Scope comparison question

[Red Tornado]

I'm looking for an inexpensive scope and was wondering which would be better between comparably priced Leapers, Tasco, or Bushnell. I've got a BSA, and it's alright, but I thought something else might be better for another rifle.

BTW, it's a $100 gun, so I'm not spending more than that on the scope. That leaves Leupold, Swarovski, etc. out.
Thanks,
RT

 

[repsychler]

No experience with Leapers, but I have used Tasco and Bushnell and would choose Bushnell.

 

[HankB]

Leapers scopes are OK for people with low expectations on guns with little recoil which are only used in warm, dry conditions.

Tasco is sometimes referred to as "Trashco" . . . I've seen more than a few that fell apart internally. Their top of the line 'scopes are not actually bad, but their bottom of the line is fit only for toys.

Bushnell makes some decent "cheap" scopes, but I'd avoid their "bottom" line scopes.

You neglected to give particulars on that "$100" rifle (cartridge, the type of shooting you do, etc.) so I can't really get more specific in my recommendations.

 

[Red Tornado]

Thanks Guys.

Hank, it's a K31, so fair amount of recoil, and it will mostly only be used at the 100 yard range. If I find a longer range, I'll shoot it, but that's all that's available in this area. I mostly just want to find out how accurate the rifle is by taking my bad eyesight out of the equation.
Thanks,
RT

 

[JackOfAllTradesMasterAtNone]

If you're gonna stay cheap, then I'd say TASCO if you expect to buy new. But, I just bought a slightly used NIKON Buckmaster from a guy here on THR for $130 shipped. (~$240 new) Lifetime warranty like Leupold. And it's just as bright or brighter than my Leupold VXII's

You can find the lesser NIKON Prostaff for less than $100 used, or just over that new.

I like Bushnell, and have at least one of higher quality. But the lesser models don't impress me.

-Steve

 

[Red Tornado]

I'm an idiot. I totally spaced checking THR and TFL (although it's usually the same ads) for a scope. It's worse because I bought my last scope here. :banghead:

Anyway, I went with a Bushnell 3x9x32. I've heard "trashco" before, and Hank's description of Leapers was enough for me. Anyway, it won't be used too hard and will only be in daylight, so the objective should be enough. I'd rather have lower rings than a larger objective. It'll probably end up on a .22 eventually anyway.

Thanks for the help.
RT

 

[rbernie]

BTW, it's a $100 gun, so I'm not spending more than that on the scope.

That's generally a mistake in the long run. Even my $70 Marlin rimfire gets at LEAST a used Burris or Nikon, and preferably a Leupold VXI or VariX-II, and I'm by no means dripping in coin.

If I had back the money I've wasted on $30-$100 scopes over the last ten years, I could pool it and buy a BOATLOAD of VXIIs and be a lot happier with the end result...

 

[Red Tornado]

Good point Rbernie, but this is primarily just to see how accurate the rifle is and then I'll be shooting mostly iron sights.

If I ever get a place to do any long range shooting, a good scope will be in the mix.
Thanks,
RT