I went out and did a little shooting today using airguns and rimfires and decided to swap a couple of scopes around. Before doing so though I decided to try and compare them side by side. These scopes aren't dirt cheap, but considering the features on them, they are definitely lower end scopes.
Now to begin with, I've had the BSA for a few years now. I believe it cost me $99 about six years ago, but it may have been $89. It's the 6-24x40 mil-dot with the illuminated reticle and it now appears to go for around $115. It's been on a PCP airgun it's entire life, so it's never been exposed to any real recoil and not surprisingly it has held up. At 50 yards or less that particular gun will shoot MOA with this scope. It's got a 1" tube and its mounted with BKL rings.
The second scope I've only had for around 9 months. It's a Leapers 4-16x56 mil-dot with illuminated reticle and the parallax adjustment on the side. This one's been on my CZ 452. It also hasn't been exposed to any significant recoil and the rifle has delivered excellent accuracy with this scope. It's got a 30mm tube and is mounted with Beeman rings. I paid $135 for this scope and it appears to be going for $145 now.
1) Clarity. Both of these scopes have been clear enough for me to easily shoot out to 100 yards with, but putting them side by side I have to give a very slight edge to the Leapers. I was able to see just a tiny bit more clearly with it at 50 yards. Now this might be due to the BSA having been used in the field considerably more. The BSA has been used in the rain and had it's lenses wiped off with whatever cloth happened to be at hand. I always tried to use a clean and soft cloth to clean the lenses with, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that they have lost some of their clarity over the years.
2) Glare. With the magnification dialed up both scopes were very susceptible to glare when pointed in the direction of a light source. On the lowest power however, the Leapers was the clear winner. The BSA still lit up enough to make sighting difficult when aiming at treetops with the sun behind them, while the Leapers did fairly well at 4x.
3) Weight and size. These are both big scopes and not the kind of thing you would want to put on a mountain rifle. The BSA is significantly lighter however. The Leapers has a much larger objective lens, but the actual bell isn't that much bigger since it has it's parallax adjustment on the side.
4) Field of view. With the scopes dialed down to the lowest power, the Leapers appeared to have about a 25% wider field of view. With both scopes set at 6x the Leapers appeared to have about a 10% wider field of view. I didn't measure anything. I just sighted them at the same object and then made a quick guess as to how much wider the field of view was.
5) Turrets and repeatability. I haven't really done enough experimenting here to say one way or the other. The Leapers has been used at the range several times though and the elevation clicks are repeatable on it. I have been able to adjust from 50 yards to 100 yards and back again several times with no loss of zero. The horizontal adjustment might be repeatable, but at this point I don't know. What I do know is that it's not what it says it is. According to the scope it's click values are 1/8 MOA. It's actually at least double that. The BSA has had very few adjustments to it's turrets. Both sights allow for a very wide range of adjustment and both have metal target style turrets, (on the outside anyway). The turrets on the Leapers are larger and exposed with locking adjustments on the bottoms, while the turrets on the BSA are covered with caps. Both are functional, but I like the Leapers adjustments more.
6) Eye relief. The Leapers is more forgiving. That big objective lens and the lower magnification mean you can get a complete sight picture more easily. Your eye can be a little closer or a little further away or a little bit more to the side and you can still get a complete sight picture. Of course this also gives you more potential parallax.
7) Reticle. Here they are equal. Both have mil-dot reticles. Both are illuminated. The BSA has red illumination with 11 different settings while the Leapers has red and green illumination with 5 settings for either one. Both work just fine. The Leapers reticle is etched onto the lens however, so it may be stronger.
8) Miscellaneous. The sidewheel parallax adjustment is better that an adjustment on the bell. It's much easier to adjust with the rifle to your shoulder and it reduces the diameter of the ocular bell. The Leapers also comes with decent flip up lens covers while if I remember right the BSA came with a bikini cover. Flip up lens covers are much better IMO. 4-16x is a better range of magnification for use in the field. I realized fairly soon after buying the BSA that I had overdone it. It's nice when you're sitting on a bench at the range to zoom in at 24x, but in the field I just never use that much magnification. That's not really a flaw with the scope though.
Overall, I think the only thing that the Leapers did significantly better than the BSA with was glare, but it did slightly better with just about everything else and because of that, I think it is a significantly better scope.
Now to begin with, I've had the BSA for a few years now. I believe it cost me $99 about six years ago, but it may have been $89. It's the 6-24x40 mil-dot with the illuminated reticle and it now appears to go for around $115. It's been on a PCP airgun it's entire life, so it's never been exposed to any real recoil and not surprisingly it has held up. At 50 yards or less that particular gun will shoot MOA with this scope. It's got a 1" tube and its mounted with BKL rings.
The second scope I've only had for around 9 months. It's a Leapers 4-16x56 mil-dot with illuminated reticle and the parallax adjustment on the side. This one's been on my CZ 452. It also hasn't been exposed to any significant recoil and the rifle has delivered excellent accuracy with this scope. It's got a 30mm tube and is mounted with Beeman rings. I paid $135 for this scope and it appears to be going for $145 now.
1) Clarity. Both of these scopes have been clear enough for me to easily shoot out to 100 yards with, but putting them side by side I have to give a very slight edge to the Leapers. I was able to see just a tiny bit more clearly with it at 50 yards. Now this might be due to the BSA having been used in the field considerably more. The BSA has been used in the rain and had it's lenses wiped off with whatever cloth happened to be at hand. I always tried to use a clean and soft cloth to clean the lenses with, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that they have lost some of their clarity over the years.
2) Glare. With the magnification dialed up both scopes were very susceptible to glare when pointed in the direction of a light source. On the lowest power however, the Leapers was the clear winner. The BSA still lit up enough to make sighting difficult when aiming at treetops with the sun behind them, while the Leapers did fairly well at 4x.
3) Weight and size. These are both big scopes and not the kind of thing you would want to put on a mountain rifle. The BSA is significantly lighter however. The Leapers has a much larger objective lens, but the actual bell isn't that much bigger since it has it's parallax adjustment on the side.
4) Field of view. With the scopes dialed down to the lowest power, the Leapers appeared to have about a 25% wider field of view. With both scopes set at 6x the Leapers appeared to have about a 10% wider field of view. I didn't measure anything. I just sighted them at the same object and then made a quick guess as to how much wider the field of view was.
5) Turrets and repeatability. I haven't really done enough experimenting here to say one way or the other. The Leapers has been used at the range several times though and the elevation clicks are repeatable on it. I have been able to adjust from 50 yards to 100 yards and back again several times with no loss of zero. The horizontal adjustment might be repeatable, but at this point I don't know. What I do know is that it's not what it says it is. According to the scope it's click values are 1/8 MOA. It's actually at least double that. The BSA has had very few adjustments to it's turrets. Both sights allow for a very wide range of adjustment and both have metal target style turrets, (on the outside anyway). The turrets on the Leapers are larger and exposed with locking adjustments on the bottoms, while the turrets on the BSA are covered with caps. Both are functional, but I like the Leapers adjustments more.
6) Eye relief. The Leapers is more forgiving. That big objective lens and the lower magnification mean you can get a complete sight picture more easily. Your eye can be a little closer or a little further away or a little bit more to the side and you can still get a complete sight picture. Of course this also gives you more potential parallax.
7) Reticle. Here they are equal. Both have mil-dot reticles. Both are illuminated. The BSA has red illumination with 11 different settings while the Leapers has red and green illumination with 5 settings for either one. Both work just fine. The Leapers reticle is etched onto the lens however, so it may be stronger.
8) Miscellaneous. The sidewheel parallax adjustment is better that an adjustment on the bell. It's much easier to adjust with the rifle to your shoulder and it reduces the diameter of the ocular bell. The Leapers also comes with decent flip up lens covers while if I remember right the BSA came with a bikini cover. Flip up lens covers are much better IMO. 4-16x is a better range of magnification for use in the field. I realized fairly soon after buying the BSA that I had overdone it. It's nice when you're sitting on a bench at the range to zoom in at 24x, but in the field I just never use that much magnification. That's not really a flaw with the scope though.
Overall, I think the only thing that the Leapers did significantly better than the BSA with was glare, but it did slightly better with just about everything else and because of that, I think it is a significantly better scope.
