- Location
- Steel Town
A 3500 2-7x32 has been on a total of three of my rifles since 2010 and zero issues. Two others (3-9x40, 3-9x50) have been in active use since 2014. Zero issues.
Alot of scopes are just rebadged.
- Thread starter Mogulrider
- Start date
- Location
- Western Canada
I think the task and your budget dictates gear. Period.
If you're shooting paper at 100y at a flat range, Vortex is more than fine. If you're trying to hit a moving coyote at 300y, you might want to get a better option. If you're trying to do precision and hit small plates at 1000m+ or do any high angle shooting, you likely want to upgrade your scope.
Also, if the person works a low paying job (like a lot of people do these days) especially with the high cost of things overall lately, there is no way they're affording a NF without selling an organ, so they get the best they can with what they got and a good warranty helps them feel secure in their purchase because they dont have the funds to buy a new scope if this one craps the bed. It's not even really a debate for those people, who are usually the ones buying and staunchly advocating for Vortex or Burris or Bushnell anyways.
I haven't met many wealthy shooters who don't stop talking about how amazing Vortex or Burris is lol...
There is no denying quality scopes are worth their price tags, IF your task requires that fine precision ability. Shoot what you can afford, what you have and what you enjoy. Upgrade if you feel it's necessary or can afford to do so.
If you're shooting paper at 100y at a flat range, Vortex is more than fine. If you're trying to hit a moving coyote at 300y, you might want to get a better option. If you're trying to do precision and hit small plates at 1000m+ or do any high angle shooting, you likely want to upgrade your scope.
Also, if the person works a low paying job (like a lot of people do these days) especially with the high cost of things overall lately, there is no way they're affording a NF without selling an organ, so they get the best they can with what they got and a good warranty helps them feel secure in their purchase because they dont have the funds to buy a new scope if this one craps the bed. It's not even really a debate for those people, who are usually the ones buying and staunchly advocating for Vortex or Burris or Bushnell anyways.
I haven't met many wealthy shooters who don't stop talking about how amazing Vortex or Burris is lol...
There is no denying quality scopes are worth their price tags, IF your task requires that fine precision ability. Shoot what you can afford, what you have and what you enjoy. Upgrade if you feel it's necessary or can afford to do so.
Last edited:
That’s the problem, you want lifetime warranty , then it’s gonna cost you , usually glass quality.I blame Leupold for pioneering the lifetime no paper work BS..... what a bunch of losers! They may have not been the first, but they roped me in years ago with their quality assurance.
On a more seriuous note, the lifetime no paper transferable warranty sure makes buying and selling used scopes more attractive.
I’ve owned vx3,vx5,vx6.
The VX5 hd 3-15 is not even close to the Swaro Z5 + 3-18 in glass quality, but the Leupold do have better warranty.
Is it "vortex glass" though?
Or is vortex running "cabelas glass" lol
Lots of scopes made by a third party with fourth party supplies for whomever ordered to their specs, which also doesn't mean they are the same lenses with the same coatings in all of the scopes. Sure, the tube may look the same....
- Location
- Edmonton AB
Next week you will all be arguing on what caliber is needed to take Elk
Wait a min. You did that this week too.
Seriously who cares what others use for glass.
Arguing online is like the special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.
Wait a min. You did that this week too.
Seriously who cares what others use for glass.
Arguing online is like the special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.
- Location
- Edmonton AB
I seriously wonder how many of the folks that do this all day, everyday have ever had a conversation with their MP?
Our country has literally been invaded.
We are beyond bankrupt.
The very thing we love most are being stripped from us and most folks care more about what rifle or scope they need to hunt than with the coup that's taken place.
Our country has literally been invaded.
We are beyond bankrupt.
The very thing we love most are being stripped from us and most folks care more about what rifle or scope they need to hunt than with the coup that's taken place.
I think we all have different eyes, for some reason Bushnell's look better to me then Leupold's in a similar price range.... at the end of the day my eye sight has been pretty good for the first 50 years, starting to fade a bit now mostly the small print reading glass departement but there is no doubt vision doesn not usually improve with age, at least not yet....
Nothing wrong with spending thousands on scopes if you've got the coin and or your eyes need it that's for sure.
I remember cheap binos from when I was a kid, and I would much rather have a pair of modern cheap binos!
I'm sure the 2-3 thousand dollar range has also gotten better over the last 25 years, but not nearly as much as the cheaper options have improved would be my guess based on what I have "seen"
Every time this subject comes up on a gun forum and or around the campfire your going to get the " I always spend at least as much as the rifle on my optic or more....." and "I don't understand how a guy buys a $1000.00 rifle and then puts a $500 scope on it?"
People have a hard time understanding other people's choices, and most of the time "cheaping" out can be expensive in the long run but that's part of life time learning and to be fair every now and then there are exceptions to every rule.
I cheaped out on a recipricating saw 30 years ago instead of just buying the Milwaukee..... I keep waiting for that cheap old Dewalt to pack it in but it just keeps on going for some reason....
Millwaukee is way overrated… just like LeopoldI think we all have different eyes, for some reason Bushnell's look better to me then Leupold's in a similar price range.... at the end of the day my eye sight has been pretty good for the first 50 years, starting to fade a bit now mostly the small print reading glass departement but there is no doubt vision doesn not usually improve with age, at least not yet....
Nothing wrong with spending thousands on scopes if you've got the coin and or your eyes need it that's for sure.
I remember cheap binos from when I was a kid, and I would much rather have a pair of modern cheap binos!
I'm sure the 2-3 thousand dollar range has also gotten better over the last 25 years, but not nearly as much as the cheaper options have improved would be my guess based on what I have "seen"
Every time this subject comes up on a gun forum and or around the campfire your going to get the " I always spend at least as much as the rifle on my optic or more....." and "I don't understand how a guy buys a $1000.00 rifle and then puts a $500 scope on it?"
People have a hard time understanding other people's choices, and most of the time "cheaping" out can be expensive in the long run but that's part of life time learning and to be fair every now and then there are exceptions to every rule.
I cheaped out on a recipricating saw 30 years ago instead of just buying the Milwaukee..... I keep waiting for that cheap old Dewalt to pack it in but it just keeps on going for some reason....
I have a mix of brands when it comes to tools as I find no one company makes the best of everyting.... the battery stuff tends to lead to some brand loyalty due to the different batteries.Millwaukee is way overrated… just like Leopold
Millwaukee hole shooters and Sawzall's were and mostly are ( the older ones) still good tools.
- Location
- Edmonton AB
This is why they got away with everything they have.
Complacency
Distractions.
I don't claim to be the messiah, but if folks can't see what is coming, they deserve what they get.
Our governments literally are responsible for many dead.
Sheila Annette Lewis died because organ transplants were banned for the unvaccinated, and most people aren't concerned.
The UN has a 170 page document that outlines replacing our population with 3rd world immigrants, that our political parties (yes the CPC ) signed us onto.
We have CSIS literally reporting there are traitor MPs in Ottawa beholden to foreign countries.
What will it take for people to quit arguing about what scope or rifle is needed to kill big game and get invested in our country
Ignorance is bliss.
I had not heard about Sheila Annette Lewis, I'm surprised and disappointed that happened at all let alone in Alberta.
I had bicep surgery in B.C. during Covid and was not injected, I read a few letters to the editor in our local paper about how good Canadians wanted our clinic to refuse admission of the non injected.... wild to see what fear does to a population.
There are powerful forces of division at play.
Last edited:
Buddy, we can't all be grim-faced steely-eyed political warrior-activists all the time. There are plenty of threads devoted to that type of discussion, and they are well-populated with opinions ranging from thoughtful to stupid. If you want to argue about that, then go somewhere where there is already an argument going on.
The reason why this thread has so little of that...aside from your posts...is the simple fact that the OP didn't ask that question. He asked about scopes...and so, oddly enough, the responses are about scopes.
Agreed! I have always felt that, dollar for dollar, Bushnell will generally provide optical performance that is superior to Leupold. For my rimfires, for general plinking, etc. Bushnells work just fine.
Right or wrong, Leupold has always given me the impression that they produce a better-built, more solid and more durable optic, at the expense of perhaps some ultimate clarity or brightness or resolution. But scopes are not observation instruments, they are aiming devices...and my ultimate goal for an aiming device is to hit my target. I'm not into competition; the most important shots I take...in fact, pretty much the only important shots I take...are in the hunting field, so I am at least as concerned about durability as I am about optical performance. Light weight is also a concern. IMHO, giving up a wee bit of optical top-end performance to get a lighter, tougher, more durable scope is an easy choice.
- Location
- Edmonton AB
Sheila was not the only one.
All you folks who insist Pierre and the CPC are needed to fix Canada are delusional. How is it possible that NOT 1 SINGLE MP stood up.or spoke out?
They are all complicit
All 338.
State sanctioned murder
Attachments
- Location
- Edmonton AB
Yup. And again I ask. How many have contacted their MP?
How many are involved.
My guess? Very few.
- Location
- Edmonton AB
Many wanted to unvaccinated put in prison.
- Location
- Edmonton AB
Very soon you won't have firearms to put scopes on. Then what? I suspect many will become "political warriors"
Grim faced is the way we all should be. We are being murdered, replaced and attacked by our own governments
Ignorance is bliss, right?
Yup, each to their own. When I could start affording Leupolds and mostly hunted at the time I bought them for my hunting rifles. Honestly one of the big reasons was looks. I like how they look. The performance was beyond what I needed and liked the warranty. Now I have been getting into target shooting more and branched out to other brands again. Mostly because of the price point of the target leupolds. I have also seen lots of cheaper scopes hold their zero year after year without issue. Just like cars most will get you from a to b but everyone has preferences and different circumstances.
