Do you ever just stop and bang your head against the wall?

I typically don't even bother with scopes for hunting rifles, with the exception of an old High Standard .22LR I use for squirrels. It has a 4x Weaver on it. Otherwise, I hunt in the swamp. I've never dropped a pig farther than 15-20 yards. If I can see 25 yards, that would be a long shot. I usually just go with a William's peep sight. I do like scopes on some of my fun guns though.

Back on topic, I'm still trying to talk him out of it. I haven't officially failed until he orders it.
 
I typically don't even bother with scopes for hunting rifles, with the exception of an old High Standard .22LR I use for squirrels. It has a 4x Weaver on it. Otherwise, I hunt in the swamp. I've never dropped a pig farther than 15-20 yards. If I can see 25 yards, that would be a long shot.
Click to expand...

That was pretty much the case when I lived in Florida and used to traipse around in the everglades. Here in northern AZ, it's an entirely different set of rules, not to mention that, at my age now, my eyes suck.

However, two endorsements for the 4x makes me think I'll try it first before I plunk down a bunch of cash for something higher powered.

I just noticed that you are from Lutz. I'm familiar with that area, too. Used to a lot of swamp stuff in Pasco County.
 
Last edited:
Blindstitch,
This is the shooters version of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

A riflescope under $200 cannot be made.

Sure, there are some $100, $150, etc scopes which can fool you pretty good and for a while, but you will pay in lost game and extra sight in ammo pretty quickly.

Let's say I shoot my 308 with good factory ammo $40 with that $70 + $10 to ship scope. It will cost me $120 to prove out this scope ain't gonna make the grade. If I buy a $200 scope to start with, I'm only out another $80 and I should be able to sight in in 2 shots. If I don't like my $200 scope, in the case of a Burris or Leupold, it trades on eBay or Armslist for about $180, provided I mounted it right.
Click to expand...

I dont know, I have been pretty happy with my Nikon Prostaffs....
 
for the record... I have a leapers red/green dot from amazon... it's a great little dot which has been passed to a number of different guns... always easy to zero, hold zero and is relatively nice, even in low light..

Plus One here- I have had one on my 223 for over 4 years now-Switch it back and forth on the 308 many times. Still holding zero and still looking great. All I can say is--Zero scope for given yardage and use hold over from there-Tracking is very bad. 223 has over 18,000 rounds down it now with that scope. 6-24 x 56 scope and as clear as can be at all settings. Awesome Coyote scope. Has never fogged up on me yet.
 
I will admit up front that though I've been a hardcore hobbyist shooter for more than a quarter century, I'm a novice with optics... though I've had the pleasure of owning a few and using many that have covered the full spectrum of "royal crap" to "WOW, this is like pleasure for my eyeball..."

Two things occur to me straight away when it comes to cheap optics.

First thing is that cheap optics give you really, really cheap glass and what you may not notice if you haven't played with the good and the bad out there is that your eye ends up having to work much harder to see, especially when the zoom is cranked up higher. If you use a really cheap scope but you keep the zoom cranked way down, they are far easier to use before your eye simply says "I can't deal with this anymore", and for those who are prone to it, some manner of a headache can be involved.

When you spend more money on higher quality glass, you end up with a view that your eye can deal with far better and you won't get as "tired" trying to look through it.

The second thing is that you have a much, much better chance at making a cheap optic actually work "acceptably" well if it ends up mounted on a rig that doesn't physically abuse it as much. You can spend less on a scope for a rimfire and take the whole "recoil shock" out of the the equation.

If your pal is going to mount a $79 scope on a .308 and you have done your due diligence to explain how bad an idea this is... IMO, this is where you step back and smile and watch all the absolute WASTE you will witness:

--wasted money on that glass
--wasted money in his ammo
--serious wasted time and effort if it's handloads
--totally wasted time & effort in the buying, waiting for shipping, mounting
--more wasted time & effort at the range
...all for him to end up with a rifle that won't shoot because of his wild idea that a $79 scope is the answer.

Try one last "Hail Mary" on him.
Ask him to remove the emotions and simply try to look at it from a business standpoint.

Ask him how it's even possible that Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, Burris and all of the high dollar rifle scope builders could ever possibly survive in this business when they simply don't sell any rifle scopes under three hundred bucks, and they sell so many over $600... in a world where anyone with a computer can get a "similar" product for $79 shipped? :confused:
 
Sevens- Your points are all Valid, But lets look at all the $100.00 and less Tasco scopes that have been mounted on 308's,7MM's and such for 30 plus years and are still holding zero and are still shooting deer. Tell one of these Guys that he needs to spend $300.00 or more on a scope if he wants to hunt deer. You might get a ear full.

Bigfats- 6-24 is not a crazy power. I have a 22 with a 20 power on it. That is my lowest power scope I have. I can shoot at all distances possable with that scope.
 
i am vey happy with my 3-9 bushnell i have now on ar15, it was just shy over a hundred bucks. i have at least 2000 rounds under it, with 6-700 being highpower. i have a nice mount for it, and the zero hasnt budged. i dont think you HAVE to spend 300$, but not syaing it isn't nice to.
 
The best "inexpensive" nice scope that I have is a Mueller 4-14X that I paid about $168 for, about 4 years ago. It has great glass and adjustments, helping me shoot tiny groups with my .223 Rem Tikka 595.

(I'm a Leupold believer, especially the VX2 and VXII. They're bright, exceptionally clear, lightweight, and tough. More expensive scopes I've used don't compare for value.)
 
There are decent scopes that are cheap, both red dot and optical. I wouldn't put them on anything with heavy recoil. I have a BSA red dot on a 22a and it's perfect, paid $19 at cabelas for it. I also have a Simmons whitetail 6-20x50 I bought at midway. The glass is very clear and bright. It tracks perfectly and holds zero but it's on a 22-250 that weighs 9lbs. I'll buy another one of these in heartbeat. Barska optics I have seen are horrible, nc red dots I have seen are junk. But you can find some decent cheap stuff.
 
Cheap Scopes

Blindstitch has a good point. Fifteen years ago, I began applying for my rocky mountain goat license (that's the white one) in Colorado. As a side note, it takes most people at least ten years to draw; however, I was lucky, I drew in seven. So what does this have to do with cheap scopes, you ask?

A couple of years before I drew my license, I purchased a used Savage 110 in 30-06. It came with a fixed 4X scope with no brand name. I checked the zero; it was dead on where I wanted it at 100 yards. I used this rifle and the no brand name scope to harvest (that's the politically correct way to say it, these days) my goat, opening morning. Of course, I had my Weatherby 300 as a back up gun stowed in the truck.
 
Sevens- Your points are all Valid, But lets look at all the $100.00 and less Tasco scopes that have been mounted on 308's,7MM's and such for 30 plus years and are still holding zero and are still shooting deer. Tell one of these Guys that he needs to spend $300.00 or more on a scope if he wants to hunt deer. You might get a ear full.
Click to expand...
I believe that my point and your point can BOTH exist happily together in the real world. ;)

First, if you have a guy that has had a cheap scope mounted on a gun for THIRTY YEARS and it's been working, then of course, there's no way to sell him a $300 piece of glass. Frankly, it wouldn't be a stretch to suggest that if he's been running a Tasco for -30- years, he might be one of the (many) folks who shoots four cartridges a year... 3 to check zero and one to cull his deer. He may be one of guys that produces those cool old cartridge boxes you see at gun shows, you know the ones I mean-- 20 round box, 3 rounds missing, 16 rounds look like they've never been pulled from the box and one round is all tarnished. :D This gentleman could also be quite satisfied with a rifle that gives him a 3-inch, 5-shot group at 100 yards, as this rig will probably still harvest deer depending on where in the country you hunt.

If it works for him, he should stick with it. But I also might suggest that a 30-year old Tasco (especially one that's been working all this time) is probably a finer rig than a new $79 Xiangdog Amazon SuperZhoom.

And if his $100 Tasco didn't work in the first two years he had it (I'm sure that happened a good bit...) then he'd be running something else over the last 28 years.

And finally...
http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
$100 spent on a Tasco scope 30 years ago (1984) is:
$228.97 spent today.
$228.97 in 2014 dollars buys better glass than the $79 Xiangdog Amazon SuperZhoom.
 
4runnerman- You're right, 24x isn't a crazy power. But in a $59 scope it's ridiculous.

I agree there are plenty of inexpensive scopes that will get the job done. Bushnell, Tasco, etc, I'm a big fan of Mueller myself. But these are all companies that you can contact for warranty issues and they will likely stand behind their products. But who do you call when the scope doesn't have a name?
 
A riflescope under $200 cannot be made.
Click to expand...

Not true. There are a number of useable scopes to be had for under 200 bucks.


To everyone else... I'm a believer in good glass most of the time. With that being said, there is a time and a place for a 50 dollar scope if you buy the "right" 50 dollar scope. Fixed power scopes are easier to make... hence out of two scopes, one fixed and one variable power, of equal quality the fixed power should be cheaper. Target turrets, parallax adjustment, fancy reticles, and the like are more bells and whistles that are harder to pull off within a budget. So... moral of the story, I have a leapers 4x fixed scope that holds zero quite well. The glass isn't super quality, but it works for all I needed it for (really just bought it to try and see how good of a group a couple of different rifles with crappy iron sights would hold without having to remove a scope from one of my nice rigs). There are some good red dots that are decent and can be had for under 100 bucks, too. If you use a gun as part of your job, you need to drop more money on optics than 50 or 60 bucks. I would even dare say if you're hunting with it, though I wouldn't be afraid for a minute to hunt with my 4x leapers. I don't... I have Bushnell Elites for that... but I would if I had to. Just remember, though, that inexpensive is not ALWAYS cheap. Look at what it's being used for. I have a $10 uncle mikes holster for my duty P227. My firearms coordinator talks junk to me for having it, but all I use it for is to wear it at the range without having to wear my duty belt. It's never used for carry, and it serves the purpose I need it for.

To the OP, I know what you're talking about with your friend. You're talking about him buying a super tacticool 8-24 power, target turrets, mil-reticle, laser pointers, and "shock-proof" for 70 bucks to plop on a nice rifle. That is, in fact, a waste of money.
 
simply don't sell any rifle scopes under three hundred bucks, and they sell so many over $600.
Click to expand...

You answered your own question. By having a 2,000% markup on their products and having them made overseas.

Jim
 
A riflescope under $200 cannot be made.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I bought an old Leupold off my friend for $75 a few years back. Best $75 scope i ever bought. :D

I get what you mean. There are plenty of scopes for under $200 that are quality. Someone mentioned the Nikon Prostaff. That is a wonderful scope for the money, and i would put one on a rifle and have zero doubts about it's ability to do it's job.
 
Hate to admit that almost any scope is better than NO Scope. The national benchrest champ years ago, used a Tasco on his BR rifle. Yes it was a Japan model, but had good optics and tracking.

I also have an 8-32x Japanese Tasco that has been on several rifles. It still works fine and goes to the range with me sometimes.

A no-name 4X scope came on a used rifle a few years ago and though the optics aren't the best, it holds zero and is on a grandson's rifle now.

As we get older and more affluent, we forget how it is when folks just get into shooting. They may not have much money, but have enthusiasm. My start was like that, young family, not much money, but a love of shooting/hunting. So long ago. Still, I have very few expensive rifles costing over $800, and the most I've paid for a scope is about $300.
 
OP,
I know what you mean. My son-in-law's father has a Sauer 200 in 30-06 with a Barska 3X9 from Sportsman's Guide. He's never zeroed the scope or even fired the rifle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top