What a difference a better scope makes!

[izzyjoe]

I bought an inexpensive 6x20 scope on eBay years ago, and it would get blurry after 10x, and useless after that. I had it on several rifles, just for working up loads. It did hold its zero very well, but I would not trust it on a hunt! Now I buy the best I can afford.

[Petrol & Powder]

Optics is one of those places where you get what you pay for.

Any company can make a cheap scope but making a quality scope costs money and there's just no way around that.

You don't need to spend $2000+ to get a scope that's good enough but you have to spend more than $20 to get one that is good enough.

The only way scope manufactures can reduce the price point is cut corners and you can't cut corners on optics and keep the quality high.

I've seen countless people put cheap scopes in cheap rings and mounts and then blame the rifle for the lack of accuracy.

Buy quality optics, cry once and move on.

[Hardcast416taylor]

Back in the old days when we were trying to convince a buyer on a certain good quality scope we would take him out back of our store and have him sight on a farmers cows in a field about 300 yds away.Robert

[Love Life]

Hey Dick. Do you still have that .243 that Goodsteel built you?
How is that thing shooting these days? I know you had him cut the barrel down and rechamber it after so many rounds.
Still shooting okay?
Walter

I've still got the fat lady (rifle's name). Has 440 rds on it since the cut back and has been sitting in the safe for a year. No long distance to shoot in Georgia, and shooting at 100 yds is a waste of barrel life, lol. I'm trying to get back out west in a couple years and will send her to Tim for a fresh 26 inch Krieger barrel when I do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scharfschuetze]

And when 99% of "hunters" merely are happy if they can hit their refrigerator at 50 yards....who says cost is critical?

I guess it all depends on one's standards or lack thereof. Rifle, mount, rings, scope, and ammo are all part of a system to put a bullet where you want it, when you want it and how you want it. Any one of these items can and will detract from the outcome if it is of poor quality. If someone is happy with hitting a refrigerator at 50 yards and the inexactness of that, then they are probably not posting here.

[tazman]

I have been told by various people(whom I do not believe for a second) that any rifle will shoot beer cans at a thousand yards if you put a good enough scope on it.
There was once a time when I was much younger that I believed almost any scope, regardless of price, would do the same job.
Experience is a wonderful teacher if you listen.
The cheapest scope I have on any recent purchase rifle cost a minimum of $250 Many cost more depending on what I expect the rifle to do. I have three that are in the $475-600 range.
I have yet to get into the $700 plus scope market. I am not certain my skills or my rifles would benefit from such an investment.
I am shooting better now than I ever have before. Certainly part of that is equipment. Part is also the extra practice I get now beyond what I used to get. I also know my body and eyes are not capable of the precision required to be really excellent any more. I hesitate to drop that much money on an item I am not sure would be a significant improvement over what I already have.

[Larry Gibson]

roblem is, IF everyone gets a say 16" barreled M4 carbine knock off, puts a 500$ BDC drop compensated scope on it,

Do you make the claim that they'll be able to hit the proverbial gnats cheecks at 500 yards?.....

I sure wouldn't make that claim..........

Used to see a lot of shooters/hunters show up at the range with high end rifles having bottom end scopes on them......after shooting they couldn't figure out why their expensive rifle didn't shoot any better, after all the discount store guy said it was "bore sighted"........ I'd suggest to them that if they bought a race car would they expect to win with retread tires on it? That usually got me a deer in the headlight look.......I suggested a better quality scope explaining you can only shoot as good as you can see. Doesn't have to be a top end scope either as mentioned but you do get what you pay for with optics. I'd usually help them at least get close to zero.....with many it was just hit around the target frame. I'd notice a lot of them would line up the rifle, back their shoulder off the butt, close their eyes and jerk the trigger.....so then I'd also ask if they expected to win their 1st race without learning how to drive a race car in a race(?).......another deer in the headlight look.......then I'd explain they should learn how to shoot......most don't know the difference between pointing a rifle and jerking the trigger vs any semblance of marksmanship. It is a learned skill and they don't teach it in school anymore.......

But things have changed. Now days I see lots show up at the range with a M4 wanna be ARs with a tacticool scope on it. They usually post a 12"+ Shoot-in-C target at 50 yards then blaze away.....sometimes they even use the bench, well sort of.....sometimes they even attempt to make a scope change.........if they get 3 shots in the Shoot-in-C they post a zombie target and shoot a couple 30 round mags at it trying to make a head shot.......if they manage a head shot they stop shooting, whoop it up that they are as bad assed as them SEALs on TV, pack up and leave.......I could care less anymore, just wish they'd pick up the crappy steel cases .........

[osteodoc08]

Optics is definitely one of those areas that you get what you pay for. There are plenty of mid level scopes that would work fine for the users end purpose. I find I trust my leupold scopes on my hunting rifles and they haven't let me down. First brand I look at when something is going on a hunting rifle. My target gun has a Burris XTR only because I couldn't afford the top of the line night force at the time. Using that scope has shown me what good optics are capable of. Definitely impressed.

[Eldon]

Spend twice on the scope as the rifle and you'll be very happy. Minute of deer is 2 MOA but if you can't see the deer it don't matter if your rifle can punch 1/4 MOA groups.

ALSO, one $1000 scope can service 5 rifles.

[wrench man]

The Leupold scope that cost three times the Savage 110 I put it on didn't make it shoot any better?, and the Leupold mounts SUCK!, the rings wont square up and even when I got it halfway on the rifle I found that you can't mount a Leupold scope in their own rings/mounts!!??

I'd suggest to them that if they bought a race car would they expect to win with retread tires on it?

Actually, YES!, retread tires are softer than the parent case they are vulcanized to, the car WILL hook to the track better, been there and done that!

[Lloyd Smale]

nice thing today that's different then 30 years ago is you don't have to spend twice as much on a scope as a rifle costs to get a good scope. Today theres 200 (or less) dollar vx1 luepold, vortex diamondbacks, bushnell elites. Nikon prostaffs (the newest version as the older ones were lacking in low light performance) that are better opticaly and mechanical then even the top tier imports were 30 years ago. Ive got a lot of rifles and a lot of scopes on those rifles and have owned a pickup load of them in the past I wouldn't be afraid to go hunting with a leupold vx1 on everything from a varmint rifle, to a deer rilfe, to a dangerous game rifle. I have and still buy vx2s and vx3s and higher end vortex and Nikons ect but I question myself all the time as to why. YOu might see just a tiny advantage to better opics on very long range shooting (like 1000 yard comp) but in the hunting field if you tell me you need more scope then these then ill call you a scope snob. ITs about like buying a Ferrari and never driving over 55.