Cheap scopes and mounts, who has them?


PDA






SIGfiend
September 20, 2005, 10:24 AM
Hi guys, I'm trying to find some high-end $100-$150 scopes. Can you please list names of sites that sell quality names like Leapers for below market prices. Of course I want it to be for a brand new product. Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Cheap scopes and mounts, who has them?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Lennyjoe
September 20, 2005, 10:28 AM
http://www.clearviewinvest.com/search_results.asp?txtsearchParamTxt=&txtsearchParamCat=4&txtsearchParamType=ALL&txtsearchParamMan=ALL&txtsearchParamVen=ALL&txtFromSearch=fromSearch&iLevel=1
Clearview investments sells leaper scopes.

rbernie
September 20, 2005, 11:06 AM
sell quality names like Leapers Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron? :confused: IMO, if you want a decent $150 scope, buy a used Nikon/Burris/Sightron on eBay or AuctionArms.

waterhouse
September 20, 2005, 12:21 PM
I'm with rbernie on this one. Almost every scope I own is a leupold or Sightron, both great companies, and they were all bought used on ebay or through exchange boards of forums like this one. A lot of time you can get what was a retail $230 sightron for $140 used, and they work just as well as the new ones.

So my suggestions for a good website would be ebay.

USSR
September 20, 2005, 12:29 PM
You have been given some good advice. There are no "high-end $100-$150 scopes". Buy a used scope if you cannot afford new. You get what you pay for in optics.

Don

SIGfiend
September 21, 2005, 02:30 AM
http://www.clearviewinvest.com/detail.asp?product_id=030-729

Lenny, is that a Leapers scope in the above link? They don't say what brand it is...

Cindog
September 21, 2005, 12:47 PM
If you must go cheap, then go Swift (http://www.eabco.com/Swift01.htm). Just be sure you stick to one of their Premiere grade scopes. A little more but still less than Leupold, Sightron, etc. is a Mueller (http://www.muelleroptics.com/).

Soap
September 21, 2005, 02:19 PM
+1 to what USSR said.

Essex County
September 21, 2005, 02:54 PM
I have a couple of "default" scopes that I go to for project guns (it seems I always have going on). For a fixed Weaver's K series is hard to beat. I just mounted a K-6 this morning. To kick it up a little, in a variable I think the Bushnell 3200's are great. Anytime I've gone cheaper I've had regrets........... Essex

MachIVshooter
September 21, 2005, 05:07 PM
There are no "high-end $100-$150 scopes". Buy a used scope if you cannot afford new. You get what you pay for in optics.

+1

There are, however, some "good" scopes in the $150-$200 range, such as the Nikon Prostaff or Buckmaster 3-9x. The Simmons ATV and Aetec also fall into this category. I have a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x on a Ruger .280 and a Simmons ATV 4.5-14x on my G-3. For a little more, you can get a Leupold Vx-II 3-9x (~$250). Decent Burris and Weaver scopes become available over $250. I have a Remington 700 LVSF .17 Rem. with a Weaver Classic V16 4-16x 42mm fine reticle 1/8 MOA dot (the fine reticle is not a good choice for big game hunting, though).

IMO, a variable 3-9x, 3.5-10x, 4-12x, 4.5-14x or 4-16x with an objective lens between 36 and 42mm and a duplex crosshair is best for hunting. Anything that starts at higher than 4.5x magnification really limits your field of view. And you should never need more than 16x on any antelope, deer or elk at a reasonble distance. Objective lenses under 36mm make low-light shots more difficult. 30mm tubes and 50mm objectives offer great light gathering, but require mounting much higher above boreline, thus creating more confusing and radical trajectory/line of sight.

There is a reason that 1" tubed, 32-40mm 3-9x scopes have been the standard for the last half-century.

greg531mi
September 21, 2005, 06:04 PM
Since Bushnell bought Tasco, the Tasco line has improved. I bought the World Class 3x9x40, was surprised what I got for $29.95....It made the Simmons, Barsaka's, Leapers, and other under $100 scopes l looked through, look like junk, compared to the World Class. It seems they improved it, and I think, it is a good value. The older ones were junk, but the new W.C. are clearer and brighter than anything else in the price range. Don't get the pronghorn, or low priced Bushnells.
The best thing to do, is to go to the sporting goods store, and look through them and compare, that is what I did....,

ajax
September 21, 2005, 08:38 PM
Go nikon best bang for the buck in that price range because there is nothin good about leapers.

kirkcdl
September 21, 2005, 08:45 PM
My guess is that what you want is the top models of a lower priced brand of scopes.Try www.cdnninvestments.com

You might also check out www.kalinkaoptics.com Russian optice are the best value on the market,US dollars go a long way in Russia these days.Good Luck...

gulogulo1970
September 21, 2005, 10:15 PM
I have a couple of Simmons 2.9X10X44mm Aetecs on my 300 Weatherby and a 308 Savage 99 and could not be more impressed with their ability to hold zero shot after shot, year after year.

Great value for the money. They haven't given me a reason not to like them.

Geno
September 21, 2005, 10:26 PM
When I used to hunt the open MI bean fields with my .30 Wea, I used Leupold 3.5-10 and 4.5-14. Then, I switched to a Wea. Mark V in .270 Win and limited my shots to 300 yards or less. For that, a simple Tasco 4X was awesome. I never had to rezero. I know...extreme choice, but so was the distance varience extreme.

Now, I hunt with pistol only...my next and final point...do NOT overlook the T/C scopes...they are strong, take a beating and do not lose zero. Finally, they are right for your price range. T/C does make both pistol and rifle scopes, I think in the following powers: 1X; 4X and 3X-9X, both standard and illuminated.

http://www.tcarms.com/

Doc2005

rbernie
September 21, 2005, 11:48 PM
My Simmons AETEC was just plain crap for repeatability. It'd not LOSE zero so much as it wouldn't adjust to the same place if you needed to switch zero betwen different loads.

IThunter
September 22, 2005, 10:10 AM
i am also a firm believer in you get what you pay for when it comes to scopes...my bushnell sportsviews is dark and gray when compaired to my new Nikon Buckmaster...and the only reason i have the bushnell is because it was on the rifle when i bought it.

MAUSER88
September 22, 2005, 10:41 AM
Maybe a little more than you want to spend, but the Bushnell 3200 Elite is a real nice scope at just under $200.00 Cheaper Than Dirt had them in stock and for a good price.

rockstar.esq
September 22, 2005, 11:00 AM
Unlike the otheres here, I won't flog you for not foregoing your meals for a month in order to have the Uber tacticool future vision scope. However I do belive that once you experience the cream of the crop, the humble offerings are much less stimulating. Clarity and adjustability are the two most obvious differences one will likely notice. That said. I for one absolutely hate this trend where every hunting rifle must be equipped with adjustable turrets capable of allowing you to "shoot the square" ad nauseum. The price points on scopes with rangefinding functions are abnoxiously high. It seems that in order to make a shot one must have the hottest magnum chambering with a high power scope that get's "dialed in" only after laser rangefinding down to the nanometer! If you have the personal restraint and patience to establish a zero with your rifle and a given load. I believe you can hit just as well without bankruptcy. If you think about it, there are more quality optics in your mid range cameras and their prices are often well below that of scopes who have fewer moving parts. I know that a camera doesn't have to tolerate recoil but all things considered, the quality of reticles hasn't improved nearly as much as the lens quality has. Seems to me that somewhere along the line, shooters bought into the notion that you simply must meet or exceed the cost of a rifle in order to obtain worthy optics. Precision is not the same as consistency. Everyone can shoot a one hole group with only one shot. Who cares if the "click" isn't perfectly 1/4" at 100. Most shooters can't shoot that difference offhand, many rifles couldn't do that with the rifle in a vice! I say buy what seems reasonable to you. Don't assume that an imprecise mechanism can't be relied upon for repeatability. AK's are a great example of this concept.

rbernie
September 22, 2005, 12:52 PM
Unlike the otheres here, I won't flog you for not foregoing your meals for a month in order to have the Uber tacticool future vision scope. How does our suggesting that it's better to drop $125 on a used Buckmaster or $150 on a used Monarch instead of dropping $100 on a pimped-out Leapers get you to this statement?

The Jackal
September 22, 2005, 04:29 PM
Nikon and Weaver. No contest. My grandfather had a 25yr old Weaver 4x that held it's zero until one to many bangs in the back of the truck threw the front lens outa whack.

Nikon makes a decent 3-9 for about $150 and a 2-7 for about $130.

Dr.Rob
September 22, 2005, 04:56 PM
Tasco used to be a great value... leaps and bounds better than Simmons etc. I've never broken a Tasco though I've had a Weaver and Redfield fail.

You CAN get by with an inexpensive scope, you should NOT skimp on your mounts.

rockstar.esq
September 22, 2005, 04:56 PM
rbernie
"How does our suggesting that it's better to drop $125 on a used Buckmaster or $150 on a used Monarch instead of dropping $100 on a pimped-out Leapers get you to this statement?"

SIGfiend (Thread starter)
"Of course I want it to be for a brand new product."

Man wanted a new scope, and he wanted to know about getting one.
Personally, I live over a week on $25.00 - $30.00 worth of food. Your suggestion would cost at least that and it still wouldn't be what he asked for. More to the point, the constant yammering about "you get what you pay for" is what I was responding to. I don't mind buying used equipment, in fact milsurp is the way to go in my book. SIGfiend stated that isn't what he was looking for.

rbernie
September 22, 2005, 06:50 PM
But you failed to address the truly perjorative component of your quote - "the Uber tacticool future vision" part. I'm still waiting to hear how a Buckmaster conforms to that description. :rolleyes:

Hawkmoon
September 22, 2005, 11:13 PM
www.sportsmansguide.com

Sunray
September 23, 2005, 02:06 AM
"...high-end $100-$150 scopes..." There's no such thing. You can have a scope for that money, but not a high end one.

antarti
September 23, 2005, 02:25 PM
You CAN get an excellent scope at the high end of your price range, either:

1) Used
2) Opting for a 1.5-5, 1x-4x, or a 2-7 by 20 or 30-something (28, 32, 36, etc)
3) Opting for a fixed power (4x or 6x) scope

I would go #2 or #3. Reasons:

1) Magnification over 5x or 6x is a pure and total waste IMO, especially on sub $400 scopes
2) The smaller objective still gives great light in these smaller magnifications, often equal to that in larger objective sizes
3) Smaller objective means scope sits lower to bore, and easier cheek weld
4) You can get much better glass for less money
5) Fixed or smaller scopes are usually lighter
6) You get the warrantee
7) You are going to buy one of the better brands sooner or later anyway, when the Leapers breaks or stops holding zero.

Weaver, Burris, Nikon, and Bushnell 3200 series have all been mentioned, and are all outstanding choices. The ubiquitous 3x9x40 may be most popular, but it isn't the entire game (or even the best choice for 90% of those out there) either.

TimboKhan
September 24, 2005, 02:12 PM
Well, personally, I believe alot of the time you pay for what you don't need when it comes to scopes. Look, is it wise to spend 25 bucks on a no name scope and then expect it to work? No, but you needn't spend a ridiculous amount either. You can go to Wal-Mart and get perfectly servicable Simmons scopes for under the 150.00 mark, and for alot of applications, they will be ideal, especially if you are just looking for a target/light hunting scope. If I were going to go on a once in a lifetime trip for Kodiak bears, or Big Horn Sheep, or Bongo, or Lion or something like that, you can bet the farm that I am gonna spend the money (or, ideally, find a super good deal used) on a really, really good scope, because I am paying for reliability and ruggedness as much, if not more, than I am paying for the optics. For popping tin cans, paper and squirrels, I personally think its dumb to spend more than 150.00, and to take that logic further, I think its dumb to even spend that much when you can find good used scopes for even cheaper. Matter of fact, I will even go so far as to say that if your patient and not under any sort of time crunch, its possible to find some really outstanding optics on the pawnshop/ebay/garage sale circuit for unbelievable prices. My dad bought a shepard scope at a pawnshop for under a hundred bucks (I can't remember now exactly what he paid for it, but it might have even been for under 50 bucks) simply because they didn't know what they had.

If you enjoyed reading about "Cheap scopes and mounts, who has them?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!