Scope Question


March 27, 2009, 03:46 PM
I bought a Leapers UTG, Reticle Intensified, 4-16x50, 5th Generation Scope w/ Illuminated Reticle, 1/4 MOA, and Includes Lens Covers that I'm going to mate to my Savage Model 110 .243.

Anything I should know about before I put this bad boy on?

I included a link so you could get a picture of the scope. I'm also picking up a set of high mounts for it, and a set of medium mounts for another gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "Scope Question" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 27, 2009, 06:50 PM
I wish you luck. I have tried a few Leapers products over the years and found them to be lacking in quality and durability. I learned the hard way to spend more on the scope than I did on the rifle. My last one also came from CTD, an AR-15 carry handle mount scope with BDC. It would not hold zero while on the rifle, much less repeat when removed and reinstalled. If yours works out, let us know!

March 27, 2009, 09:11 PM
Will do, if it doesn't, I'm getting my 71 bucks back and using the old scope (a 3-9x40)

I wanted a variable magnification for my .22, as well as a beefier scope on my .243 for some time now, so I decided to give the .22 the Tasco Golden Antler 3-9x40, and then treating the .243 with something a little nicer. I'll give you guys a range report. It said in one of the reviews that the locking knobs needed to be tightened down with a hex-key wrench and that the ring screws needed to be set with blue loctite. I'm anxious to try it out.

I've had some pretty good luck with scopes, so we'll see where the Mistress takes me.

March 28, 2009, 04:29 PM
Okay thank you for making ME feel like a piece of trash. But let me enlighten YOU on a little something:

I work at a dead end job, with no chance of advancement, making little cash, and I won't have another job for a little while due to the economy.

I don't have the money you may think you have, and I don't have the know-how about all these scopes that you may think you do.

In my predicament, 71 bucks is a lot of money. I saved up for this scope because I think it'd look nice and work well on my rifle. If not, there's always a return policy.

I call it "Bad Boy" out of mere amusement, and if you think I'm serious, you need to learn a little bit about sarcasm.

I come to this forum for honest advice and to have a good time with fellow 2nd Amendment Rights supporters.
Not to be trashed on by a wannabe know-it-all who seems to think he's got all this expendable money that he can go and toss at a $300 dollar scope.

So excuse me for trying to find a cheaper alternative to $300 bucks, and excuse me for coming to The High Road for a question.

March 28, 2009, 05:27 PM
Hey LJ-Mosinfreak-Buck: You are not wasting my time. Don't let the optics snobs (or snobs of any kind) get to you. Some people apparently feel like their mission in life is to track down and disparage anyone whose views, tastes and opinions differ from their so enlightened, nose-bleed high stations in life.

Don't forget. You promised us a range report. :)

Ed Ames
March 28, 2009, 05:41 PM
Positive mention of any scope that costs less than $300 is a good way to get yourself flamed on the "high" road.

Doesn't mean buying and using such a scope is a bad choice, but it this is the internet... trash talking inexpensive alternatives is always safer than arguing the merits of something that lacks the price tag to prove "it must be good."

Only thing I'd suggest is that you read up on leveling scopes (assuming you are going to mount it up yourself) and be ready for some trial and error on that front. I have tried spirit levels and lasers and jigs and incantations and frankly the best results have always come after two or three false tries.

Also, with those high rings you may need to look for something to help your cheek weld... try it and if your head wobbles too much you may need to fashion/buy a cheek rest of some sort.

March 28, 2009, 05:48 PM
Agree with SwampWolf... don't let the "low roaders" get you down. We all have limited budgets... some more limited than others, but there's no shame no matter where you fall in that spectrum. I'm very interested in hearing a range report on your new scope, and hope it does a good job for you.

Ed has some good pointers... getting the most out of whatever we can afford is why we're here after all. ;)

Speaking of which - Ed - I typically level my scopes using spirit levels, and have never... to date... had occasion to doubt what they've indicated. Would love to have some elaboration on your "trial and error" comment. Especially if there's an incantation that can trump the spirit level method :)

March 28, 2009, 06:33 PM
Thanks guys. Indeed I did
promise a range report, and you'll get it as soon as I get a chance to go shoot.

I have a set of scope levelers somewhere around here, and I only need to level the scope, I already got the rifle leveled out with it's bi-pod.

Ed Ames
March 28, 2009, 06:45 PM
PA, I guess maybe I'm just not very good at leveling things but even all the bubbles between the lines and everything visually correct I had strange problems at the range that, after some research, I decided were cant error.

No incantation or spirit guide can hold a candle...can hold any number of candles... on going out and shooting. :D

March 28, 2009, 07:00 PM
I'm also picking up a set of high mounts for it,

Do you have a reason to want high mounts (bolt clearance, stock drop, etc.)? When mounting a scope I always try to get it as low as practical. I try to avoid craning my neck to get a good sight picture and, as Ed Ames noted, achieve a good cheek weld with the stock.

dagger dog
March 28, 2009, 07:03 PM
Optics snobery, is a low spot on this rather high road!

Buy and use what you can afford and learn with your mistakes.

There are plenty sub-100 dollar scopes out there mounted on all caliber rifles, that are being used daily with out any problems .

March 29, 2009, 12:56 PM
I have had poor experiences with these scopes (although I have never owner one personally), if it works for you great; but if not a good scope to try may be a Bushnell. They are reasonably priced and I have had pretty good experiences out of them. I adore a fixed 4x scope that I mounted to my Grandfather's Stevens M87D and it has been great. Other scopes that you may want to investigate (assuming your Leapers is not satisfactory) is a Tasco or fixed power Barska. Variable power Barska optics are alright but experience a slight POI shift when the magnification is dialed up/down. With any of the aforementioned scopes the lower power scopes seem to be of the best quality and are certainly brighter (but a 14x might be OK). Best of luck, Mav.

March 29, 2009, 12:57 PM
Optics snobery, is a low spot on this rather high road!
There are plenty sub-100 dollar scopes out there mounted on all caliber rifles, that are being used daily with out any problems .
Amen! :D

Float Pilot
March 29, 2009, 01:06 PM
While I pretty much only have Leupolds, I recently experimented with a low end scope.

I bought a $130 (Alaska Price) Pentax 6x scope and put it on my old 7x57mm Custom M-98 Mauser. Which is one of the most accurate rifles I own.

Oddly enough this new Pentax has great light gathering and is clear as can be. I have fired about 100 rounds using this scope and so far it has held perfect zero and focus.

March 29, 2009, 01:17 PM
I hope your Leapers scope works OK for you. I also have an aversion to paying excessive prices for optics when good value is to be had for less money. Don't let a scope snob spoil your day. While it's true that more expensive scopes offer advantages, MOST people aren't in a situation that requires what they offer.

Should your Leapers not satisfy you, consider this scope:

I have one and I'm more than satisfied with it. It's great value for the money.

March 29, 2009, 02:47 PM
I think Leapers should change their name. I get these odd imageries when the word comes to mind...:p

March 29, 2009, 04:01 PM
Well the reason I'm getting high mounts is because in the reviews, someone mentioned that it didn't clear his rifle without the high mounts, and I have fairly low mounts, so I figured to get the high ones and save me some trouble; and secondly, on the old scope, the bolt was rubbing away the finish, so I just decided to get higher mounts.

Like promised, I will do a range report, and I will also hand make a higher cheek rest if needed.

March 29, 2009, 04:28 PM
Let me say this...

I believe in good optics. I come to that belief honestly. I could have bought another Mark IV with the money I spent on cheap optics that had to be thrown away.

I won't disparage a person asking questions or advice.

However, I won't taut an optic to save anyone's feelings.

I put a Lepers 3-9x44 on my father's hunting rifle a while back. As I figure, the POS cost my father two missed deer and one wounded, but not recovered deer.

Most people want a tactical or optic with exposed knobs because they are "dialing in the dope" on an optic. If you aren't doing that, or doing "Kentucky holdoevers" you don't need exposed knobs.

Those optics that are getting the dope dialed in are measured by how repeatable they are and how well they return to zero.

Forget about repeatability of turrents or returning to zero on the one that I had.

We are talking about a guy (my father) who sights in and never touches the turrents again. He transports the firearm in a hard-side case and takes amazing care of his firearms. We are talking about a guy who has dozens of firearms that literally look brand new-- even after 30 years.

The damned Leapers scope could not hold a sight-in from ONE deer hunt to the next. In a two day period, it would lose its zero-- with NO SHOTS FIRED.

I'd hate to know what would have happened if he actually tried to dial in adjustments.

By the way... I do know about having to "seat" the adjustments on some cheap optics. I did that on the leapers.

I truly hope what I write about your optic doesn't bend you out of shape. I write from MY experience in being EXACTLY where you are.

I sympathize about your finances. There ARE material realities that cannot be overcome. No amount of wishing makes money appear in your pocket.

However, let me say this. I've got a Leupold Mark IV illuminated TMR recticle 3.5-9x40 on a $1.5K LR-308. I saved like a miser to get both.

And I am a Jr. High School teacher.

If people TRULY examined their spending habits, they would discover a LOT of things are possible by cutting out waste and non-essential spending. Listen to Dave Ramsey for a while and it will change your life. Start eliminating your debts and you will be SHOCKED at how much more money you have in your pocket. Credit Cards are the new slavery that has no concern over your race, religion, or creed.

As for the hate on sub $300 optics among the "optics snobs"...

I suppose I am one of those "snobs." As mentioned earlier, I come by it honestly. Don't even ASK me what I think about Simmons.

No... I don't hate on sub-$300 optics. There are plenty of good ones out there under $300. The optic that I taut OFTEN on THR costs $159 at Wal-Mart: Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40.

It is the best deal going in my opinion on cheaper optics. I really can't tell the difference in clarity or brightness between the 3 that I put on family members' rifles and my Leupold Mark IV. Obviously, my Mark IV has things it was designed to do that the Prostaff doesn't do. However, for a good, solid optic that will sight-in and stay that way as well as deliver a VERY bright, clear picture, it is the way to go.

And Bushnell overs some very good optics in their 3200 and 4200 series. Weaver has some good ones. Burris has good offerings.

Hell, I even have a Millet DMS-1 on my AR-- cost me $200 and I like it for what it is.

As I see it, there are PLENTY sub-$300 optics out there that will be fine on 95% of the rifles out there. These are the ones that are designed to set and forget.

You get into trouble when you try to get sub $300 tactical optics with exposed knobs. It is Economics 101. When you start to add more to an optic-- somewhere, something HAS to give in order to make the product a profitable item for the manufacturer.

This may be:

Lens coatings
Light Transmission

With the non-"dial-in" optics, I KNOW what was left out-- dialing in. With cheap tactical optics, I don't know what corner they decided to cut.

I usually find out when it breaks, misses easy shots, or I can't see a 1.5 acre deer food plot at 4:30 PM CST due to light transmission (exaggerating).

Do yourself a favor....

Either continue saving, or HONESTLY assess your needs in an optic and buy ONLY what you need until you can afford your "wants."

I did that and it took me til I was 37 years old to get what I wanted.

If you already bought the optic, next time do yourself a BIG favor...

Ask on,,, or BEFORE you buy your next one.

Before I settled on my optic, I had MANY conversations on here and with such experts as Zak Smith before I made a decision.

Good luck to you.

-- John

March 29, 2009, 04:41 PM
Thanks John, glad to see what your feelings are in a much more civilized way. There's logic and experience put into the words that MIL-DOT seems foreign to.

I will say though, I usually do have good luck with optics, and I have ghetto-rigged some to work when they broke, so I may be able to figure this out and make it work the way it should.
If I can't rig it up to work fine, I'll send it back and get my 71 dollars back. No big deal. You win some, and then you lose some; it's all about trial and error.

Grant it, I am a little rock-headed when it comes to things, and if this scope does turn out to be a golden performer, then I got myself a deal. If not, well, return policies are the way to go, and I'll put my old scope back on and look for a better option.

March 29, 2009, 04:51 PM
No problem, LJ-MosinFreak-Buck.

I WANT the optic to work out well for you. I have heard that Leapers is making some efforts to improve quality, so my experience may be proved to be out-dated.

But do remember this...

If it doesn't work out for you, you'll be hard pressed to find anyone saying anything bad about a Nikon Prostaff and it will likely do what you need it to do in a quality yet inexpensive package.

I've got two firearms that I have to get around to putting one on. After seeing Dad's Remmy 7400 with one hold up so well for the last two deer seasons, I am impressed.

A while back, SWFA had some dealer-demo ones on for $99.00 each. I check that site often and deals pop up.

Good luck!

-- John

March 29, 2009, 04:55 PM
I'll look around if this scope doesn't work. If it does, I'm not gonna look for anything better for a while.

Come to think of it, my buddy has this scope on one of his rifles, and it hasn't done too bad for him, so we'll see where my luck goes.

March 29, 2009, 05:06 PM
Also, the reviews on say that this scope isn't bad at all, and all but two loved the scope so, I think it'll be alright. Other websites have the scope at $150 so the low cost of the scope is purely CTD.

March 31, 2009, 10:46 PM
Got the scope today. That scope is HUUGE!!! It goes from behind the bolt all the way to bout a quarter way down the folded bipod (that's with the sunshade).

Feels nice, and everything seems to work fine on it, but I probably won't be able to sight it in until Thursday. Just wanted you guys to know that it came in the mail. and BTW, I didn't have to tweak anything to get it to work so I guess that's good news.

March 31, 2009, 11:32 PM
Sounds good Lj. :D

April 1, 2009, 10:24 AM
Just got her boresighted (tedious process that I always have difficulty doing) and She's gonna be set up for 200 yards for zero. I love the zero resetting knobs, and the fact that they're Zero locking too. I feel a lot better about sighting her in and having the scope stay that way.

I'll put a picture in so you guys can see what she looks like. Believe me, it's huge.

(Sorry bout the crummy cell-phone pics)

If you enjoyed reading about "Scope Question" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!