How can the best scopes cost more than the rifles they're put on?
- Thread starter mbpautz762
- Start date
- Status
The design and quality, they will outlast 5 of those cheap scopes and the warranty allows you to send it in and get it fixed or a new one...
People will argue the glass is very similiar on a clear day which can be true... but in harsh conditions the more expensive glass is better!
The biggest part though of more expensive scopes IMO is the quality of the turrets and their repeatability. Go crank a cheap scopes turrets around and around and then back around and back around, then set it where your zero was. See if its still on zero. Do this many times as if your out long range shooting or something and volia, your turret don't work...
Cheap scopes work fine for the "normal deer hunter"
Expensive scopes are the only way to go if you want to do high volume longer range shooting.
I do think though, that there comes a point where you almost double the cost of the scope for a few extra features. I like to think that the best bang for your buck are.. Leupold VX III, Bushnell's 4200, and Nikon Monarch.
To get a better scope almost costs double of the ones mentioned.
People will argue the glass is very similiar on a clear day which can be true... but in harsh conditions the more expensive glass is better!
The biggest part though of more expensive scopes IMO is the quality of the turrets and their repeatability. Go crank a cheap scopes turrets around and around and then back around and back around, then set it where your zero was. See if its still on zero. Do this many times as if your out long range shooting or something and volia, your turret don't work...
Cheap scopes work fine for the "normal deer hunter"
Expensive scopes are the only way to go if you want to do high volume longer range shooting.
I do think though, that there comes a point where you almost double the cost of the scope for a few extra features. I like to think that the best bang for your buck are.. Leupold VX III, Bushnell's 4200, and Nikon Monarch.
To get a better scope almost costs double of the ones mentioned.
mbpautz762
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 131
that all makes sense. I really liked the camera analogy since I'm a bit of a photography buff too. most people don't realize that if you're taking a picture in good lighting with good contrast (ideal conditions), a cheap $200 point and shoot camera will look every bit as good as a $1500 digital SLR camera 
. it's when conditions differ from ideal where the SLR really shows what it can do better. sounds a lot like what's going on with expensive scopes!
. it's when conditions differ from ideal where the SLR really shows what it can do better. sounds a lot like what's going on with expensive scopes!woof
Member
lipadj46, It doesn't surprise me at all. But it does annoy me when newbies come in here and ask about scopes and get told they should be spending twice as much for a scope as the rifle and if they don't they must be rank amateurs who don't care about quality. If someone wants to engage in conspicuous consumption of scopes it's fine with me, but I think people who ask should be told the truth - that unless they are in a fraction of one percent of scope buyers, pretty much anything over $300 is overkill and they can do very well for $100.
Personally my best scope is a Bushnell 4200 3-9x40 that I paid $250 for. It is a great scope and I always recommend it or the Nikon Team Primos for someone who wants a good budget scope that they will never need to upgrade. At the same time I would love to buy a nice Schmidt & Bender. Maybe after I send my daughter off to college.
rangerruck
Member
also , we need to think more on the precision. Do you think the low end tasco, bushies,leapers, muellers nc star, BSA, etc., are making glass, in airtight rooms, cleanliness to a operating room, with dudes wearing surgical clothes and masks?
nope, you don't think that at all. But the peeps who make glass for zeiss or schmidt and Bender, are the same peeps who make glass for the hubble scope, and other super hi speed / hi technical applications, and the precision , cleanliness, perfection to the edges, curvature, etc., that is required, goes well beyond the normal, for what is done, and we have only talked about the glass so far. You have to pay, all those people, who make hi salaries, just to get that good piece of glass.
nope, you don't think that at all. But the peeps who make glass for zeiss or schmidt and Bender, are the same peeps who make glass for the hubble scope, and other super hi speed / hi technical applications, and the precision , cleanliness, perfection to the edges, curvature, etc., that is required, goes well beyond the normal, for what is done, and we have only talked about the glass so far. You have to pay, all those people, who make hi salaries, just to get that good piece of glass.
browningguy
Member
It's all about the level of polishing and the coatings, that is where the money is. I use a lot of midrange scopes because I can see the difference. Nikon Buckmasters, Elite 3200's, FFII's, a couple of Weaver Grand Slams and Classic Extremes. That's about as good as my eyes are. Witht he high end scopes the clarity may be a bit better, color correction a little better, resolution a little better, but you need good eyes to use the difference between midrange and top shelf.
mr.trooper
Member
i guess ill take the middle ground.
i used to use Walmart scopes and i thought hey were just fine. They did everything i needed to do. But after buying a decent scope, now i know the difference.
Its a rainy overcast day today. I'm looking out the window with a Tasco and a Millet. Both have the same features and nearly the same specs. The Tasco was $50, and the millet $250. With the millet i can see the rain drops as they fall, and make out individual stalks of prairie grass in the adjacent field. Thats never going to happen with the Walmart Tasco scope.
You do get what you pay for, but only to an extent. having looked through 1,000+ Zales and S&B scopes, yes there is a bit of a difference between them and a Nikon. They are clearer and the adjustments are better. BUT the gap in fairly small, and its nothing compared to the difference in wally world glass and a good middle range scope like a Millet or a Nikon. There are diminishing returns.
Most scopes under $200 will need to be replaced every few years; not worth the money. Most scopes in the $200-500 range will need to be replaced once or maybe twice in the life of your average shooter; a good buy for most us. The high end scopes will outlast you if you are anything less than a high volume competitive shooter; very spendy, but if you can afford it or save for it, then why not?
i used to use Walmart scopes and i thought hey were just fine. They did everything i needed to do. But after buying a decent scope, now i know the difference.
Its a rainy overcast day today. I'm looking out the window with a Tasco and a Millet. Both have the same features and nearly the same specs. The Tasco was $50, and the millet $250. With the millet i can see the rain drops as they fall, and make out individual stalks of prairie grass in the adjacent field. Thats never going to happen with the Walmart Tasco scope.
You do get what you pay for, but only to an extent. having looked through 1,000+ Zales and S&B scopes, yes there is a bit of a difference between them and a Nikon. They are clearer and the adjustments are better. BUT the gap in fairly small, and its nothing compared to the difference in wally world glass and a good middle range scope like a Millet or a Nikon. There are diminishing returns.
Most scopes under $200 will need to be replaced every few years; not worth the money. Most scopes in the $200-500 range will need to be replaced once or maybe twice in the life of your average shooter; a good buy for most us. The high end scopes will outlast you if you are anything less than a high volume competitive shooter; very spendy, but if you can afford it or save for it, then why not?
woof
Member
Most of the money is in the last 1% of value added. That's what the law of diminishing returns is all about. As the price goes up you pay more and more for smaller and smaller degrees of improvement, and often even those are imaginary.
MAX100
Member
There is big difference between a $150 Tasco and a $800 Sightron SIII. There is very little difference between a $800 Sightron and $1500 NF scope.
It all depends on what you plan to use the scope for and how much are willing to pay. I am willing to pay $800 for a nice Sightron scope that will track precise and will continue do so with very heavy use, nice target turrets with sharp audible clicks, ultra clear glass, precise mildot reticle, more total moa elevation & windage adjustment for long range shooting and excellent customer service. To me this is well worth $800. I have spent at least that much on cheap optics that have failed. When I am done with it I can sale it and get most of my money back.
GC
It all depends on what you plan to use the scope for and how much are willing to pay. I am willing to pay $800 for a nice Sightron scope that will track precise and will continue do so with very heavy use, nice target turrets with sharp audible clicks, ultra clear glass, precise mildot reticle, more total moa elevation & windage adjustment for long range shooting and excellent customer service. To me this is well worth $800. I have spent at least that much on cheap optics that have failed. When I am done with it I can sale it and get most of my money back.
GC
woof
Member
Each buyer decides where his point of diminishing return is. That is, at what price does he think those dollars were worth it but more would not be? For Max100 it is $800 because he apparently spent or would have spent that but no more. Someone else might conclude that there is a big difference between $50 and $200, but not between $200 and $300. Then they buy the $200 scope and are happy. Look, if all these cheap scopes were total junk and failed constantly they wouldn't be selling. They are perfect for amny people, like 99% of all scope buyers. I have a friend who is a carpenter and he spends a lot on hammers because he is in the 1%. But if I spent that on a hammer and acted all proud of it, he would be laughing at me behind my back because I'm not a carpenter.
The $1000 scopes are nicer to look through. Anyone who has the extra cash would be a candidate.
If you are going on a $10,000 hunting trip, and it's not that big of a deal to you financially, why wouldn't you want to look through a Swarovski? I sure as hell would. Ever look through one?
I mean, does anyone need a Porsche? If you have the cash, though, and you like them, why not?
Why should anyone have to justify their purchase, if they're not taking food from their kids' mouths or anything?
Furthermore, modern production rifles are pretty accurate. After the $1000 mark, you're probably paying more for aesthetics than group size in a hunting rifle. There's nothing wrong with that, but when you pay upwards of $1000 for a scope, you are still paying for performance, not polish and figure.
If you are going on a $10,000 hunting trip, and it's not that big of a deal to you financially, why wouldn't you want to look through a Swarovski? I sure as hell would. Ever look through one?
I mean, does anyone need a Porsche? If you have the cash, though, and you like them, why not?
Why should anyone have to justify their purchase, if they're not taking food from their kids' mouths or anything?
Furthermore, modern production rifles are pretty accurate. After the $1000 mark, you're probably paying more for aesthetics than group size in a hunting rifle. There's nothing wrong with that, but when you pay upwards of $1000 for a scope, you are still paying for performance, not polish and figure.
redneck2
Member
I had what I thought was a decent scope on my Knight. Simmons 44 Mag 3x9. I had been after a particular buck for five years. Finally saw him on our property, 320 yards off. Cold, rainy drizzly day. Bought this combo specifically for this situation.
I pull up my scope to take a look. Scope is fogged solid. Next week the neighbor kills him. 14 points, 28" outside spread. At that point, I would have gladly paid full list for a Swarovski.
I worked at a gun shop. Maybe 3 or 4 out of 10 Tasco, Swift, BSA would come back. Maybe 1 in 50-100 Leupold. Never saw a Burris come back. We would have fools that would spends thousands on an elk hunt, then put a $79 dollar scope on their rifle.
There are three places a good scope really shines over a cheapie. Crank the power up on a cheapie and it starts to darken and fuzz up, particularly higher power models. As noted several times, repeatability of settings. Clarity at dusk and dawn. Also, cheap scopes tend to lose zero.
One easy test is to turn the power up and down. If it turns easily, the scope is not tight and WILL fog up.
I pull up my scope to take a look. Scope is fogged solid. Next week the neighbor kills him. 14 points, 28" outside spread. At that point, I would have gladly paid full list for a Swarovski.
I worked at a gun shop. Maybe 3 or 4 out of 10 Tasco, Swift, BSA would come back. Maybe 1 in 50-100 Leupold. Never saw a Burris come back. We would have fools that would spends thousands on an elk hunt, then put a $79 dollar scope on their rifle.
There are three places a good scope really shines over a cheapie. Crank the power up on a cheapie and it starts to darken and fuzz up, particularly higher power models. As noted several times, repeatability of settings. Clarity at dusk and dawn. Also, cheap scopes tend to lose zero.
One easy test is to turn the power up and down. If it turns easily, the scope is not tight and WILL fog up.
redneck2
Member
I had what I thought was a decent scope on my Knight. Simmons 44 Mag 3x9. I had been after a particular buck for five years. Finally saw him on our property, 320 yards off. Cold, rainy drizzly day. Bought this combo specifically for this situation.
I pull up my scope to take a look. Scope is fogged solid. Next week the neighbor kills him. 14 points, 28" outside spread.
I worked at a gun shop. Maybe 3 or 4 out of 10 Tasco, Swift, BSA would come back. Maybe 1 in 50-100 Leupold. Never saw a Burris come back.
There are three places a good scope really shines over a cheapie. Crank the power up on a cheapie and it starts to darken and fuzz up. As noted several times, repeatability of settings. Clarity at dusk and dawn.
One easy test is to turn the power up and down. If it turns easily, the scope is not tight and WILL fog up.
So, buy a $1,500 Cooper rifle and you won't feel so bad about spending $500 on a scope. Solves your problem.
I pull up my scope to take a look. Scope is fogged solid. Next week the neighbor kills him. 14 points, 28" outside spread.
I worked at a gun shop. Maybe 3 or 4 out of 10 Tasco, Swift, BSA would come back. Maybe 1 in 50-100 Leupold. Never saw a Burris come back.
There are three places a good scope really shines over a cheapie. Crank the power up on a cheapie and it starts to darken and fuzz up. As noted several times, repeatability of settings. Clarity at dusk and dawn.
One easy test is to turn the power up and down. If it turns easily, the scope is not tight and WILL fog up.
So, buy a $1,500 Cooper rifle and you won't feel so bad about spending $500 on a scope. Solves your problem.
A nice scope with a high price tag isn't any different than any other high-quality product with high price tag. A hyundai will get you to work in the morning and so will a BMW.
If you still have to ask yourself "why?" with regards to quality and the corresponding price, then I'm not sure that anyone can really sell you on it.
Before I worked as a race mechanic, I thought that Craftsman tools were just fine. Then I started using other, more pricey brands, and found out that there is a reason for the extra cost.
If you still have to ask yourself "why?" with regards to quality and the corresponding price, then I'm not sure that anyone can really sell you on it.
Before I worked as a race mechanic, I thought that Craftsman tools were just fine. Then I started using other, more pricey brands, and found out that there is a reason for the extra cost.
This is definately a case of diminishing returns. I own a couple of scopes over $1000 dollars and I can tell you they offer little more than most $500 scopes. And don't believe for a minute the myth that the more expensive scopes track better or are more durable. That hasn't been my experience. Also remember the exchange rate on imported European glass means you're paying for more than you're getting. IMO anything over about $600 is not necessary to 99% of shooters. When you consider weight, size, durability, warranty it's pretty tough to beat a VX3. Yes the European scopes have slightly better optics but that ain't everything. Look at some custom gunshop websites that build the big kickers and see what they recommend if you want to know about durability. Most of them use Leupold products. I knew when I bought my Zeiss' it was because I wanted great glass. Not because I had any dilusions it was better in every category than a $600 VX3.
i don't think class envy has much to do with scope selection. budget, yes. crapping on people who have more or less $, not so much.
until fairly recently, the differences were mostly features (FFP, reticle and turrets in same units, 1-2 turn turrets, zero stop, reliable illuminated reticle, etc) and to a lesser extent, glass quality. just my opinion, but it seems like a lot of middle-tier players are offering many of those features now. so the delta is more and more about quality parts and assembly (and customer service, etc). still, good luck finding all those features on the same $300 scope.
until fairly recently, the differences were mostly features (FFP, reticle and turrets in same units, 1-2 turn turrets, zero stop, reliable illuminated reticle, etc) and to a lesser extent, glass quality. just my opinion, but it seems like a lot of middle-tier players are offering many of those features now. so the delta is more and more about quality parts and assembly (and customer service, etc). still, good luck finding all those features on the same $300 scope.
Woof, what are you calling cheap scopes? Are you talking tasco, bsa, barska, other china made scopes or are you talking budget line Japan made scopes? Personally there is a huge difference in quality from China built scopes to bottom end Japan built scopes. The picture is worlds different, the turrets are much nicer in every way and the overall construction is in a different class with Japan made scopes. I love a bargain as much as anyone but I really can't say much China made is worth the shipping it costs to get repaired, let alone the $100+ some of them run. I have yet to have one that was repeatable, optically clear, or lasted more than a season of use with maybe one exception. If you are arguing these scopes do everything even a bottom end Japan made scope does I think you are naive and haven't used both. If you are saying for the average shooter/hunter a budget Japan made scope will do everything one costing much more will do I would agree. With the track record I have with scopes, China doesn't compete with Japan in any category for even the most basic of hunters. I have one Mueller that is trying to go against that reputation but I have yet to put it on a hunting rifle as I just don't trust it. In the percentages game I think in general China made scopes are at best 20% of what a scope could be, bargain Japan scopes start pushing 85-90% and then from there things go up exponentially. I do think that a $200 Japan built scope is more than twice a $100 China built scope of equal features.
JohnBT
Member
"pretty much anything over $300 is overkill"
Clearly an incorrect statement, unless all you want to do is shoot one or two shots a day in good light. I won't try to change your mind, but you are wrong.
"So, buy a $1,500 Cooper rifle and you won't feel so bad about spending $500 on a scope."
Ha, when I finally spent $1600 on a new Model 57 Custom Classic .22 (current MSRP=$2395) I already had the scope. Good scopes last, sometimes for generations. Just like binocs.
A lot of folks think a cheapish pair of binocs are all they need - until they try an excellent pair and find they can stare through them for hours at a time with no eye strain. Do you know what I say the most at a Redskins' game? "Losers" Oops, no it's "Can I have my Nikons back now? Use the ones hanging around your neck."
John
Clearly an incorrect statement, unless all you want to do is shoot one or two shots a day in good light. I won't try to change your mind, but you are wrong.
"So, buy a $1,500 Cooper rifle and you won't feel so bad about spending $500 on a scope."
Ha, when I finally spent $1600 on a new Model 57 Custom Classic .22 (current MSRP=$2395) I already had the scope. Good scopes last, sometimes for generations. Just like binocs.
A lot of folks think a cheapish pair of binocs are all they need - until they try an excellent pair and find they can stare through them for hours at a time with no eye strain. Do you know what I say the most at a Redskins' game? "Losers" Oops, no it's "Can I have my Nikons back now? Use the ones hanging around your neck."
John
There's two things at play here. One is the question of whether or not you need a high-end scope, and the other, more obvious question, is what a high-end scope does to be worth the money.
High-end scopes are, generally, more durable and have better optical quality that cheaper scopes. They gather more light, they offer better clarity, they have less distortion than their cheaper bretheren. These are objective facts that can be quantified. Whether or not that is worth the money to you is directly proportional to the first question, which not enough people ask.
As was said, you don't need a $1,500 scope to pop a whitetail at 150yds on a beautiful, sunny day. Will a $1500 scope do it? Oh yes. Will a $150 scope do it? Oh yes. Will the $1,500 scope do it ten times better than the $150 scope? Nope. However, if you're trying to identify, range and pop a p-dog at 300 rounds as the sun sets, your $1500 scope will do a much better job than your $150 Walmart special.
It's all about identifying your needs realistically, and buying the right tool. It's a waste of money to buy more than you'll use, but it's also a waste of money to buy less than you need.
Mike
High-end scopes are, generally, more durable and have better optical quality that cheaper scopes. They gather more light, they offer better clarity, they have less distortion than their cheaper bretheren. These are objective facts that can be quantified. Whether or not that is worth the money to you is directly proportional to the first question, which not enough people ask.
As was said, you don't need a $1,500 scope to pop a whitetail at 150yds on a beautiful, sunny day. Will a $1500 scope do it? Oh yes. Will a $150 scope do it? Oh yes. Will the $1,500 scope do it ten times better than the $150 scope? Nope. However, if you're trying to identify, range and pop a p-dog at 300 rounds as the sun sets, your $1500 scope will do a much better job than your $150 Walmart special.
It's all about identifying your needs realistically, and buying the right tool. It's a waste of money to buy more than you'll use, but it's also a waste of money to buy less than you need.
Mike
JohnBT
Member
"I mean, does anyone need a Porsche?"
Me, but I'm too cheap to cough up that much cash. I've always wanted a new 911. Maybe next year, but I'm getting too old for a mid-life crisis.
Did my slightly younger cousin need a new Miata hardtop convertible? Did she need a new Harley? I dunno, but she got them. Must have had a good year last year. She already had the basic full-sized 4x4 truck to drive to work when it snows and to haul lumber and stuff for her projects, but yes, I guess she needed them all.
John
Me, but I'm too cheap to cough up that much cash. I've always wanted a new 911. Maybe next year, but I'm getting too old for a mid-life crisis.
Did my slightly younger cousin need a new Miata hardtop convertible? Did she need a new Harley? I dunno, but she got them. Must have had a good year last year.
She already had the basic full-sized 4x4 truck to drive to work when it snows and to haul lumber and stuff for her projects, but yes, I guess she needed them all. John
JohnBT
Member
"Will a $150 scope do it? Oh yes."
For a year or two or five if you're lucky.
The $1500 scopes will probably be listed on e-bay 40 years from now with huge reserve prices. And they'll be in good working order.
JT
For a year or two or five if you're lucky.
The $1500 scopes will probably be listed on e-bay 40 years from now with huge reserve prices. And they'll be in good working order.
JT
madcratebuilder
Member
Basically quality costs. You can get very nice equipment with out taking a second mortgage on your home. There is a lot of competition for scope dollars, you can find some nice scopes in the 4-600 dollar range. While they are nice, they well not compare with a 1500 dollar Ziess or S&B.
More than once I have seen med range scope out shoot high end, but that's mostly the shooter. Buying a mega dollar rifle and scope doe snot make you a marksman. Get what works for you and don't worry about what the other guy has, work at out shooting him.
More than once I have seen med range scope out shoot high end, but that's mostly the shooter. Buying a mega dollar rifle and scope doe snot make you a marksman. Get what works for you and don't worry about what the other guy has, work at out shooting him.
groundhog34
Member
Go out at twilight that is when high quality scopes prove their worth. That said a $1500 scope is not 3X better than a $500 scope but there is a great difference between a $200 ond $500 scope. For the money Leupold VXIII are the best value IMO.
- Status
