Barska Scopes


June 28, 2011, 03:17 AM
Do any of you fellas use any Barska Scopes .I am considering putting one on my NEF Handi-Rifle Barska's Euro 30mm 2.5x10x56mm . I had been to Barska's website Barska Riflescopes carry a limited Lifetime Warranty . If any of you have a Barska let me know how it has preformed for you good or bad

If you enjoyed reading about "Barska Scopes" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
June 28, 2011, 12:53 PM
I've got a Barska red dot that's been very reliable. No data on the scopes though.

June 28, 2011, 01:04 PM
i cant say about their rifle scopes, but i have a Barska spotting complaints.

everything seems very solid and well built, good clarity and good eye relief.....

its not the best stuff out there, but for the price, it works great

June 28, 2011, 03:33 PM
I am going to buy the Barska i can get it while its on Optic Planet for $79.00 Reg Price is $139.99 It has a lifetime warranty & it built for heavy recoil of the big guns .I sure can't pay $500-800 for those high dollar scopes if i could i wouldn't . I friend of mine bought a Nikon Marnarch at our local gun shop &he paid $539.99 for it & he hates its because my Bsa is as clear as his & i only paid $ 129.00 I tried to tell him but no he wouldn't listen he had me to take it off of the rifle & now its just sitting in the box & he wont even try & sell it can't figure him out lol

June 28, 2011, 09:37 PM
you get what you pay for...especially in optics....barska = junk.,!!

June 28, 2011, 09:50 PM
you get what you pay for...especially in optics....barska = junk.,!!

now is this statement from personal experience.....or is it based on information you got from a friend of a friend?

June 28, 2011, 09:56 PM
I aint ever spent money on one, but I have been around them, I saw a package deal with a .308 bolt actiion and a barska on it, scope looked good, looking thru it was another story. I just save my money and get quality optics like Leupold witha a real guarantee not a "limited" guarantee. they just arent made to stand up to recoil good. at 57 years of age I been around a lot. Tasco is better than Barska...and that aint sayng much.

El Mariachi
June 28, 2011, 10:09 PM
I got a Barska Huntmaster 3x9-40 shipped to my house for less than $34.00 a couple of months ago. Bought it off E-bay from the Barska site themselves, where they sell leftovers and what not. Customer service is excellent, the scope is very nice (on the Marlin 925M bolt action at least) and their headquarters are less than 30 miles from my house. Plus, they even answer the phone when you call.......

June 28, 2011, 10:14 PM
Good Evening,

I have a Barska spotting scope. It does the job for which I bought it. I can view my paper targets at 100 yards and see how I'm shooting. I didn't spend too much and can see downrange. That's the good news.

The bad news is that eye relief on mine is terrible. I have to take my glasses off and jam my face into the eyepiece. Also the optical clarity isn't very good. One day at the range another shooter had a better scope (Bushnell I believe). I looked through my scope and then through his. The difference was incredible and I don't think Bushnell is at the top of the optical heap.

I won't be buying more Barska products. I'll be looking around for something better next time I need optics.

I recommend looking at several brands and deciding for yourself if spending more money is going to be worth it for you.

Good luck whether you choose to pat yourself on the back for saving money or if you decide to spend more to get more.


El Mariachi
June 28, 2011, 10:42 PM
Any one here (besides me) know why you can't buy $262,000.00 Ferraris for twenty thousand bucks?.....

June 28, 2011, 10:56 PM
Any one here (besides me) know why you can't buy $262,000.00 Ferraris for twenty thousand bucks?.....

Anyone here understand why $262,000.00 Ferraris are not owned by the common car owner?

I've never owned a Barska scope, but have always heard how bad they were from those that never owned one or seemed to require more bragging rights than cash in the pocket. I do own a number of BSA scopes mounted on both rimfire and centerfire rifles, all of the perform very well and on my target rifles do the job extreamly well. Mayhap my standards aren't high enough, but then 5 shot groups that measure .265 to .250 at 100 yds with a .223 is fair shooting.

June 29, 2011, 12:32 AM
In my mind, durability and reliability are paramount when it comes to optics. I'll settle for a cheapo scope on a plinker, but NOTHING is worse than being left high and dry by a bad scope on a hunt. Optical quality comes in a distant second to the peace of mind you get from knowing that bullet is going where the crosshairs are under any condition. "Shockproof, Fogproof, etc" are just generic terms that mean nothing unless the manufacturer's reputation backs up the claim. Barska doesn't have that reputation.

Jeff F
June 29, 2011, 01:07 AM
you get what you pay for...especially in optics....barska = junk.,!!

When it comes to optics I have to agree with this statement.

Tasco is better than Barska...and that aint sayng much.

I also agree with this, but I have to say the Tasco of old, the ones made in Japan were very good and of high quality for the money spent.

You pay for quality, clear optics are going to cost, repeatability in the adjustments are going to cost, durability is going to cost, Replacing that POC Barska is going to cost.

All I can say is buy once cry once. Save a little longer and buy a better scope.

June 29, 2011, 01:16 AM
Only ever owned one. I don't recall the model. Mounted it correctly on a Swiss K-31. First shot and the lense cracked.

You get what you paid for. You may get a decent one, you may not as I did. If you don't want to spend the money on quality glass that's your decision.

Hope it works out and you enjoy it.

June 29, 2011, 01:41 AM
Got one on my .22 "tacticool" plinker, my .308, and my AR-15. I'm not shooting dimes at 100yds, I'm shooting torso sized silhouettes with the AR-15, +/-2" groups with the .308, and empty shotgun shells with the .22.

I'm just shooting for fun at the range, and all of the Barska scopes I own do that just fine.

June 29, 2011, 08:11 AM
I have one mounted on my Savage M65 .22 magnum(3x9x40 Ridgeline). Cost $110 plus shipping(from California to Alabama) so far it has done everything I bought it to do. It is clear,holds zero and the Mossy-Oak camo looks great.

W L Johnson
June 29, 2011, 08:54 AM
Been using one of their 1.5x4.5 x20 scopes on one of my ARs for some time now. It's been rock solid and clear. Don't know about the rest of their line but this one's a keeper.

June 29, 2011, 10:37 PM
The Barska scope i am going to use is The Euro 4A Reticle 3x12x56mm & it has the 30mm tube as well its fro the heavier recoiling rifles like my 500 Magnum when i use the T Rex Thumpers i have its a 700 Grain cast monster &.The Handi Rifle should preform well scope & all if the scope doesn't ill send it back I like Barska I can't afford the High dollar scopes costing many of hundreds of dollars I also like BSA well too

June 29, 2011, 11:54 PM
I guess it depends on what type of performance you want?
I am not sure about the NEF handi rifle but even many low end rifles can do very good accuracy but will never know the accuracy potential w/o a decent scope.
Barska fall into the entry level. Some are happy but some report they fall apart. Do not expect anything for serious use. It is made in china.
Consider a 2-7 or 3-9 Redfield, japanese glass. owned by leupold. unexpensive but in an entire different league.
Proudly made in the USA.

Buck Kramer
June 30, 2011, 08:25 AM
I have never had a Barska scope but I did put one on my 11-87. The ejector broke long before the red dot did...

June 30, 2011, 08:47 AM
I have never had a Barska scope but I did put one on my 11-87. Some how this doesn't add up :=0

June 30, 2011, 08:50 AM
Opinion only but based on what I've purchased through many years, scopes today are a varied product many made in same factory with different brands and quality control is hit and miss at best. I've owned Simmons,redfield,Leupold,Burris,Nikon, Bushnell and Mueller.

Last couple years I've used a Mueller's that were more clear then my Nikon Monarch so you simply can't base everything on price, now can I say the Nikon or Mueller will compare 10 years down the road can't of course but for now the Mueller is the one I prefer of the two.

I believe anything under $500 is a gamble but if they have a lifetime warranty and its what you can afford as long as it does the job pay no attention to critics.

June 30, 2011, 05:49 PM
Put a Barska tactical on a built 1903A4, 30.06. Went out of focus after about 10 shots and never came back.
If you get one, get it from Midway, no questions asked return policy.

June 30, 2011, 06:00 PM
I wouldn't spend my money on it personally. I've had one a while ago, took it back to Cabelas about a week after I bought it. Looked through most all of them at Cabela's. None are worth the money in my opinion. I'd rather toss on a Nikon Prostaff of minimal magnification rather than a Barska with big options. Vortex diamondback or viper would be another good option. Weaver makes a few close to your budget. The Burris fullfield is decent. If you can find the Bushnell 3200 they are good as well. The Leupold line is a bit expensive for what you get. You do get an amazing warranty though. Still, I'm not a big fan of the rifleman or VX-I line. VX-2 or better would be fine. Sightron makes a SI and even better SII line. All of these are a huge optical step up and reliable step up over most anything China made today. For the price difference, I'd rather save a bit for one of those than buy anything less. After having been let down with most everything China made, I've decided to move up on price and quality, though still am on the budget side in most cases.

June 30, 2011, 06:37 PM
here is some good real world unbiased opinion advice. go to midway usa, and optics planet. read the reviews of people who actually spent their hard earned dollar on the scope you are looking at. usually, if there are problems with it, you can find out there the easy, inexpensive way. not all of us can afford $700.00 - $2500.00 for a rifle scope. and in my humble opinion, we should not have to spend that much to get a decent scope. at <$300.00, i would not expect to be able to read the print of the newspaper that the flea is reading on the elks front shoulder, but personally, i do not need to. i need to be able to put a bullet where the lines of the scope cross, and be able to tell the front of the animal from the back. it would also be nice if the scope held up to repeated shots from magnum cartridges as well. bells, whistles, and self correcting do-dads not needed.

June 30, 2011, 06:47 PM
I've used their scopes, spotting scopes, and binoculars and honestly don't think much of them. My Son's bought those optics some time ago and after having used noting but Leupold for the last 30 years or so, I wold never buy Barska. Eye relief is terrible, as is clarity and just about every other important feature needed in an optic. Leupold doesn't fog, is gas pressureized, permanent coatings, have threaded objective for filters, available reticle options, 6" of eye relief, 100% water proof to 1000' under water, precise MOA adjustments, what can I say, I'm a Leupold only glass guy. A Leupold 3x9x40 can be had for about $200 and it will knock your socks off. Leupold customer service is unmatched. They have never charged me a cent, even when it was my fault I ran over my binoculars they replaced them at no charge, not even shipping. Just about every year my Son's or I will loose eye cups on the binoculars and they always get new to me at no charge, and in a new York minute, along with a Leupold ball cap.

June 30, 2011, 07:22 PM
Eye relief is terrible, as is clarity and just about every other important feature needed in an optic.I haven't noticed any of this with my Barska and I have several Leupolds and Nikons to compare with.

June 30, 2011, 07:41 PM
Hey fellas thanks for all of the imput it really has helped me out alot

June 30, 2011, 10:18 PM
Do not track the feedback on optics planet or any other site on the low end scopes. Many folks they put the feedback after they shoot one time, occasional shooters, not much idea about ballistics, accuracy, etc...

These are some good options on affordable side with decent glass:
- Redfield- Japanese glass made in the USA owned by Leupold.
- Vortex - Japanese glass, don't go for the cheapest
- Burris timberline/Fulfield - japan glass - very decent quality for the price.
- Nikon Monarch or even Buckmaster or Prostaff above any barska at any price range.

November 14, 2012, 07:22 PM
I have a Barska AC10032 - 3-9x40 Huntmaster Scope mounted on Saiga AK47.
The eyepiece fell off right after I zeroed the scope... wasted $ to bore sight it, then shot like 300 rounds to get it zeroed....
now guess what ........the eyepiece fell off inside the scope and blocked the view...
Shockproof huh?

The warranty is $10 to get a new scope sent to you in about 2 weeks... Not sure I want another Barska product tho....

EDIT: I called again today and customer service told me a different story....$20 for inspection, I have to pay for shipping, will not ship new scope until they receive the broken one... And if the scope is not purchased on their website, there is a surcharge to upgrade the scope...
And proof of purchase required, even if the scope has lifetime warranty...
What the heck? Are they just screwing with me .....? I don't want anything more from this company... Don't waste your time and money.

November 14, 2012, 07:42 PM
No, I can't say from personal experience that they are junk, but I can say that they've long had a reputation among firearm enthusiasts to be of poor quality, and I'm confident this is accurate. When there are so many decent quality, budget-oriented scopes out there these days, why would you screw around and ask for problems and sub-par performance?
You don't have to spend a thousand+ dollars to get a worthwhile scope,but neither are you getting a decent one for $39.95. With optcs, you HAVE to spend enough to get a minimum quality level, or you're better off not getting anything at all.
1stmarine just posted a list of decent options,also take a look at Bushnell's Elite series.

November 14, 2012, 08:53 PM
All scopes are good at noon on a sunny day. The test comes at dusk in December.

November 14, 2012, 10:46 PM
I had a Nikon Monarch 1.5x4.5 scope on my Ruger No.1 .45-70, and decided to mount that scope on another rifle. I took the Barska Contour 4x - 32mm objective scope off my SKS and put it on my No.1.

Optically it really ain't bad. The Barska is quite a compact scope and I like the way it looks on this rifle. It held up well on my SKS, I wonder if it will hold up to the recoil of 500gr bullets at a muzzle velocity of around 1600 fps? :confused: :D

November 15, 2012, 12:11 AM
I own two exiles, and a friend owns two nikons, in the same sizes, and i can tell you right now that. am,fine with my barskas, most of the storey of them being junk comes from people that have never touched one or are lousy shots to begin,with

Doc Savage
November 15, 2012, 01:30 AM
While I haven't used their rifle scopes (and probably never will) I do own a pair of their binoculars. I researched them for awhile, and when a set I was interested went on sale to where I figured what the heck, I picked them up. I'm not a big beliver in the concept of anything that doesn't cost an arm and a leg are junk. I've had good luck with many "lesser" branded items. Barska just wasn't one of those products.

The Binoculars are a pair of 10-60X zoom 50mm objectives. The 10x setting isn't bad. Clarity gets real bad at about 20x and at 60 you really only get an image that isn't distorted at the very center of the lens (about 20% of the FOV is clear). I have a real issue with the focus between the two tubes. Even using the diopter adjustment, you can't get identical clarity in both eyes. Given my experience with this item, I'd hesitate to ever purchase another of their products.

November 15, 2012, 09:02 AM
I have a Barska 4 ~ 16x 50mm tactical scope with first focal plane.
The top of their line.
It will not hold a zero, like the rounds go off the the side and up. Barska demands that the original purchase receipt accompany the scope for warranty repair, which I no longer have. So I have a $205.00 piece of junk with no recourse.
Buy good scopes, don't waste your hard earned $ on cheap ones.


November 15, 2012, 09:27 AM
We use barska ridgelines for our guns that get knocked around in the mule and on the 4 wheeler a lot. the optics aren't the best but they hold zero like a freakin champ! Make sure you get one with the accu lock feature. Like the ridgeline. They work well. I don't know about the ones without it but I wouldn't want to take that chance myself.

November 15, 2012, 09:36 AM
I have one Barska that a friend took off a combo and had laying around. Free is always good even if it is bad, right?
I put it on an older Rem 742 30-06 and sighted it in with 8-9 shots. We shot it this past weekend and the zero was still good after 2 years in the safe. Nothing has broken, shattered or otherwise been defective through maybe 20 rounds. Eye relief is okay as is clarity. Do I prefer this over my Leupolds? No, but "it is what it is" applies. If you have $400 then buy a better scope. If not then buy what you can afford.

November 15, 2012, 09:48 AM
some of those barskas get out of the factory in working order...
it's a crap-shoot

November 15, 2012, 03:55 PM
Those who have commented and that have used Barska or any other bargan priced optic may not recognize the difference in a quality pieceof glass. I know I didn't until I actually usd a good optic.

I mean if you are willing to spend $79 on something that is poorly costructed for use on a high recoil firearm, you'll very likely have regrets in the form of a black eye, stitches, and a mild concussion. My Wife and I both learned the hard way and stopped using inexpensive junk glass in the early 1980's or so. Now we both wear scars that were 100% the result of junk glass. If you have to get that close to a scope to get full imaging, then it is junk, period. Although this is what initially pushed me over to Leupold years ago, I have come to understand the many advantages to be had from quality glass.

Consider spending an additional $150 for a real scope. Did you know that many bargan price optics don't even use glass lenses? Even the $200 3x9x40 Leupold is good glass and will stand up to anything you put it on. And Leupold has a no qustions asked poicy when it come to repair or service. I send my stuff in for inspection and allignment from time to time, and they never charge a penny, not even for shipping. They just rebuilt 2 pairs of glasses this year for me at no charge. One pair was over 30 yrs. old and the other 20 yrs. old. What does that say for quality and service standards, a lot!

Buy what you will, but remember this, you only get what you pay for.

November 15, 2012, 04:35 PM
Old thread but I will add my 2 cents.

I bought a 20-60X Barska spotting scope. It came in a nice box with a little tripod and carrying strap all $100.00

At lower magnification it is fine, you can see 30 caliber holes at 100 yards. At 500 yards I compared against my Pentax 20-60X.

The image is slightly green in the Barska at lower magnifications. Zooming up you see a green circle centered in your field of view. Things inside the green circle you can make out, images outside the green circle are blurry.

At 500 yards I could see color differences between pasters and the target with the Barska. With the Pentax I could see white edges of the pasters and I could tell the pasters were squares, and I could see the color differences.

A better spotting scope for the money is my $100 Ultima 65 18X-55X Celestron. This scope did not come with a neat box, tripod or carrying strap, or even eyelense protectors. It is however optically clear at all magnifications and clear and bright to the edges.

November 15, 2012, 06:33 PM
I've got one, the 6-24x 60mm IRAO model (AC10700). It's on my AR-50, because I couldn't afford a Nightforce after paying for the rifle. Plan was to run it for awhile until I could afford a better scope, but 7 years later, it still works just fine. Now, I'm not shooting competetively or anything, but I really have no complaints about the Barska.

Of course, this is one of thier most expensive flagship scopes, so judging brand quality based on it may be like saying all Bushnell scopes are great if you've only ever used an Elite 4200.........

November 16, 2012, 02:17 AM
A friend of mine bought a small Barska scope, I'm not sure of the model or anything and put it on his Kel-Tec Sub2000 and I liked it so much I bought one with a red laser for my Sub2000. So far, it's been great. My friend has had no problems with his either after a couple of years use. It's got a couple of scratches on the body, but it's working perfectly. I plan on trying one when I finally get my AR.

November 16, 2012, 05:38 AM
Considering the clarity and overall quality of Redfield scopes, I see absolutely no reason to take a chance on a scope that "might or might not" work when you can have an optic from a company with a great reputation, excellent support, and a lifetime warranty for just slightly more. You can *GAMBLE* on a Barska if you want to.....or you can *Invest* in a Redfield..... the choice, for me, is easy enough to make

November 16, 2012, 10:34 AM
Considering the clarity and overall quality of Redfield scopes, I see absolutely no reason to take a chance on a scope that "might or might not" work when you can have an optic from a company with a great reputation, excellent support, and a lifetime warranty for just slightly more. You can *GAMBLE* on a Barska if you want to.....or you can *Invest* in a Redfield..... the choice, for me, is easy enough to make
I too recommend the OP take a look at the Redfield Revolution line. I don't have a lot of scopes compared to many here -- a 1980s Leupold, a 1970s Bushnell, a 2011 Redfield Revolution 3-9x40, a 1970s Colt AR-15 scope, and about 3 other misc. no-name scopes that I didn't actually purchase (and rarely use). To my eye, the Redfield Revolution is clear and crisp (both the image and the reticle) and pretty bright. I REALLY like it in use in the field. I've checked out a lot of scopes recently (gun shops, Gander, friend/family members' scopes, etc.) and to my eye, the Revolution series compares very favorably to scopes costing significantly more that the Revolution's street retail price. If you are able to combine a sale and a rebate, you can get an even better deal.

November 17, 2012, 06:45 AM
I have a couple Barskas on my springer air rifles. Those things will usually destroy a scope due to the reverse recoil. The Barskas are holding up very well. That's all I can tell you from personal experience.

November 17, 2012, 07:21 AM
i bought a barska plinker 22 scope not too long ago, i was wondering if anyone has one and what the verdict would be?

November 17, 2012, 07:24 AM
The Barska that came as a package deal on my new Mossberg ATR, chambered in .308 winchester seems to be fine. I zeroed it with 3 shots. Confirmed zero with 17 more. I took a black bear 4 days ago at dusk. It currently has only 21 rounds through it, so I can't talk to longevity, but I have absolutely no complaints with this scope.

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