2. Built in America at the Leupold factory.
This. Buy American when you can, if the product is similar in quality.
chris in va is offline  
Old December 7, 2010, 05:48 PM   #15
Poodleshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2000
Location: Floating down the James River in VA
Posts: 2,539
Quote:
This. Buy American when you can, if the product is similar in quality.
Google "Leupold" and "Made in the USA". Read some of the answers, or simply ask Leupold. They use foreign components (namely glass) in the manufacture of their scopes. Leupold is "assembled" in Beaverton, OR from mostly US parts,but not all.
Foreign glass is not necessarily a bad thing. It has been a fact of life since at least the 60s in cameras and other optics.
Poodleshooter is offline  
Old December 7, 2010, 09:37 PM   #16
TriumphGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 5, 2009
Posts: 559
Quote:
The two main reasons are 1. It’s built in America. 2. Built in America at the Leupold factory.
Amen to that. It's harder and harder to do.
TriumphGuy is offline  
Old December 7, 2010, 10:27 PM   #17
srkavanagh6621
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 188
I love when people are all gungho about American made products when there not exactly American made. If you look Nikon and Leupold (redfield) get their glass form the same place! the middle east. Its a finer sand which makes for better glass! but say what you want either scope will serve you purposes!
srkavanagh6621 is offline  
Old December 8, 2010, 06:03 PM   #18
precision_shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: DFW, Texas
Posts: 1,640
Thanks for all the help and suggestions. I've been wanting to try a Vortex scope for a while now, and they have been getting good reviews. So I ordered the Vortex Viper 2-7x32 today from SWFA. Should have it by Friday since they are only a couple hours from where I live...

Thanks again guys and i'll post a review once I get it and have a chance to mount it and put some rounds down range...
__________________
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, 1776
precision_shooter is offline  
Old December 8, 2010, 06:48 PM   #19
Ozzieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 4,964
I love when people are all gungho about American made products when there not exactly American made.

Ok just what is the percentage of each scope made in America?
Redfield,,, 80%
Nikon,,,,, 0%
Yes I am gungho about America, and American made products.
If you don’t like it go live in another country, but there are a lot of people out of a jobs and anything we can do to maintain the work force in America with the dollars that we spend to me is a good thing and is promoting America.
I do understand that in this political climate that may not a good thing to a lot of people but,,,
I am going to say a bad word here so be ready for it.
"GOD" bless America.
Ozzieman is offline  
Old December 9, 2010, 01:44 AM   #20
Chinny33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 244
redfield crazy

I kinda went redfield crazy.

I purchased my first redfield about 6 months ago and it was the 2x-7x. It is super awesome clear. i was so super surprised at the quality in comparison to my nikons and leupolds.

I then went and bought two 3x-9x and a 4x-12x. one of my 3x-9x was a lemon so im sending it back in.

the 2x-7x is the best of the breed when it comes to clarity and visual acuteness you get through the scope. It has nothing to do with the 'lower' power. my 4x-12x is clearer than my 3x-9x, for some reason. same 40mm objective too. still the 2x-7x is my favorite!
__________________
PLAN PLAN PLAN
A prudent man forsees evil and hides himself; the simple pass on and are punished
Proverbs 27:12
Chinny33 is offline  
Old December 9, 2010, 02:25 PM   #21
thinkingman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 27, 2008
Location: western WA
Posts: 691
See the post above.
Too many Leupold/Redfield products make the trip back to the mothership for me to buy one.
I'd seriously consider the Vortex mentioned above.
The Nikons I own are Monarchs
thinkingman is offline  
Old December 9, 2010, 07:28 PM   #22
warbirdlover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2009
Location: central Wisconsin
Posts: 2,324
For $159 this will blow both of those away and it has a lighted recticle for dark conditions.

http://www.muelleroptics.com/products/MU2732IGR

Or $139 if you shop around.

http://swfa.com/Mueller-2-7x32-Multi...ope-P9131.aspx
warbirdlover is offline  
Old December 9, 2010, 07:34 PM   #23
Alden
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 265
I've heard Mueller scopes are really nice.

That being said, I bought two Redfield optical products this past year, a 2-7x scope and a 20-60x spotter and love both.

The spotter was $200 and it's very clear and crisp, even at the highest magnification.
Alden is offline  
Old December 9, 2010, 10:09 PM   #24
TX Hunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2010
Location: East Texas USA
Posts: 1,776
I would get the redfield leupold is trying hard to make a good impression with them, they are good scopes.
TX Hunter is offline  
Old December 10, 2010, 06:51 AM   #25
Lloyd Smale
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2005
Posts: 822
Ive got both. The redfield definately has better glass and is a much better scope in low light but the mushy ajustments suck the nikon has better ajustments.
Lloyd Smale is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12927 seconds with 7 queries