Buying a scope

G

galt

New member
I have seen some guidelines on buying a scope, like you should plan on spending as much on the scope as the rifle. So a $200 10/22 should get a $200 scope, and a $1200 M1A should get $1200 scope. This seems a bit arbitrary, and maybe not the most practical.

Anybody have any different guidelines?

Also, specifically right now, I am thinking about a scope for my on-order 10/22 in SS/Synthetic (first rifle). What features should I look for, and how much should I spend? Or should I just leave it iron, and start on the Remington 700 fund ?

------------------
galt
Speak Out on the Net http://www.netcitizen.org
 
I stuck $50 worth of 3x9 Tasco on my 10/22 and it works just fine. It isn't much of a scope but will do for a .22. Save your $ for a Leupold on the 700.

------------------
bullet placement is gun control
 
I look at it like this... what is the most cost effective scope for the job the rifle will be asked to perform.

Example - A scope for my AR. Yes I could get a inexpensive (< $100) or one that approaches the cost of the gun ($1K). The former probably wouldn't be the best and the latter would be over kill. I settled on a mid-range ($250) one that will suit the jobs this rifle will be asked to perform. (short to mid range shooting)

Now the scope for my AWP is a different story. Rifle is capable of long range ( > 500 yds) 15 second of angle accuracy. What was needed was a high performance scope with optimum clarity, repeatable click adjustmnets and a range finding reticle. This called for a top of the line scope (approx $900)

For a 10/22 I probably would get something around the $200 mark. The reason I say this is due to the fact that there are many inexpensive user installed after-market parts available for the 10/22 to accurize it and more then likly you will be adding some in the future (most people do). You want a scope that will work when you make changes.

If you don't plan on accurizing it the a scope of lesser cost will work fine. One thing though... stay away from the ".22 Scopes" that have the small tubes. Get a normal sized tube with a good Objective lense (32mm).



------------------
Schmit
GySgt, USMC(Ret)
NRA Life, Lodge 1201-UOSSS
"Si vis Pacem Para Bellum"
 
Yes, a cheap scope might be "good enough" for a .22 but I shoot my .22 a lot more often than my centerfires and I want good glass. I put a Leupold Compact RF 2x-7x on my .22 rifle. The optical quality is great and the parallax is adjusted for shorter ranges. My second choice was the Leupold Vari-X II EFR 3x-9x. The clarity and precision of these scopes are much better than the cheaper models and you can't beat the Leupold lifetime warranty.

On my centerfires I have a Leupold Vari-X III, two Bausch and Lomb Elite 4000s and I have a Leupold Compact 2.5x that I often take along as a backup scope or use for shotgun hunts. They are all good scopes. I would also recommend the Elite 3000 as a good choice at a cheaper price. I know people with Burris and Nikon who speak highly of them. The only Simmons I would consider is the AETEC and the one with the adjustable objective might be a good choice for a .22 rimfire.

I've tried super high end Zeiss, Swarowski and Kahles and didn't think I needed the features that they offered. European hunting is very different than it is here. They need more light gathering because they can hunt at night. If you are going to buy any one item on the high end make it binoculars. You look through them a lot more often than a rifle scope and the light gathering and superb optical quality means less eye strain during use.

I had a hunt go sour when a cheap scope and binoculars crapped out in bad weather. I went out and bought better optics and haven't looked back.

[This message has been edited by PJR (edited September 13, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top