I bought a tasco target varmint in 4-16x42. It is an ok scope for under a hundred dollars but I find that anything over nine power just is too blurry to use. Also the distance from your eye to the lens is extremely critical, I would not buy it again. I have seen some pretty nice tasco world class scopes however
Frugal, Yet Accurate -- Scope Advice
- Thread starter SwearNoAllegiance
- Start date
- Status
Ed Ames
Member
Sigh...
I like good optics. Not just rifle scopes either. I have a pelican case with about $13,000 in camera lenses including individual lenses that cost more than your scope and probably rifle too. Telescopes, binoculars, microscopes, I love them all and have spent more than I care to admit on 'em. I have a collection of military optics including a tank periscope among other things just 'cause I like 'em.
Anything I really need, I need two of. In a perfect world that's a matched pair. In the real world I can often find a less costly backup that will bridge my need without tying up resources.
I suspect my working rifle optics are as good or better than your Zeiss. And no, I'm not comparing tasco to zeiss. My backup scope? It's better than yours if you don't have one.
IMO, and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise, you are simply advocating an "all your eggs in one basket" approach. I am saying that spares...backups...are not optional equipment. You can make a big buzz about how you need something wunnerful just to get by but if you don't have a spare you have already failed. You have limited yourself to games because when things go wrong you'll have nothing.
I have a tasco spare. It has worked very well. I specifically chose the 2.5-10 because it doesn't have some of the problems of the 4-16. It has allowed me to check out rifles before picking the final scope, troubleshoot problems, etc. A very well spent $60.
I like good optics. Not just rifle scopes either. I have a pelican case with about $13,000 in camera lenses including individual lenses that cost more than your scope and probably rifle too. Telescopes, binoculars, microscopes, I love them all and have spent more than I care to admit on 'em. I have a collection of military optics including a tank periscope among other things just 'cause I like 'em.
Anything I really need, I need two of. In a perfect world that's a matched pair. In the real world I can often find a less costly backup that will bridge my need without tying up resources.
I suspect my working rifle optics are as good or better than your Zeiss. And no, I'm not comparing tasco to zeiss. My backup scope? It's better than yours if you don't have one.
IMO, and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise, you are simply advocating an "all your eggs in one basket" approach. I am saying that spares...backups...are not optional equipment. You can make a big buzz about how you need something wunnerful just to get by but if you don't have a spare you have already failed. You have limited yourself to games because when things go wrong you'll have nothing.
I have a tasco spare. It has worked very well. I specifically chose the 2.5-10 because it doesn't have some of the problems of the 4-16. It has allowed me to check out rifles before picking the final scope, troubleshoot problems, etc. A very well spent $60.
driftrider
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2009
- Messages
- 53
We're apparently talking about two different things. I'm addressing the original poster's question regarding what scope to buy, which will be his only scope for this rifle. I too, have several cheap scopes laying around, and if necessary I'd put one of them on in the off chance that the better scope fails. So if you're talking about keeping a cheap Tasco/Simmons/Center Point/ect... as purely a backup scope, I will give you that. But if your advocating that he'd be better off with two Tascos instead of one Zeiss, you're, well... I'll be kind and say that wouldn't be a wise choice. But he's not asking for a recommendation for a backup scope, he asking about a primary scope, which should, at least in my opinion, be better glass than a $60 Tasco. If he ALSO gets a $60 Tasco to back up the Nikon, Bushnell Elite, Sightron, etc..., or even if he did go with a Zeiss, that's great. But I'm suggesting that he save his money to get a good scope to start, rather than suffer the frustration and limitations imposed by most ultra-cheap glass. You should also note that I'm not trying to imply that only a $700+ scope like my Zeiss is "good enough". Not at all. I bought my Zeiss because I wanted premium glass, not because it was strictly necessary for my intended purpose. I've stated on multiple occasions that he could be well served by a scope starting in about the $200 price range. $200 isn't a lot to spend on a primary scope for a rifle intended for precision shooting. I also stated that he'd be better off buying a $450 Savage Model 10 and spending the balance on a better scope, than to spend $1000 on a full blown "tacticool" rifle and buy a $60 scope to put on top of it.
I don't know if you understand my point, because you seem to be arguing from a different premise than I am. I think that you may be the type of person who argues just to argue, but I can't say for certain. The original poster can get what he wants out of our exchange, but I've said all I think I need to say.
Mike
I don't know if you understand my point, because you seem to be arguing from a different premise than I am. I think that you may be the type of person who argues just to argue, but I can't say for certain. The original poster can get what he wants out of our exchange, but I've said all I think I need to say.
Mike
Ed Ames
Member
We are definitely coming at this from different sides. 
Let's say we both agree having a spare around is good, especially in a pinch. It sucks to have to yank a zeroed and ready-to-go scope off a working rifle just to run a second rifle or what have you. And we both agree you that the best optics are worth having.
Because you want a spare anyway, it is less money overall to start with a low price/high value scope knowing it will be relegated to the spares bin in short order than to get a mid price scope that will end up a spare. Not just any old cheap scope, but something that works well enough. Then, while you are shooting, save up to buy a nice lifetime (as in, how long you will use it) scope.
It's simple math. $60 + 700 < $200 + 700... though I think $2000 is a better price point for the good scope.
It isn't a waste of money to buy a spare, it's a waste of money to buy a better spare than you need. If you compete you should have two of all your competition gear. For practice there is nothing wrong with starting cheap.
And the original poster said they were saving up to do a full on whatever build and were looking for an interrum scope. That means they were talking about buying two scopes.
Let's say we both agree having a spare around is good, especially in a pinch. It sucks to have to yank a zeroed and ready-to-go scope off a working rifle just to run a second rifle or what have you. And we both agree you that the best optics are worth having.
Because you want a spare anyway, it is less money overall to start with a low price/high value scope knowing it will be relegated to the spares bin in short order than to get a mid price scope that will end up a spare. Not just any old cheap scope, but something that works well enough. Then, while you are shooting, save up to buy a nice lifetime (as in, how long you will use it) scope.
It's simple math. $60 + 700 < $200 + 700... though I think $2000 is a better price point for the good scope.
It isn't a waste of money to buy a spare, it's a waste of money to buy a better spare than you need. If you compete you should have two of all your competition gear. For practice there is nothing wrong with starting cheap.
And the original poster said they were saving up to do a full on whatever build and were looking for an interrum scope. That means they were talking about buying two scopes.
driftrider
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2009
- Messages
- 53
See, I think we were having a peeing for distance contest with the wind in both our faces!
Now I fully understand where you're coming from, and agree with you. If he's just getting a scope to plink with until he sends it off for the full-blown custom job, and as part of the custom build it would be fitted with a high-end scope, then absolutely get the cheaper scope. Especially if it's going to sit in the gear bag just-in-case. I also agree that it's a good idea, whenever possible, to have a backup. I actually prefer have a fully setup backup GUN, not just the scope, because if you put these machines through their paces, sooner or later something's going to break. When I go hunting, I always take two legal for the season guns, set up, sighted in, with ammo ready to go. This last season I was hunting in MN with my brother (500 miles from home), and my sling swivel broke while I was hiking through the woods. The rifle flipped off my shoulder and imbedded about 8" barrel first in the mud. Unfortunately, I didn't have a cleaning rod, and there was so creek or unfrozen pond nearby, and I had a 6" mud plug in the barrel. By the time I got back to the truck the mud was ice, and it wasn't coming out. But, hey, I've got my 12 gauge and some slugs with me. I put the gun in the house to let it warm and thaw, took the shotgun and went back out to the stand. No problem. That's what I call backup!
Anyway, I think that I'm ready to make peace with this. I believe that me both misunderstood the premise that the other was arguing from. I wish the OP good luck with his new rifle with whatever glass he ends up topping it with. He says he wants to be as proficient as a military sniper... but I think that he should be thankful he doesn't have to go through SEER school. I had a few friends in the Corps that had been through it, and I'm very glad I never had to go.
Mike
Now I fully understand where you're coming from, and agree with you. If he's just getting a scope to plink with until he sends it off for the full-blown custom job, and as part of the custom build it would be fitted with a high-end scope, then absolutely get the cheaper scope. Especially if it's going to sit in the gear bag just-in-case. I also agree that it's a good idea, whenever possible, to have a backup. I actually prefer have a fully setup backup GUN, not just the scope, because if you put these machines through their paces, sooner or later something's going to break. When I go hunting, I always take two legal for the season guns, set up, sighted in, with ammo ready to go. This last season I was hunting in MN with my brother (500 miles from home), and my sling swivel broke while I was hiking through the woods. The rifle flipped off my shoulder and imbedded about 8" barrel first in the mud. Unfortunately, I didn't have a cleaning rod, and there was so creek or unfrozen pond nearby, and I had a 6" mud plug in the barrel. By the time I got back to the truck the mud was ice, and it wasn't coming out. But, hey, I've got my 12 gauge and some slugs with me. I put the gun in the house to let it warm and thaw, took the shotgun and went back out to the stand. No problem. That's what I call backup!
Anyway, I think that I'm ready to make peace with this. I believe that me both misunderstood the premise that the other was arguing from. I wish the OP good luck with his new rifle with whatever glass he ends up topping it with. He says he wants to be as proficient as a military sniper... but I think that he should be thankful he doesn't have to go through SEER school. I had a few friends in the Corps that had been through it, and I'm very glad I never had to go.
Mike
Fella's;
I bought a Tasco 2.5-10X A/O mil-dot varminter. Put it on a new at that time .22 rimfire & proceeded to wring the combination out. The scope could not produce anything like repeatable adjustment values. It's gone. It cost me something like $60.00 delivered. It got replaced with a Bushnell Legend 5-15X A/O mil-dot. That ran me something like $175.00 delivered. It's decent, but not great, glass for the buck. I've kept it around & it very well could go into service as a back-up. It's now on a lightweight walking varminter .223. And that gun's not first team in that category either.
If it had to replace one of the Monarchs, Leupie's, or Zeiss scopes, I would be very aware of the drop-off in quality. But, it's good enough to do the back-up. The sub $100.00 scope simply is out of it's class even in that role. The Savage MKII out-classed it.
Now perhaps the Center-points under discussion here are true bargains. But, the odds are against them as a whole being able to consistantly perform above their price point.
900F
I bought a Tasco 2.5-10X A/O mil-dot varminter. Put it on a new at that time .22 rimfire & proceeded to wring the combination out. The scope could not produce anything like repeatable adjustment values. It's gone. It cost me something like $60.00 delivered. It got replaced with a Bushnell Legend 5-15X A/O mil-dot. That ran me something like $175.00 delivered. It's decent, but not great, glass for the buck. I've kept it around & it very well could go into service as a back-up. It's now on a lightweight walking varminter .223. And that gun's not first team in that category either.
If it had to replace one of the Monarchs, Leupie's, or Zeiss scopes, I would be very aware of the drop-off in quality. But, it's good enough to do the back-up. The sub $100.00 scope simply is out of it's class even in that role. The Savage MKII out-classed it.
Now perhaps the Center-points under discussion here are true bargains. But, the odds are against them as a whole being able to consistantly perform above their price point.
900F
Some Beach
Member
Hey all,
I'm a bit of a newbie here. I picked up a Center Point 4-16x40 yesterday and I was wondering where you set your adjustable objective? Obviously the flip-up cap won't always be in the 12 o'clock position if you're making adjustments.
Thanks
I'm a bit of a newbie here. I picked up a Center Point 4-16x40 yesterday and I was wondering where you set your adjustable objective? Obviously the flip-up cap won't always be in the 12 o'clock position if you're making adjustments.
Thanks
Some Beach;
Yup, it's a given that if the scope has a conventional A/O and a lens cap, the cap's gonna rotate as you adjust the A/O.
However, in order to answer your question, it would help if we knew what gun/caliber you're putting it on & what you're shooting at. Is it paper at the range, deer in the woods, or pronghorn antelope at 350 yards?
Strictly in my opinion you understand, but I feel that A/O is very useful on something like an accurate .22 rimfire hunting gun, where shots might be from 15 to 110 yards. I don't have A/O on any of my centerfire hunting rifles because it's just one more thing that can be out of adjustment when a quick shot has to be made. Given a good 3-9X scope, it's always in focus, & not prone to parallax errors in a situation where you've got to bring the rifle to the shoulder & immediately make it go bang.
900F
Yup, it's a given that if the scope has a conventional A/O and a lens cap, the cap's gonna rotate as you adjust the A/O.
However, in order to answer your question, it would help if we knew what gun/caliber you're putting it on & what you're shooting at. Is it paper at the range, deer in the woods, or pronghorn antelope at 350 yards?
Strictly in my opinion you understand, but I feel that A/O is very useful on something like an accurate .22 rimfire hunting gun, where shots might be from 15 to 110 yards. I don't have A/O on any of my centerfire hunting rifles because it's just one more thing that can be out of adjustment when a quick shot has to be made. Given a good 3-9X scope, it's always in focus, & not prone to parallax errors in a situation where you've got to bring the rifle to the shoulder & immediately make it go bang.
900F
Flash!
Member
The A/O is marked with yardage on the Centerpoint...... I set mine to the appropriate yardage and off we go....
I now have over 250 rounds thru one of these scopes on a 308 and it is still holding zero. I have 100 rounds thru a second one on another 308....same great results.... the ones on the 17HMR and .223 are all holding zero too.....
I now have over 250 rounds thru one of these scopes on a 308 and it is still holding zero. I have 100 rounds thru a second one on another 308....same great results.... the ones on the 17HMR and .223 are all holding zero too.....
I'm going to Walmart today and am going to pick up a center point, abuse it for the weekend, and take it back. It won't give a long term use results but it will allow for a resolution test and I am trying to build a scope stand to take pictures through to show scope image. This should all be ready by the end of the weekend though with it being Easter weekend it may take an extra weekend to be through all the tests I want to run. I really want to try a box test and repeatability of the turrets when really worked.
Good luck with a cheap scope. Enjoy paying for shipping both ways, potentially multiple times. The glass in the Simmons scopes I have seen is no where near Japan made glass. I like my Simmons 44 Mag for what it is but honestly its a $100 scope and thats all it will ever be. You pay for a lot more than a lens when you buy a scope. You buy the tube, the mounting hardware, and all the adjustment hardware. Ignoring the glass itself, it is very hard to hold tolerances through all those other parts when your budget is what many China made scopes price to. Turret adjustments are precision items and to be done well cost a good deal of money. Good luck getting sighted in and good luck if you need any sort of repeatable adjustment in the field where you don't have a sighter or two first to make sure you are on target.
Some Beach
Member
CB900F: I put the scope on a Mossberg 100 ATR .270 win. I plan to shoot feral pigs and take it deer hunting this coming season. I live in Texas, just north of Houston near The Woodlands. As the name implies, lots of woods up there! As far as shooting deer, going towards Austin area it starts getting a little hilly.
Flash!: I live right down the road from you! Down Hwy 249, near Hooks airport. I was shopping the Academy at 249/FM2920, Tomball Pawn, and Wal-mart. Did you happen to go to the German Festival a couple of weekends ago? Our kids (2 and 4) had a great time and I always enjoy Tomball and its "small town" feel.
Thanks guys!
As far as shooting deer, going towards Austin area it starts getting a little hilly.Flash!: I live right down the road from you! Down Hwy 249, near Hooks airport. I was shopping the Academy at 249/FM2920, Tomball Pawn, and Wal-mart. Did you happen to go to the German Festival a couple of weekends ago? Our kids (2 and 4) had a great time and I always enjoy Tomball and its "small town" feel.
Thanks guys!
dagger dog
Member
To my knowledge, the only scope maker that makes 100% of their scopes in house is Schmidt & Bender
This info was gleaned from a major gun magazine. Doesn't mean it is true, but I would take the authors word as true.
Post # 75 says it all, it is common sense, some pockets are deeper than others.
Many out there are sniper wannabes few are true snipers.
There is no doubt when your shot has to result in stopping an agressor, human or dangerous game, only the best optic available is the answer.But when paper, deer hide, coyote , rabbit or squirrel fur are encountered others may be used.
This info was gleaned from a major gun magazine. Doesn't mean it is true, but I would take the authors word as true.
Post # 75 says it all, it is common sense, some pockets are deeper than others.
Many out there are sniper wannabes few are true snipers.
There is no doubt when your shot has to result in stopping an agressor, human or dangerous game, only the best optic available is the answer.But when paper, deer hide, coyote , rabbit or squirrel fur are encountered others may be used.
Flash!
Member
Some Beach...
Howdy neighbor! I'm in that Academy every weekend, and I go looking at Tomball pawn occasssionally and hit both the Walmarts on 249 a lot.
I thought about going to the German festival but didn't find enuff time.....
Welcome to the forum!
Howdy neighbor! I'm in that Academy every weekend, and I go looking at Tomball pawn occasssionally and hit both the Walmarts on 249 a lot.
I thought about going to the German festival but didn't find enuff time.....
Welcome to the forum!
SomeBeach;
It sounds to me as though you're going to have a bit of variation in the ranges you might encounter. Therefore, yup, the lens cap is gonna rotate. If you didn't want that, shoulda bought a scope with a side mount turret for the parallax error corrections, commonly known as "side focus".
However, in your case, I think I'd set it for 75 yards & see if that works for you. As I understand it, feral hogs are frequently a close-range proposition & woods hunting should be self-explanitory.
900F
It sounds to me as though you're going to have a bit of variation in the ranges you might encounter. Therefore, yup, the lens cap is gonna rotate. If you didn't want that, shoulda bought a scope with a side mount turret for the parallax error corrections, commonly known as "side focus".
However, in your case, I think I'd set it for 75 yards & see if that works for you. As I understand it, feral hogs are frequently a close-range proposition & woods hunting should be self-explanitory.
900F
Some Beach
Member
Flash!: I just got back from the Academy up there a few hours ago. I'm looking for a case, found a $10 Allen soft case (made in the USA) but the zipper barely, and I mean barely, goes passed the elevation/windage knobs on the scope. It's a really tight fit so it looks like I'm going to have to spend a few more $$$ and get a wider bag.
CB900F: Yeah, I was looking at the AO earlier and pretty much came to the same conclusion. I can live with a lens cover not being straight up but I just wanted to see where you guys were putting your AO.
CB900F: Yeah, I was looking at the AO earlier and pretty much came to the same conclusion. I can live with a lens cover not being straight up but I just wanted to see where you guys were putting your AO.
King Ghidora wrote:
Dude, why are you getting so bent out of shape because someone doesn't have high accolades for a piece of equipment that you have.
Get over it. I fail to see why people get so emotionally invested in a piece of gear. It is almost as if they NEED the validation of their peers.
I'm happy that you like Simmons. I won't bring one into my home.
Three strikes and your out. I've had Simmons optics that flat-out SUCK at light transmission in failing light of dusk and dawn hunting. I've seen THREE Nikon Prostaffs with 40mm objectives do better in light transmission than THREE Simmons with 50mm objectives.
We won't even get into holding zero. No, on second thought, we will.
Two of the three Simmons optics that I used would not hold zero from one hunt to the next-- being transported in a padded hard-side case and NEVER bumped. They've cost my father at least one deer.
You may "know" glass, but I seriously doubt you've mounted your camera on your firearm and aimed through it.
Simmons may well be a better company now-- the Three Simmons optics that I owned were purchased about 5 years ago. However, I'll ALWAYS believe 4 years of my OWN experience over your opinion. They were all replaced by Nikon Prostaffs last year and I've already been amazed at the step-up in clarity, light-transmission, and ability to hold zero.
Now, I may well be on here in 4 more years complaining about these three Nikon Prostaffs. Time will only tell. Thusfar, I'm impressed.
If I do have to revise my opinion, or if someone disagrees with my assessment, so be it. I surely won't get bent out of shape over it.
For disclosure, the only Prostaff that I have is on my Ruger 10/22. The rest are on my father's 30-06, my mother's .243, and my nephew's .243. I use a Leupold Mk IV on my .308, and an Aimpoint on my AR.
-- John
Dude, why are you getting so bent out of shape because someone doesn't have high accolades for a piece of equipment that you have.
Get over it. I fail to see why people get so emotionally invested in a piece of gear. It is almost as if they NEED the validation of their peers.
I'm happy that you like Simmons. I won't bring one into my home.
Three strikes and your out. I've had Simmons optics that flat-out SUCK at light transmission in failing light of dusk and dawn hunting. I've seen THREE Nikon Prostaffs with 40mm objectives do better in light transmission than THREE Simmons with 50mm objectives.
We won't even get into holding zero. No, on second thought, we will.
Two of the three Simmons optics that I used would not hold zero from one hunt to the next-- being transported in a padded hard-side case and NEVER bumped. They've cost my father at least one deer.
You may "know" glass, but I seriously doubt you've mounted your camera on your firearm and aimed through it.
Simmons may well be a better company now-- the Three Simmons optics that I owned were purchased about 5 years ago. However, I'll ALWAYS believe 4 years of my OWN experience over your opinion. They were all replaced by Nikon Prostaffs last year and I've already been amazed at the step-up in clarity, light-transmission, and ability to hold zero.
Now, I may well be on here in 4 more years complaining about these three Nikon Prostaffs. Time will only tell. Thusfar, I'm impressed.
If I do have to revise my opinion, or if someone disagrees with my assessment, so be it. I surely won't get bent out of shape over it.
For disclosure, the only Prostaff that I have is on my Ruger 10/22. The rest are on my father's 30-06, my mother's .243, and my nephew's .243. I use a Leupold Mk IV on my .308, and an Aimpoint on my AR.
-- John
Maverick223
Member
The super sniper 10x would be good as well as the bushnell 4200 10x. I would stick with a fixed moderate power as you can get better optics in a more rugged and repeatable package. I would stay away from the tacti-cool stuff that seems too good to be true (such as Barska, NCStar, etc.). 
Go for a basic scope that has the features that you NEED and wait for the other stuff (large/variable magnification, front focal plane, etc.). The options that I would want in a scope for your use and budget include the following: Rugged/Repeatable/Proven Construction, Good Optics, Target Turrets (preferably in mils), a Mil Dot or other ranging reticle, and a decent magnification (most snipers prefer a 10x). Things to avoid are shotty (Chinese) construction, foggy optics, hunter turrets, and obscene magnification (at least at your budget). Happy shooting, Mav.
Go for a basic scope that has the features that you NEED and wait for the other stuff (large/variable magnification, front focal plane, etc.). The options that I would want in a scope for your use and budget include the following: Rugged/Repeatable/Proven Construction, Good Optics, Target Turrets (preferably in mils), a Mil Dot or other ranging reticle, and a decent magnification (most snipers prefer a 10x). Things to avoid are shotty (Chinese) construction, foggy optics, hunter turrets, and obscene magnification (at least at your budget). Happy shooting, Mav.
- Status
