Which Scope for a 10/22?

[Animal Mother]

I'm looking to purchase a scope for my 10/22.

I've been shooting for nearly twenty years, but I've never mounted a scope on any of my rifles. I'd like to get a decent quality scope but I also don't want to spend a tremendous amount of money on something that falls into the category of "nice to have" in this political and economic environment. At the same time I don't want to waste my time with garbage, so if I have to spend more, I will.

I've been looking at the following two scopes but I don't know which would be better or if I'm overlooking something much better in this same price range (max $75). I'd use it mostly for plinking and target shooting.

Simmons 22 MAG 3-9x32 Adjustable Objective Riflescope with Rings
http://www.simmonsoptics.com/Riflescopes_22Mag.htm

Bushnell .22 Rimfire 3-9x32 with Rings
http://www.shopbushnell.com/product_detail.asp?T1=BSN+762239

Which is the better scope, or what else would be better for around $50 to $75?

 

[alaskanativeson]

I don't know about Simmons, but Bushnell quality control has gone downhill a lot lately from what I've seen.

 

[ThomasT]

I have had several Simmons scopes. The warranties on them are good. I know because I have sent two of them back for replacement. I don't buy Simmons anymore.

I have had better luck with Bushnells but the ones I have are several years old. I quit buying the really cheap scopes.

If you can fight your way to spend a hundred bucks on a scope have a look at the Nikon Pro-staff 4 powers. They come with a good set of tip off rings and have very clear glass for their price point. Plus they have a decent amount of eye relief. I now have have 2 4Xs. 2 2x7s and a 3x9. I'm happy with these scopes.

The 4X is set to have a 50 yard paralax for 22 rifle use.

 

[madcratebuilder]

Of the two you listed the Bushnell would be my choice. If you could add another $50 to the scope fund I would highly recommend the Mueller APV. It's a 4.5X14X40 with adjustable objective that can focus down to 10 yards.

 

[CajunBass]

I've got a couple of Simmons and a couple of Bushnells that were in that price range. Although they're not the specific models you've listed, they both work just fine. If I was going to buy a new one, and I might before too long, I'm getting another 10/22 for Christmas, I'd get the Bushnell, but only because I can walk into Gander Mountain, and pick one up off the rack.

 

[ArmedBear]

I you're willing to go to $100, there's a MUCH better rimfire scope: the Nikon 4x32.

I have a Simmons 22 Mag Compact 4X. It is bright and reasonably sharp. It's okay if you look perfectly straight through it, but it has pronounced curved distortion if your eye is at all off-center. It's not all that noticeable at the range, but in the field, it can be really disconcerting. I've looked through other Simmons scopes, and it appears that this is a common "feature."

 

[FN5.7shooter]

I have both and the Simmons with the adjustable objective is the winner for me. Get the adjustable objective model from Simmons. It will make a good scope for a rimfire. Scopes without an adjustable objective are usually focused at 100 yards for centerfire rifles. Rimfire needs more like 25 to 50 yards focus and the adjustable models allow for this.

 

[ArmedBear]

Rimfire scopes are generally set for 50 yards, FN.

That said, I shoot rimfires at 100, with irons, too. And I've never seen any problems arise from a 50- or 100-yard fixed objective.

I'd choose a better scope, not a Simmons with more features. Maybe that's just me.

 

[jmr40]

Sorry, but I cannot reccomend any scope under $100. They are junk and you will regret buying it. The least expensive scope I would suggest is one of the Nikon Prostaff models. Walmart sells a 2-7X that would be perfect on a .22 for $129. The 3-9X is $149. Don't waste your money on anything less.

 

[BSlacker]

You get what you pay for is evident but the OP is asking about two specific scopes. Inexpensive scopes have a place and they are not junk. Everyone can't afford or desires a high end scope. All scopes have their horror stories with expensive hunts ruined and important matches lost but for general plinking and fun a low cost scope is fine. If one is going on the once in a lifetime blue speckled squirrel hunt and everyone know this type only come out at sundown then get the best scope you can get you will only get one shot but for plinking around in broad daylight a low cost scope will be fine. I have been shooting 44 years and have but one broken cheap scope (Tasco) it was on a FAL when it broke. What are people doing to the poor little cheapie scopes to routinely break them. Get the one with the adjustable objective and don't look back.

 

[JWarren]

Either of those optics on a rimfire will probably be fine.

My mother has a Redfield 4X rimfire scope on her Belgian Browning that has worked for over 25 years. A lot of optics will hold up well on a .22 rimfire.

I personally have a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 on my target 10/22. Those are great optics for the $150 you pay for them if you don't have a problem with the parallex being set fixed at 100 yards.


-- John

 

[aka108]

I just recieved delivery of a Clearidge 3X9X32 with AO. Looks and feels of good quality with great optics. Made in Japan. Cost was 211 delivered. Haven't had it out for sighting in at this moment but I don't visualize any problems.

 

[ArmedBear]

In my experience, standard 10/22's aren't accurate enough to need more than a 4X.

The Nikon 4x32mm at Wal-Mart is a great scope, $100, and will see a lot better than the rifle can shoot, for the best price, with no knobs to fiddle with, and no need for AO.

Though it's a good scope, I wouldn't get a 3-9x40mm for $150, if you really wanted to keep to a budget, but I would spend $100 on the 4x Nikon. I might go buy one today, come to think of it, and put the Simmons back in the box.

Anyone want to buy a Simmons 22 Mag Compact 4X scope with rings, with box, excellent condition?

 

[JImbothefiveth]

In my experience, standard 10/22's aren't accurate enough to be worth more than a 4X.

It might depend on how you are shooting. I shoot mostly offhand, and I always keep my scope on the highest magnification, 9. This allows me to group far better than with irons, and I don't think I can outshoot it yet.

It may be different for prone or benchrest, however.

 

[ArmedBear]

The gun can't shoot better than 2" at 100 yards (realistically, not even that). A (quality) 9X scope can easily see pencil lines at 100 yards. I'm just saying you don't need that much magnification to hit what you can see with peep sights. Yes, with a scope you'll be more accurate, or at least I sure am. There's just no pressing need to magnify the target so much when you can't reliably hit something smaller than a tennis ball, from a benchrest, with the rifle in question.

I suppose that, offhand, you can use 9X to force you to hold really steady, but when I've shot my far-more-accurate .30-06 bolt offhand in a charity match (which BTW I won), I turned the thing down to where the movement of my body was visible but not disconcerting.

Anyway, since the OP wants to save money, I figure that, for the application, the truly excellent $100 4x32mm Nikon is a much better value than a crappy 3-9. That would still be true if it were a more accurate rifle.

Now of course there's nothing wrong with a 3-9 or a 4-12, or whatever. When price, size, weight, etc. enter the picture, though, there are certain tradeoffs that I think are better than others, in a given situation.

 

[wally]

I'm very happy with my BSA 4-16X 40mm on my ruger 10/22.

Photos and sample targets are shown in: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=131138

This scope is pretty easy to find for ~$60.

I recommend the ruger base CDNN sells for $5, then you can use any Weaver mount rings.

--wally.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Yeah, get a Mueller, not Simmons. As for the low end Bushnell, it'll be better than the Simmons, IMO, but not as good as a Bushnell Banner or Mueller or Swift. I now avoid Simmons and BSA like the plague, after several bad experiences, except for the Simmons Master Series Aetec. I still happily buy & use Bushnells, if they are the "Banner" or higher lines.

 

[rangerruck]

here is the best overall scope ever made. Why? is it most accurate and repeatable? no. Is it clearest? no. does it use the best glass ever made? no.
But it is clear, it is repeatable, it is solid steel, even the rings/mounts. it can take severe punishment, it is adult, spring piston, air rifle rated, so you know it
can take recoil as well. it will focus down to 7 ft. which is awesome, because
it has an adjustable AO down to 7 ft.
Best of all, it is less than 50 dollars.

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=00209GA3932AGD

this is good, because normally these are out of stock. you can also find them
in the big box stores, but they will be in the big plastic blister pacs, not in the box.
Be careful, not to get the centerfire style scope, it is not air rifle rated, nor does it have an Adjustable Objective(AO).
It is the tasco golden antler. it is a 3x9x32, so it is not huge, and overpowering looking on a 22, and it allready comes with appropriate sized rings and mounts.

 

[GeezerwithGuns]

I fitted my 10/22 with a 1.5-4.5 Bushnell Banner scope. I have found it to be adequate for my needs at the ranges (up to 100 yds) I typically shoot rimfire. It is actually "recommended" for air rifles & shotguns (supposed to withstand recoil). It was a little difficult to zero, but once I got it set up, it works reasonably well and delivers acceptable accuracy. Note that I use the terms "adequate," "reasonable" and "acceptable" because it is not in the same league as high priced center fire glass and I don't want to create that impression. At 50yds, I can make easy head shots on prairie rats.

While it's certainly not state-of-the-art, at around $85 (on sale) it serves its purpose.

 

[Lucky Strike]

Another vote for the Mueller APV.....i did some research (mostly at rimfirecentral.com ) and that was the most recommended scope

 

[Pat4x4]

yep,mueller APV is a great scope.. tight on the eye relief but worth it.

 

[Animal Mother]

After hearing all the responses I'm definitely thinking about spending the extra cash and going for a Mueller. From what I understand I can mount the Mueller on my AR-15 if I wanted to and it could handle the recoil.

 

[tango2echo]

Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40mm. Found one on sale for about $110. Put it on a SS 10/22. That combo has accounted for lots of meals of squirrel biscuits and gravy over the years.

T2E

 

[Lucky Strike]

"After hearing all the responses I'm definitely thinking about spending the extra cash and going for a Mueller. From what I understand I can mount the Mueller on my AR-15 if I wanted to and it could handle the recoil"


Hmmm....i just got an AR15 and hadn't even thought of mounting the APV to it. If your right about it handling the recoil then I could definitely see myself buying two sets of quick disconnect mounts so I can switch back and forth between the APV and the EOTech that's currently on my AR15

 

[moosehunt]

A good rule of thumb to remember is that one should spend at least as much on a scope as the gun cost. Personally, I think that about a 4x is all that a .22 justifies (not talking target guns here). I was pretty lucky last year and walked into a gun show up in Idaho and ran across an older, US made 4x Redfield that was in new condition--marked $40. I thought it was a mismark, supposed to be $140, but asked the guy if $40 was the price. He said yes, so I offered him $30 and walked off with it. What a steal! Works REALLY fine on my 10/22.