The cheap scope...

K

KROIL

New member
What is a cheap scope ? I had a BSA pistol scope mounted on a .45/70 chambered Thompson Contender that lasted exactly 3 rounds and pulped the innards. I have a $700 Leupold on a .300 w/m BAR that I just hate. I have a early 70's Tasco 3x9x32 (remember all Tascos are junk ?) that is now mounted on its FIFTH rifle and still holds zero after a couple thousand rounds. My neighbors 12 year old son got his first deer this season lookin through a cheap $29 BSA. I guess what I am trying to say is all scope mfgrs make good ones and bad regardless of the price. Optics have come a long way....I would bet a WW2 sniper would have loved one of the $29 BSA's if he could have had one.
 
I have a red dot that won't hold zero on a bb gun. And that's not an exaggeration. But I also agree to some extent, I feel like I can get a "really good scope" for under $100. I'm glad I'm not the only one that would rather shoot without a Leupold :rolleyes:
 
I have a early 70's Tasco 3x9x32 (remember all Tascos are junk ?) that is now mounted on its FIFTH rifle and still holds zero after a couple thousand rounds
Click to expand...

I have 3 Tasco's. None cost me more than $120. All work great. I have them on a .22, a 7mm-08 and a 30.06. The one on the 30.06 came from WalMart for $40 or so.

For low priced scopes I'll be sticking with Tasco. Should I ever need a high priced scope I'll wish Tasco made one, I guess.
 
It's pretty well known that Tascos of yester-year are higher quality than those made today. I forget what year they quit making the better ones, though.

I'm not a fan of Leupold either.. you can get the same quality for less, or spend the same amount and get higher quality from other brands.

I had a Simmons Pro50 that I was pretty happy with until it quit holding a zero on my .30-06.. and I'm talking catastrophic failure. It was good, then progressively each shot got farther off the point of aim. It only took about 5 shots before I was not even hitting a 8.5x11 piece of paper at 100 yards. That was when I gave up on "cheap" scopes.

Having said that, I was raised in the South where you had to look really, really hard to find a shot over 150 yards. Quite frankly, any scope would work as long as it held zero. It wasn't until I moved out West that I understood why you would spend so much on a scope.. a 300 yard shot is pretty average, with 400 yards not uncommon. The clarity just isn't there.. I was hunting antelope 2 years ago with my FFII (which is not a bad scope) and at 14x I couldn't tell 100% for sure if the antelope was a male or female and it was only about 400 yards away. Out here, spending $$ on scopes is money well spent.
 
I have a story for the Tascos, as I was growing up thats what me and my family all used. Killed a pile of deer and targets for that matter, recently though I switched to all Nikon optics and my Dad kept using the Tasco, he dropped one of his old ones last year and decided to just buy a new Tasco, what a pile of crap. They have literally turned to the worst, this scope woulded hold a zero on a air gun, paintball gun, or even air soft gun. Put a new 150 dollar Prostaff on it for him and the 30 year old hunting gun still shoots core lokts sub moa
 
There is a reason that the new Tascos have earned the name "Trashco." The new ones are garbage... Simmons are complete crap too... I buy scopes made in the USA, Germany, Austria and Japan (in no particular order).... I will not under any circumstances buy scopes made in China or the Phillipines...
 
I look at scopes like anything else. I would rather pay more for quality once than pay less for junk over and over and over.

I bought my fair share of cheap scopes when I was young and dumb and wish someone would have been there to talk me out of every purchase.

Bought a BSA 8-32X50.... called that one the black out scope. Anything above 12X and the eye relief became so critical that a heartbeat was enough to move my head far enough to give me total darkness in the scope. At 32X, when you could get a picture, the image was so distorted it was hard to tell exactly what you were looking at. Paid $130 for that crap. Buddy of mine tried to give me $5 for it and I refused and gave it to him with fair warning that he was wasting his time. He called a couple days later and said he took it off immediately lol. I told him just pitch it so no one else ever has to deal with it.

Bought a Bushnell Sportsman? (IIRC) 4-12X40 for a muzzleloader when I was 19. It held zero and everything but was pretty dark. Well, first day of ML season and it's about 45 degrees F and lightly raining. I'm walking to my stand when a nice 8 point runs down the hill coming right at me and stops about 35 yards in front of me broadside. I pull up and the lenses are so darned fogged up I can't see a thing. Buck sees me and bolts.

Had a Simmons on a Marlin 983 22WMR. It lasted about 100 rounds then went nuts.

But last junk scope I bought was about 12 years ago and I'll never go back.

Good scopes are not cheap and cheap scopes are not good.
 
Last edited:
I bought a Shooters Edge scope at my LGS about 3 years ago for my sons .243 and it has held up for this long with quite a few rounds down range. Pretty good scope in my opinion. Paid $49.99+tax and would definatly do it again. Best cheap scope Ive ever seen.
 
In my experience, Tasco and Simmons are junk. I have had a lot of success with Bushnell though. I put a Banner series Bushnell on my 7mm Rem Mag and it performed very well. Held zero and pulled in a lot of light. I was very happy with it and have no problems recommending it.

I eventually replaced it with a Nikon Monarch but only because I wanted to down size to a 3x9.
 
I've had several inexpensive scopes over the years, including a very fine Tasco 8-32X made in Japan. I also have three Simmons 4.5-14X ATV scopes that have been excellent, one that wasn't, but it was replaced or repaired. The Simmons ATVs are on my .22LR sporters. They focus down to about 35 feet and are extremely clear, useful on both 50' indoor and long outdoor ranges.

One of the more disappointing scopes was a Bushnell 3200 3-9X. The barrel distortion was awful. Panning across a wooded area would cause trees at the edges to appear to bend like barrel staves.

My favorite newer scope is a 3-9X Leupold VXII. The exit pupil is broad, the field of view (checked at 6x) is wider than my 2.5-10X Monarch, the image a bit clearer, and the view goes all the way to the edge, instead of seeing a black ring between it and the tube.

For a fairly inexpensive scope, my 4.5-14X Mueller is really great. It's on my .223 Tikka 595 and it works well, both at the range and in the field. It's very bright, clear, and adjustments are very good. It seems worth much more than it cost.
 
I've used several cheap scopes and have had decent luck with them. I don't think they are nearly as bad as many guys online make them out to be. I will also say that 98% of the guys I hunt with use scopes under $150, and most of those are well under $100. I had to go up to $150 because a couple of them use higher powered Simmons scopes that cost right over $100, but most of them were in the $30-70 range. It's very rare that any of them have a problem, and most of them kill plenty of deer year after year with them.

I will include a few stories of cheap scopes that I've had. I bought most of them in my younger days, or got them thrown in with something I purchased. I buy decent optics most of the time now, but with most of them it's not a huge difference that I see between the two, just that I get more piece of mind.

I will also mention that I killed a pretty decent 8 point buck with a $30 Tasco Bucksight 3-9x40 mounted on a muzzle loader several years ago. Then I also killed my biggest buck, with the same muzzle loader with the same $30 scope. It wasn't a world class buck by any means, just large for this area. It was made in China, and purchased at Walmart for $30. The glass in it is pretty decent, the scopes has held zero, and overall I'm pretty impressed by it. I've also been out in rough weather quite a bit and it's never fogged up on me. I'm very impressed when you consider the price. I bought a second one of these to use for 2 months while my Leupold was sent in for repair, and this one worked just as well for me. When I got my Leupold back, I sold this Tasco to a buddy and he is still using it to this day as am I with the one my muzzle loader. They are about 4 years old. I have thought about changing this out, but I just can't bring myself to do it as long as it keeps working well.

A friend has a similar but not exactly the same model Tasco's on a rifle that I've shot quite a bit also. The glass on this one isn't nearly as good as the above two, but it's still decent and clear enough for any hunting scenario in legal light around here. It stays zero from year to year, and has been pretty decent as well.

The other cheap scope I still have is a Simmons Deerfield 3-9x32 that is also made in China. I purchased this one about 7 years ago. It's only mounted on a .22, but it's been dropped, thrown around, bounced around in the truck, and generally just had a hard life. It's always held zero, it has pretty good glass. Even better than the Tasco. For reference, It's got better glass than both the Leupold VX-I and Nikon Prostaff I used, but isn't quite up to par with the Burris FFII. It tracks well, and it just overall works great. It's also never fogged up on me. If I'd known how well this scope was going to hold up I'd have bought 10 of these.

I had another Simmons that was a Blazer 3-9x40 that would be about 3 years old now that I got on a rifle I bought. The previous owner had used it for a year and was pretty rough on it. I used it for 9-10 months and it never moved the POI on me, and it had surprisingly good glass too. The only complaint I had about this one is the tracking was absolutely horrible. Each click was more like 1" at 100 yards instead of 1/4". However, once you got it sighted in, it stayed sighted in and worked pretty well. I'd have no qualms about using this on a hunting rifle. That said, I ended up selling it to a friend that wanted a scope, and I upgraded.

I had a Bushnell that came used on a .22 also, and this is the only cheaper Bushnell I've had. It's the one that comes on several of the Savage package rifles now. I can't say I want another one. This was one of the sorriest cheap scopes I've used. The glass while clear enough to use, sucked. The edges of the glass looked like looking through plastic, but it was decently clear in the center. The adjustments were absolutely horrible. If you made adjustments it would take a few shots to settle in, or you could tap on the top of the scope to get them to settle in. Either way it was a pain. I'd thought people tapping on their scopes were crazy as I'd never done this, and didn't want to abuse my scope, but you had to do it on this one. However, once zeroed it did hold zero. It just didn't impress me at all. I'm sure you could have taken it out and killed a deer with it, but overall, I thought it sucked, and I ended up selling it.

I also tried one of the Center Point 4-16x40's and I liked it as well. It replaced the above mentioned Bushnell. The only reason I don't still have it is because when I sold the rifle, the buyer wanted the scope also and paid $60 extra over my asking price for just the gun. Knowing I could buy another one of these new for $70 and not having anything else to put this one on I let this one go. It didn't have great glass, but was useable. At the higher powers it looked like it had a slight smoke screen to it or something. Just looked washed out, but was useable. At lower powers it was pretty decent. This one also never lost zero on me, and to my surprise it tracked perfectly and was always repeatable. The turrets on this one really surprised me. I'd have no problems using one of these either. This one was also made in China.

Last but not least, a Simmons 8 Point 3-9x40. This is the only one that has failed on me out of all of the ones I've used. I bought a Leupold scope from a guy and he threw this one in for free. He said it was new, but I can't confirm that. It looked new and didn't have any ring marks or anything, but at the same time he didn't have the box, and said one or two other things I found out weren't true later on so I'm just not sure if this one was new or use. I mounted it on a very hard kicking 30-06. I went to sight it in, and on shot number 6, something that looked like a paint chip or something started floating around inside of it blocking part of your view. This is the only cheap scope I've ever had break on me.

Considering the luck I've had with most of them, and the luck most of my friends have had with them, I just find it hard to believe that they are as bad as they have a reputation for online. I bet between the group of guys I hunt with there are probably at least 50 of these cheap scopes being used if not more than that.

Now would I take one of these on a African Safari, or a trip that cost me thousands? Not only no, but heck no. I'd want more piece of mind that I got with a cheap scope. However, would I take them hunting on an average hunt? I sure would. Heck, I even drive 2.5 hours to hunt, and I'd take them to hunt in a situation like that.

I will also mention that I've used several Bushnell products, a few Elite series scopes, a range finder, and some other accessories in addition to that cheap scope. Every Bushnell product I've used, while working, has left me disappointed. So I tend to shy away from Bushnell. Unfortunately Bushnell now also owns Simmons and Tasco. I've been fairly happy with the Tascos which I think were made after Bushnell owned them, but with the two Simmons, one of them failed, and the other one while decent tracked horribly. A lot of the guys I hunt with with Simmons, own ones that are pre Bushnell also, so I can't comment on the ones that have been made since Bushnell took over other than the couple I've used other than one buddy that bought a new Aetec and the adjustments were backwards on. That said a few guys I hunt with do use Bushnells and have had okay luck.

This is just my personal opinion on them, and review of the scopes I've used for anyone interested.
 
Last edited:
Some of the best scopes I've ever used were NcStar 2X20's that I paid $29 plus shipping for. Used one on everything including my 444 contender and a Mauser scope mount that was imfamous for eating scopes. I have a handful of Japanese Tasco LER scopes that you can't buy from me for any price. But for serious handgun scopes I always fall back on the Bushy Trophy series. For the price I haven't found anything close.
 
I've had scopes on every gun I've ever owned and until a couple years ago never spent more than $120 on ANY of them. Most were $75 or less.

The only one that EVER failed me was the most "expensive" $120 Tasco and that was after 5+ years of fine performance.

In the last two years or so, I've bought what I thought was expensive at the time, a $225 Mueller Eradicator and two $350+ Burris handgun scopes.

Interestingly, they all perform just fine, with the Burris scopes having a slight but noticeable edge in clarity over any other scopes I've owned.

I believe that the Burris scopes must have exceptional glass because I've used (though not owned) scopes that are more than twice as expensive as they are and the clarity/brightness of my Mueller was comparable to some of those high-dollar optics... meaning the Burris is better than some that cost twice as much and the Mueller almost as good at about 1/4 the cost.

Also, my father had a scope on his 12ga 1100 that he bought at K-Mart for $39 probably 25 years ago. It served him well until this year when it finally lost capability to hold zero. What more could you ask than 25 years on a hard-kicking 12ga for $39?

I believe there CAN be advantages to more expensive optics, generally in clarity of lenses, but I don't believe that differences in "toughness" or longevity are nearly as great as the price would indicate and, the optics, I have always found to be acceptable on even the cheapest of the cheap.
 
From reading, these last dozen or so years, the main problem with the cheap scopes seems to be the quality--the durability--of the internal adjustments. This is particularly true with the variables; not as much, apparently, with the fixed power scopes. By and large, lesser problems with the optical quality.

I guess that if somebody's gonna buy a cheap scope for hunting, he oughta go with a fixed 4X...
 
I have several inexpensive (sub $150) scopes on various rifles. I own four CenterPoint scopes (one 2-7x32 and three 3-9x32 scopes with AO). All of them are on various .22 rifles or dedicated AR .22 uppers. They have been around for a few years now and I have never had a problem with them even though the 3-9's cost me $25/scope via Ebay. Even the "expensive" 2-7 scope was only ~$60 IIRC.

I own a $125 Mueller 4.5-14x40 APV scope on my Ruger 10/22. That scope has spectacularly clear glass for a scope that costs slightly over $100.

Lastly, my newest inexpensive scope is a Simmons Whitetail Classic 6.5-20x50 scope I picked up for $110 at Midway. All I can say is WOW, it has great glass and it's construction is top notch. It is mounted on on an old savage 30-06 and thus far it has held zero and is spot on.
 
I guess we all have different parameters for judging our scopes. When I was younger & broke I had no choice but to use cheap scopes but I didn't like them. For me, it is not acceptable to have a rifle scope that does not track correctly. It is not acceptable to have craptastic optics making the upper half of the magnification range utterly useless. Scopes are a tool that have only one job to perform. Their job is to dependably & repeatedly allow me to place bullets where I want them. I don't allow my tires to only hold air some of the time. I don't allow my vehicles to only run some of the time. These things are tools & I expect them to work. If they don't I fix them. If they cannot be fixed I get rid of them. Right now I work more hours than most people could ever understand. When I have time to recreationally enjoy my firearms (of which scopes are an integral component) I want them to perform.

I think it would be interesting to know where you guys are & how far you generally shoot or how far your view extends. I am in central Ks and the view from three sides of my home is measured in miles, not yards. When I hunt, its not uncommon to look at something through the scope or binoculars that is over half a mile away. My nice scopes make my time spent hunting more enjoyable. My cheap scopes stay at home because they just irritate me.
 
A person going on a hunting trip more than a few miles from home should consider taking two sighted-in scopes for a rifle, just in case one fails, gets fogged, gets dropped/broken. The spare doesn't need to be very expensive, but should be good enough to use in difficult conditions. A 4X fixed-power can even do okay in a pinch. The Weaver-type (or Picatinny) system, using quality mounts, is an excellent system. IMHO.

The original Weaver, or other quality rings that fit Weaver Top Mount bases, are tough and maintain zero, regardless of the number of times they're swapped. (The cheaper double-loop Weaver mounts and some of the cheaper foreign mounts are junk, using soft screws, and clamps that fail.) I like the Weaver four-screw mounts better than the two-screw mounts. Just be sure to file/grind down any bumps inside the rings prior to use.
 
The $15 Barska 2-7x20 on my Marlin 795 .22lr was zeroed 2 years ago and still hits where it points. The $25 NCStar 3-9x40 that I was advised was junk has sat on my Marlin 925R .22lr for a year and a half with no issues either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top