Scope quality....

Leupold certainly seems to be the go-to choice for many, a very large reason for that being their most excellent warranty service and quick turn around time on repairs. I don't really think they're overly spectacular as far as optical quality is concerned, especially in the models below the VX3. They've also failed at every attempt to compete with the top tier scopes(LPS,VX7), thinking that if they price them high enough, people will assume they have to be as good as the best ones. Not true, and consumers figure this out pretty quick. My only explanation is that they don't have the technology or lens coatings available.

Regardless, as much we like to pick apart clarity on riflescopes, for a hunting application you're really not spending that much time looking through the scope and our legal shooting times don't permit us to take full advantage of the best ones out there. While I have some high end scopes, I also have some real cheap ones that have held up for years on heavy recoiling guns. Most scopes nowadays will hold up very well with sufficient clarity for hunting, especially if one is happy with the standard 3-9 or 4-12 zoom range. High quality optics really start to shine under high magnification and low light, that's when the low priced ones leave a lot to be desired.

What I chuckle at is the guy who spends $2000 on a scope for his hunting rifle and still uses his $50 Tasco binoculars for glassing. Quality binoculars are far more important to me than a high end riflescope.
 
bearkilr said:
Leupold certainly seems to be the go-to choice for many, a very large reason for that being their most excellent warranty service and quick turn around time on repairs. I don't really think they're overly spectacular as far as optical quality is concerned, especially in the models below the VX3. They've also failed at every attempt to compete with the top tier scopes(LPS,VX7), thinking that if they price them high enough, people will assume they have to be as good as the best ones. Not true, and consumers figure this out pretty quick. My only explanation is that they don't have the technology or lens coatings available.

Regardless, as much we like to pick apart clarity on riflescopes, for a hunting application you're really not spending that much time looking through the scope and our legal shooting times don't permit us to take full advantage of the best ones out there. While I have some high end scopes, I also have some real cheap ones that have held up for years on heavy recoiling guns. Most scopes nowadays will hold up very well with sufficient clarity for hunting, especially if one is happy with the standard 3-9 or 4-12 zoom range. High quality optics really start to shine under high magnification and low light, that's when the low priced ones leave a lot to be desired.

What I chuckle at is the guy who spends $2000 on a scope for his hunting rifle and still uses his $50 Tasco binoculars for glassing. Quality binoculars are far more important to me than a high end riflescope.
Click to expand...

honestly the lower end leupolds are awesome. The clarity is good and at low light settings they out perform all the top tier bushnells and nikons ive looked through
 
I have to give credit to Bushnell, i was not sure about those but yesterday i installed one on my MR-1 a Elite 6500 1.25X8X32 and this is the scope that rifle was waiting for and for 380.00 dollars, it is a steal, bought two more today, great scopes and low price... JP.
 
I own 4 Leopolds and two original Monarchs, the Nikon is WAY nicer to look through than my VX 2's and FX2's, the VX3's aren't bad though.
 
I like Simmons scopes, I did have one fog up and I got a better one sent back. I paid $24 for the 4x that sits atop my 300 WM. it is nice and clear, not too heavy and a good hunting scope. The only way I will get a $700 scope will be if I win one. But then again, I hunt with Sporter mil slurps, reload with surplus powder. I have shot a few moose with peep sights. If I wanted to compete I would need a competitive scope. For me if a scope is clear, focused, and will hold its point of aim there is not much more it can do.
 
caramel said:
I have to give credit to Bushnell, i was not sure about those but yesterday i installed one on my MR-1 a Elite 6500 1.25X8X32 and this is the scope that rifle was waiting for and for 380.00 dollars, it is a steal, bought two more today, great scopes and low price... JP.
Click to expand...

With Bushnell quality you always need 2 or 3 as back up.
 
bearkilr said:
What I chuckle at is the guy who spends $2000 on a scope for his hunting rifle and still uses his $50 Tasco binoculars for glassing. Quality binoculars are far more important to me than a high end riflescope.
Click to expand...

Agree. I wouldn't spend $1500 on a hunting rifle scope if I didn't have binoculars of at least that quality.

Also, the Leupolds have other traits like compactness and lighter weight.

It would be nice if Zeiss made a compact 4x32 and 6x32 of higher optical quality, not more than 9 oz, ~4.5 inch eye relief and long enough for a long action Win 70.
 
caramel said:
Yesterday i did assembly one for a young man, after getting a nice Axis 308 from Wantsalls, i went out and bought what was good to make a perfect rifle for a beginner, it may last him a lifetime... JP.
Click to expand...

caramel, Thats a good lower end set up for anyone. I've had good results with those Millett rings.
 
archie_james_c said:
Can't speak for Zeiss nor am I interested in one.

Bushnells are great for rim fires. They also have accuracy issues in that they always want to point towards Pearl Harbour...

A gold ring is hard to beat in many, many ways.
Click to expand...


I had a 1.25-4 4200 Elite on my 416 Rigby without issue. I've had two Leupold scopes go south on a 3006; one a fixed 4x and one a 2.5-8 VX 3.

Based on my experience the Elites have held up far better under tougher conditions.
 
scott_r said:
With Bushnell quality you always need 2 or 3 as back up.
Click to expand...
Elite scopes are recoil tested to the equivalent of 10,000 rds of 375HH before they pass QC for shipping. Tell me any other scope manufacturer that brutally tests their scopes to as much abuse before packaging and shipping. The 1.25-8X for under 400.00, good luck finding a comparable scope at even twice the price.
 
I want more from my scopes than most I guess, good optics are a bonus, but I look for dependability and repeatability. Once I have the rifle zeroed at 100 yds I adjust 16 clicks up, and 16 right and fire a round, then 32 left and fire a round, then 32 down and fire again, then 32 right for another shot, then 16 up and 16 left and it should be bang on centre with the 100 yard zero. I then should have an 8" x 8" square box (or 4" x 4" with 1/8" adjustments) around the centre of the target, if not I do not want the scope. Even with my hunting rifles I want to know for damn sure that the adjustments do what they are supposed to, every time all the time.

Only then do I trust a scope, other than the elite bushnells I have never seen a low cost scope do this all the time on a high power rifle without failing the test. Mueller so far being the exception.
 
I want more from my scopes than most I guess, good optics are a bonus, but I look for dependability and repeatability.
Click to expand...

I want more than you from my scopes. I want dependability,repeatability, as well as clarity, and brightness, and near constant eye relief.
 
canadaman30 said:
Elite scopes are recoil tested to the equivalent of 10,000 rds of 375HH before they pass QC for shipping. Tell me any other scope manufacturer that brutally tests their scopes to as much abuse before packaging and shipping. The 1.25-8X for under 400.00, good luck finding a comparable scope at even twice the price.
Click to expand...


It take a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40 any day of the week over a an elite Bushnell. I can buy one for around $400.
 
stubblejumper said:
I want more than you from my scopes. I want dependability,repeatability, as well as clarity, and brightness, and near constant eye relief.
Click to expand...

Well naturally, I just didn't think to post that, nothing worse than eye relief that varies 2" over the scopes range lol. I find people that never use their scope on any other power than what they sighted it in with don't care, I always forget about them.

I also want my scopes to keep the same POI over the full zoom range.

I have had Leopolds that do not meet all these criteria, but most do. My early model Monarchs do as well, haven't tried any of Nikons offerings in over ten years now though.
 
so you're talking Leupold then!
Click to expand...

Leupold is one of the worst offenders for the eye relief changing when you adjust the magnification. I haven't looked through a VX-6 yet, but all of the other current models that I have looked through suffer from this.

Well naturally, I just didn't think to post that, nothing worse than eye relief that varies 2" over the scopes range lol
Click to expand...

I consider anything more than 1/4" or so unacceptable.
 
I'm a Leupold guy myself.
Was just at WSS in Saskatoon and they're blowing their demo's out.

3.5-10 x 40 in Gun Metal Grey was $408
6 x 36 Gloss was $299
Bunch of others at really good deals.

Picked up a 4.5 14 x 40 Matte 30mm tube w/ side focus for $588.

Now have to decide which rifle is getting a new scope.
 
canadaman30 said:
Elite scopes are recoil tested to the equivalent of 10,000 rds of 375HH before they pass QC for shipping. Tell me any other scope manufacturer that brutally tests their scopes to as much abuse before packaging and shipping. The 1.25-8X for under 400.00, good luck finding a comparable scope at even twice the price.
Click to expand...

For one, even bushnell doesn't claim to test every scope to that level, so I don't know where you got that idea. For two, I've busted Elites on varmint rifles, hunting rifles and even had a couple 4200 6-26s pack it in on a rimfire silhouette rifle. I won't believe bushnell if they said it was dark at night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom