cheap scope question..

[MachIVshooter]

Firearm cost should equal scope cost seems
to be an excessive burden.

It's subjective. Your $800 deer rifle doesn't need an $800 scope to kill deer. A $250-$300 3-9x or 4-12x should do just fine. But I opted to plop a $600 Leupold on my $550 700 BDL .25-06 because I will take 400, 500 and even 600 yard shots at game using carefully tailored handloads. (Those prices were a decade ago, so I'm sure both have increased). I wanted a scope that I knew would be clear and would hold it's zero while being drug up and down mountainsides.

It all depends what you want to do. There is a point of diminishing returns, and it varies from shooter to shooter. For me, the ceiling for optics is about $1,000. For a guy who shoots occasionally and never further than 200 or 300 yards, the price can be lowered substantially. For someone who competes with a .50 at 1000 yards or more, the glass budget is much higher.

But I've never known anyone who was satisfied with an $80 scope on a centerfire rifle.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

I put a cheap scope on my FAL, ($125) as an experiment. I just want to see if the rifle is as capable as I think it is. So far at 50 yds, it is. If it goes this well at 100, I'll shoot it til the scope fails, which everybody says it will, and then give it some good glass. Or go back to irons, who knows? It's just fun right now.

BTW, it has a lifetime guarantee.

 

[benzy2]

The real problem here is the chambering you are putting a cheap scope on. If it were a .22 or a small centerfire you often can put a cheap scope on, get it zeroed, and then not touch it and be fine. With harder recoiling rounds it often doesn't take long and things are going crazy. I love a bargain. I love a good deal. If there was a scope built to take the punishment but just wasn't as bright and crisp as others I would seriously consider it for a few rifles. The problem I see is that if a company skimps on the glass they skimp on the construction. As such it is hard to find an inexpensive scope with mediocre glass that isn't built to mediocre standards. Many people will rip apart the need for a nicer scope without hesitation. I have fit that group for a long time. Then I saw the light, literally, and won't go back. It is just night and day what a price increase will do up to $400. After that it seems like very little return but then again I'm not overly stressful on my optics and my optics never have my or others lives on the line and don't "have" to work. If you are only spending $100 I would pick a scope that comes from a store I can take it back and get a full refund from. That is the best bet in the very likely chance it fails or fails to meet your expectations.

 

[cliffy]

Scope Qualities

A Bushnell Banner 4-12x40mm resides atop my Diana 350 Magnum air rifle, so they appear to be rugged because Air Rifles recoil more violently forward and backward than firearms. Still, on my Ruger Model 77 Mark II Sporter in .223 Remington, I prefer a 6-24X44mm Burris Signature Select, which is pricey but worth it! Today I shot a 3/4" group of ten rounds at 105 yards with a Caldwell Rock, and that looked mighty pretty. In rifle optics, one gets only what one pays for. I also have a Bushnell Trophy 3-9x40mm in silver-color no less. It's okay, but no longer sits atop my .223 serious rifle. A Nikon Buckmaster (not pricey-under $200) 4.5-14x40mm is mounted on my .243 Winnie Pooh's Remington 700 CDL as a perfect match. cliffy

 

[chute2thrill]

Thanks for all the advice everyone.. You talked me out of getting the Bushnell.. Thinking a brand new scope would break after a day of shooting definatly steers me away..

I did a search on here for the leupold rifleman and that seems like a much better decision..

 

[rangerruck]

if you must, then get either the Tasco , air rifle rated, spring piston adult break bbl rated scope, which is a golden antler series, and it has an adjustable front obj. it will cost about 50 bucks,

http://www.opticsplanet.net/tasco-3-9x44-titan.html
DO NOT GET THE GOLDEN ANTLER WITH THE NON ADJUSTABLE FRONT OBJ !!!
next there is the Tasco varmint series, in a variety of powers, I have 3 of the 6x24x42 scopes, one of them was mounted on a Parker Hale 308 ultralite, and it never lost zero. it will be around 100 bucks.

Now then, If you spend an extra 50 bucks, from wally world, you can get a Nikon , that will have a lifetime wrrty, have excellent japanese made glass, and will be a damn fine scope, one you can keep forever.

Lastly, if you have gunshows in your area, go to one, and look for old tasco's, with very shiny outer tubes. they should be stamped made in japan, around the eyepiece, and should also maybe still have a small paper oval stamp on it, that says approved. Old japanese glass can be had for 100 bucks or less, and it is excellent allways. I got one recently that a dude had, never mounted, and it had five elevation discs with it; first disc for 22's, second one for 223 and the like, next one for 308 class, next for 243 and mag class , last disc was for wetherby class type cartridges. so you could do multiple zero's with multi weapons, all on the same scope. so cool.
I would never tell anyone not to get old Tasco/jap made glass.

 

[Wildfire]

2 Tascos.

Hey There:
I have 2 of the older Tasco scopes. 6x24 TS and 8x32TS. These have 1/8" dots and 1/8" clicks. They are Older. I paid $299.00 for each back then . That was quite some years ago. They have never failed to repeat their zero and I still use them today. The 8x32 has a clairity issue now but the 6x24 still is fine.
Back when I bought these at 299.00 each they were not that cheap.
I always use the target turrets and have never had a problem. These two scopes are way out of production and I have not found one like them in many years now. The new Tasco scopes (6x24) I can not speak about. The ones I have seen are not the same as the ones I have. The new ones are cheaper made and look nothing like my older ones.
I have killed many scopes in the past. Even good Luepolds. I still have them and will send them back for fixin. (When I get time).

The older ones (Tasco's) made in Japan were OK. The new ones made in China (Not so sure about).
Bushnells ? most are made in China now. If the say BOP they are made in China. BOP = Bushnell outdoor Products. The Elite series are not made in China at last check. Those were made by Baush and Laumb (Spelling ?)
They were bought out by Bushenell as were many other companies. They now carry the Bushell name. That scope (The Elites ) are of good quality and carry a life time warranty no matter who owns it.
The Luepold you mention is OK but is their very bottom line scope.
If you are going to be shooting at 500 yards you will want a scope with adjustable "Target " turrets. Check into that on that Luepold before you buy it.... Someone may help me on this one , But I think that Luepold Rifleman scope has friction turrets. If so You will not like it at all. In other words there are no click adjustments. even the early Vari-X 1 and 2s did not have the click adjustments. Now the 2s do. Other then that the Luepold scope is an excellent scope.

 

[NCsmitty]

Many of us here cannot afford $600-$1500 for optics as much as we would like to do that. Less expensive scopes generally have more defects than say high end Leupold or Zeiss. But they can be a reliable option for us po' folks. You just buy what you feel you can afford, and go with it. Chances are good that it will satisfy your requirements for you shooting needs.

NCsmitty

 

[mr.trooper]

I have an $80 Bushnell. Its not spectacular, and it doesn't have any fancy features, or whiz-bang proprietary reticle, but its clear and it holds a Zero.

The only real difference in a $100 scope and a $600 scope are the adjustments. The bodies are made from one piece, of the same aluminum alloy, and the same optical glass, and the SAME number and type of optical coatings.

The only thing thats actually superior on an expensive scope is the adjustments. Cheap scopes have plastic or nylon parts in their adjustments that will ware out fairly quickly under repeated use.

If your going to sight the rifle in and leave the settings alone after that, then paying 6 times as much for fancy adjustments that you will never use seems silly.

As a compromise, i see Walmart is now selling Nikon economy line for around $250. That would give you better quality without breaking the bank.

 

[Tarvis]

I was going to give my opinion as advice, but screw it. Buy the cheap scope and learn for yourself. If you're shooting deer and soda cans at 100 yards, anything will do. If you demand the best performance, buy a cheap scope so you can figure out why they are cheap.

An anecdote: A friend of mine and I were shooting squirrels at around 125-200 yards one day, me with my savage model 12 LRPV single shot with a VX-III with target dot reticle and target knobs ($800) and him with his AR and a $100 something-or-other. He couldn't even see some of the squirrels behind the dot and was having a hard time seeing them because of the color. I looked through his scope and the color difference was amazing. His made everything look yellowish and mine made colors look rich and definitive. He couldn't see them unless they moved while I was trying to call them out while counting fleas. No, I couldn't actually see any fleas, but you get the idea.

Buy a cheap scope if you're shooting cans. Buy an expensive scope if you like being able to see what you're looking at.

The only thing thats actually superior on an expensive scope is the adjustments

Wrong. Lens coatings make a HUGE difference in light transmission and clarity, as well as how the glass is ground and polished. Also, how about warranty?

Another anecdote: A friend of my dad had bought a revolver in 357 mag with a leupold pistol scope on it. After firing it a few times, the scope broke somehow (can't remember if it was the reticle or what) and he sent it in to the factory. They sent him a new scope with a note that read: "We are sorry the scope broke. This scope was designed and manufactured before the 357 mag was available so it was not set up to handle the recoil. Hopefully this new scope will work better." They didn't charge him anything, even though he wasn't the original buyer.

If your going to sight the rifle in and leave the settings alone after that, then paying 6 times as much for fancy adjustments that you will never use seems silly.

It seems silly if you don't know what you're actually buying.

 

[benzy2]

The only thing I can say about cheap scopes it to buy them from a store that will take them back. I have had too many over the years that have gone bad that I won't buy something I have to pay shipping on to get it fixed. I have had BSAs go bad (and a few hold zero though optically they were poor but fine for the price), bushnells go bad, tascos go bad. I just don't want to deal with it anymore. After paying shipping back to the manufacturer a time or two you could have saved up and bought a better made scope. Instead you have a now moderately expensive cheap scope that sooner or later will have to go back.

 

[Tarvis]

The only thing I can say about cheap scopes it to buy them from a store that will take them back.

Excellent point.

 

[Jeff F]

What Wildfire said in post 25.
I use the adjustments on my scopes all the time especially at the longer ranges. If I go up 10 clicks and right or left a number of clicks then go back to where I started I expect my scope to be back on zero. This just ain't so with a cheap scope. Been there done that ain't doing it any more.

Just saying buy the best quality you can afford especially when going on a rifle you are expecting to shoot at longer ranges.

 

[chute2thrill]

Thanks again everyone.. Like I said you talked me out of the bushnell, but I still probably won't be able to afford the $300-400 scope I need.. So I'm just going to go with the Leupold rifleman 3-9x... I can't imagine I can go wrong with the Leupold name..

 

[deerhunter61]

Jeff F

What kind of scopes do you own?

 

[Jeff F]

Ive got a couple of Leupold Mk 2's
One is a 4-12 the other is a 6-18
One Leupold fixed 6x I bought used.
A couple of the cheep Nikon prostaff on a couple .22's

My best scope is a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14 MD. I saved for six months to buy that one and it is a clear scope.
I do admit that I have a Bushnell Banner mounted on a .243 that has held zero pretty good. It's my wife's rifle and I have offered to upgrade it but she likes it and hits with it.

 

[Wildfire]

Tarvis is right.

Hey again.
Tarvis and Jeff are pretty darn right on. The turrets are not the only difference between cheap and good scopes. The lenses are different.
Luepold will put new turrets on my 3x9 VXII for $95.00.
This is not enough of a difference in the cost of some scopes to say it is just the turrets.
The Glass is a big deal... And can be a very large part of the cost difference between cheap and the best.

 

[Oohrah]

Simmons and BSA used both to fire 1" ten shot groups
for four years of Turkey Shoots. Just under 1" with at
100 yds with a .17 Hornet, 22 Hornet, 6mm Rem, and
.223 Rem.
Won't call anyone a scope snob, as most all of them
come from Asia (China/Japan) including used to be made
in the USA or considered icons. Yep even Weaver, Bushnel,
and Redfield owned by Blount (German I believe). The
high end price scopes, I don't know, nor can I afford them.
Optics on the lower priced ones are sometimes better than
the old time high end stuff. I have noticed the newer low
end ones are a little rougher on machining with some brands.
Lately, the last three scopes purchased from Natchez were
BSA. Two are 8X32 variables and a 6X24. Don't know about
their return policy cause never had problems with them. Adj-
ustments are 1/8 min of angle and are true with all three

 

[Coal Dragger]

To the original poster,

This one is probably not going to happen for you in the price range you are looking to stay in. I am unaware of any new rifle scopes for $80 that will give you the adjustment tracking accuracy you would need for consistent accuracy at a distance of 500yds (1500ft). We can ignore for a moment the fact that the optics in such an inexpensive piece of glass may not give enough resolution for a clear sight picture on a target that is roughly 5"X2.5", or the fact that your .30-06 will have to be capable of holding just below 1MOA accuracy at that distance in vertical dispersion and .5MOA accuracy in the horizontal. If your rifle is this accurate it deserves far better glass than $80 worth.

Frankly you will need to spend the majority of that $80 budget on bases and rings good enough to get the job done, much less have money left over for glass.

What you will need in the scope to accomplish your goal are good solid adjustments that go where you tell them to, and stay there. If the scope will not move the bullet impact exactly how far you need it to, you are wasting your time and money (both in ammo and the glass). If the scope will not hold adjustment you are again wasting time and money. You will also need good enough glass to give you plenty of resolution. This means quality glass and lens coatings, as well as good engineering within the scope body to eliminate stray light from fringing your sight picture and causing other aberrations.

Aside from the top three requirements you will probably want magnification of at least 10X, and a way to adjust for parallax.

My advice would be to save up your money and buy a scope that has the above features, expect to spend roughly $300-$800 depending on what you want. You might try to acquire a Super Sniper 10X42 if you can stand a fixed power. They are a reasonably good deal and have pretty good glass and sold adjustments.

Good luck.

 

[Jeff F]

I didn't go into rings and bases.
Coal Dragger has it right, a good set of rings and bases is going to cost a few bucks.

 

[Tarvis]

Simmons and BSA used both to fire 1" ten shot groups
for four years of Turkey Shoots.

Good for you, put that on your resume. That shows absolutely nothing about the quality of the scopes. Cheap scopes are not necessarily totally impossible to see with at short ranges. It's when the range is long, the target is small and the light is fading or non direct and after repeated abuse.

The
high end price scopes, I don't know

Optics on the lower priced ones are sometimes better than
the old time high end stuff

Are you frickin kidding me? You tell us that you don't know anything about high end scopes, then in the NEXT SENTENCE tell us that LOW END SCOPES ARE SOMETIMES BETTER THAN HIGH END SCOPES..................
That is flat out retarded. What is this crap about scope "snobs" coming from asia? This is what really pisses me off when it comes to guns; you try and give your experience as good advice, and all you get is "nuh uh, the cheap stuff is the best and I know because I have the cheap stuff and have been shooting for over 5 MONTHS which makes me an expert." If you don't want to listen and learn, go post on you tube. Don't come back and tell me how long you've been shooting and how much military experience you have, as you've already proclaimed yourself a dunce.

 

[Coal Dragger]

I am an optics snob, guilty as charged. I have found that I get what I pay for.

Personally I am partial to Leupold and Nightforce because those are about the most expensive optics I can justify to myself right now. There are still better scopes out there yet.

I would rather have a good aperture rear sight and globe front sight on a rifle than a cheap scope with poor image quality. In fact my most often fired rifle is my single shot Kimber Model 82 Govt' Target with Anschutz style sights. Hell the aperture sights on that rifle cost way way more than $80, and they have no optics. I can't fathom anyone expecting a new scope for $80 to be anywhere near satisfactory.

 

[dagger dog]

If you want an inexpensive scope, the Cabelas name brand has several that are quite servicable along with BSA, Leapers, Tasco,Simmons,among others, then some of the entry level scopes from the higher end makers.

Every time the subject comes up on cheap glass, the inquirer will always get a rash of s#$t from any one that owns a Leupold , Nightforce or Schmidt & Bender. The fact is you buy and make do with what you can afford. Contrary to what you may hear there are inexpensive scopes that are good value . It just depends on what your immediate needs dictate. I have heard , you get what you pay for,you should be prepared to spend at least what you paid for your rifle, and a host of other BS.

Do your home work and check out some of the inexpensive lines that fit your needs and I'm sure you will find one that will suit you. Almost all the manufacturers have warranties on their products and are reputable . If any problems arise they can be counted on to make good on any short giving in their products.

 

[22-rimfire]

I would look at Bushnell and Tasco products at Walmart and make your choice. Placing a value on an expensive scope is something that only comes with experience. Good luck. I know as I have bought cheap scopes because that is all I could afford.

 

[benzy2]

dagger dog I was 100% in agreement with that statement until I tried a decent scope. It wasn't even an amazing scope. It was well worth not buying another rifle. Its one of those things you either appreciate or you don't. If I could all of my scopes would be replaced with better ones. I still have mostly cheap China made optics. I won't buy another after having a bit of experience with nicer scopes. Try it once. If you don't think the difference is worth it you can probably get enough of your money back that one or two trips of a cheap scope back to the factory will make up any loss.