FrankenMauser
New member
johnnyc, did you end up buying a scope?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Scope Suggestion?
- Thread starter jonnyc
- Start date
FrankenMauser
New member
Take a look at Athlon scopes.
A lot of bang for your buck.
Even their "bottom end" offerings absolutely eclipse the common recommendations - Vortex's crappy glass, and vague and sticky adjustments, in particular.
A lot of bang for your buck.
Even their "bottom end" offerings absolutely eclipse the common recommendations - Vortex's crappy glass, and vague and sticky adjustments, in particular.
Why the hate for twist in rings?
Not Tacticool enough! I can remember getting criticized for using Weaver mounts back in the day instead of twist in style rings and bases.
Not criticizing here. Not sure what Tacticool is, but I’m sure that is important somehow.
Twist in rings tend to either come loose or get loose over time. This is not to mention the problems getting them aligned to the scope tube and the bore axis. This is where scope ring marks seem to come from….
I’ve just seen others loose animals or opportunities due to equipment failure. I haven’t for a long time…..or we’ll ever that I can remember.
Odd in this thread I come off as the overspender….normally I’m being picked at for suggesting my lowly cheap optics and mounts make acceptable aiming devices.
Also called dual dovetail (DD) rings, I haven't had a chance to try them. Seems it offers the mechanism to take out misalignment between rings without lapping. Don't see the point of it with one-piece base or picatinny rail. Strongest mount system they claim. I simply don't see that.
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
-TL
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
@Frankenmauser: I apologize for piggy backing your comment about athlons and vortexes, but you were so spot on that I had to "second" your opinion.
The original poster can get an Athlon Neos, 3-9X, 40mm obj for 100$ from MidwayUSA. A decent scope for the money. My only reservation is that the lower end Athlons seem to be a bit heavier than other scopes in a comparable class. However, and extra ounce or two shouldn't be an issue at the range or for hunting conditions in Pennsylvania. Also as previously mentioned, 100$ can get you a 9-3X, 40mm Hawke (Hawke Sport Optics). You can get a Hawke with a parallax adjustable objective, which would allow you to use it in the future on a .22 rimfire. Another scope to consider is a Burris Droptine, 9-3X, 40mm. It is 40$ over the budget, but if I could scrape together an extra 40$, then the Burris would be my first choice. If the budget is still limited to 100$, then the Athlon would be the choice.
@Nathan: I agree with you about dovetail rings. I'm in the process of switching mine out. Oh...and don't apologize for using quality, but cost effective optics. Not all of us, (myself included), can afford Meopta of Kahles scopes. After you reach a certain price level, the benefit versus cost ratio starts diminishing.
The original poster can get an Athlon Neos, 3-9X, 40mm obj for 100$ from MidwayUSA. A decent scope for the money. My only reservation is that the lower end Athlons seem to be a bit heavier than other scopes in a comparable class. However, and extra ounce or two shouldn't be an issue at the range or for hunting conditions in Pennsylvania. Also as previously mentioned, 100$ can get you a 9-3X, 40mm Hawke (Hawke Sport Optics). You can get a Hawke with a parallax adjustable objective, which would allow you to use it in the future on a .22 rimfire. Another scope to consider is a Burris Droptine, 9-3X, 40mm. It is 40$ over the budget, but if I could scrape together an extra 40$, then the Burris would be my first choice. If the budget is still limited to 100$, then the Athlon would be the choice.
@Nathan: I agree with you about dovetail rings. I'm in the process of switching mine out. Oh...and don't apologize for using quality, but cost effective optics. Not all of us, (myself included), can afford Meopta of Kahles scopes. After you reach a certain price level, the benefit versus cost ratio starts diminishing.
Last edited:
I have a 30+yr old Winchester M70 308 Lightweight with a 4x Leupold in Redfield rings (dovetail) with a one piece base. I have never had a mount issue on this gun and it does have some recoil. I am fortunate to be able to hunt all year around and my guns get lots of use. I have at least a 10 rifles and 2 Contenders that use dovetail mounts and have never had a mount related issue. I did buy a second hand set of Redfield dovetail rings and the dovetail was loose, the mount was fine. I would wager that incorrect installation (no lube) had a hand at creating this problem.
I will say that if you are the type of shooter that changes out scopes often then dovetail mounts are probably not your best option.
I also have a few rifles with Warne rings and bases and I believe you could pull a boat trailer with them!
And none of my guns have the dual dovetail variety.
I will say that if you are the type of shooter that changes out scopes often then dovetail mounts are probably not your best option.
I also have a few rifles with Warne rings and bases and I believe you could pull a boat trailer with them!
And none of my guns have the dual dovetail variety.
Last edited:
@pumpkin: I hope we're not drifting too far off topic. I don't want to get scolded by the moderators. In any case, I agree with your comments, but I also think there are better mounts now, than the dove tail ring type. My concern is not so much the wearing loose, but instead the potential for bending or denting the scope tube with a major windage adjustment in the rear mount. Making a windage adjustment moves the rings out of alignment. The rear ring moves absolutely perpendicular to the bore axis, while the front ring rotates around the bore axis. That will cause a bending. Maybe it's not enough to matter? I don't know.
hammie,
I always use a 1” aluminum rod for rotating the front ring. The rod is long enough to give you a pretty good line of sight looking down on the receiver and the rear portion of the barrel. I use my good eye ;-) to line up the rod with the receiver and then slide the rear ring underneath the rod tightening the ring screws and windage screws. Next I loosen up both rings slightly to make sure the rod moves freely. I then install the scope and use the windage adjustment for this purpose when bore sighting.
I’m sure someone has a better way but this has always worked for me.
You are correct in saying better systems exist today (more fool proof for the installer) but those systems don’t look nearly as pretty as those old blued steel dovetail mounts on an old blued steel rifle, or pistol.
I would argue in regular use, neither has an advantage over the other.
I always use a 1” aluminum rod for rotating the front ring. The rod is long enough to give you a pretty good line of sight looking down on the receiver and the rear portion of the barrel. I use my good eye ;-) to line up the rod with the receiver and then slide the rear ring underneath the rod tightening the ring screws and windage screws. Next I loosen up both rings slightly to make sure the rod moves freely. I then install the scope and use the windage adjustment for this purpose when bore sighting.
I’m sure someone has a better way but this has always worked for me.
You are correct in saying better systems exist today (more fool proof for the installer) but those systems don’t look nearly as pretty as those old blued steel dovetail mounts on an old blued steel rifle, or pistol.
I would argue in regular use, neither has an advantage over the other.