Best ~$200 new rimfire scopes

[kamlooky]

Don't forget to check the thickness of the cross hairs on the reticle.
Some are finer than others.
I bought a Scorpion rimfire scope and the small part of the cross hairs
were fairly thick.
Hard to make super tight groups with these.

 

[magdump]

I like my Redfield Battlezone TAC.22 2-7x34mm

http://www.redfield.com/battlezone/

 

[Kernel Panic]

Whatever scope you get, 9x at 100yrd target shooting isn't enough for a good sight picture on the target. Have a Mueller 8-32 target but haven't used it enough yet. Seems to be clear even at high power. The only Vortex I have is a Diamondback, again very good glass. These are somewhat higher price but you pays your money for optics. Also have a Tasco 2.5 -10 Varmint/ target. It does work but the lower cost is evident.

Agreed. I put a 3x9 on my CZ and within 2 minutes I realized that I had made a big mistake. I've got a Bushnell Trophy XLT in 6x18x40 on order now. I've heard a lot of good things about them. A 3x9 sounds like a good hunting scope though.

 

[thav.]

I like my Redfield Battlezone TAC.22 2-7x34mm

http://www.redfield.com/battlezone/

where did you get this scope?
thanks

 

[magdump]

where did you get this scope?
thanks

I probably got one of the first into canada. http://www.p-d-ent.com hooked me up.

 

[radmacks]

i have to say I picked up a simmons 3-9 x 32 and I'm in the 9x is not enough for 100 yards camp. Felt really disappointed, could not even see where we hit the paper and where we did not. It was a grey cloudy day and we were shooting across a snow covered field. Maybe it will be better on a brighter day across grass. I still have to play with the focus at different powers I guess. But from my experience I'm gonna say 9x is 50 yards. I guess thats why its parallax free at that range. I don't think it has to do with eyes it has to do with wanting to count the wholes on the paper with it.

 

[metalbender]

Raises a few questions about the claims of some keyboard shooters.

 

[legi0n]

i have to say I picked up a simmons 3-9 x 32 and I'm in the 9x is not enough for 100 yards camp. Felt really disappointed, could not even see where we hit the paper and where we did not. It was a grey cloudy day and we were shooting across a snow covered field. Maybe it will be better on a brighter day across grass. I still have to play with the focus at different powers I guess. But from my experience I'm gonna say 9x is 50 yards. I guess thats why its parallax free at that range. I don't think it has to do with eyes it has to do with wanting to count the wholes on the paper with it.

That's a low end 32mm scope. What do you expect from it? What's the light transmission ratio? 90%?
22 cal holes are difficult to see @100 on a cloudy day even with high end scopes.
There's a reason spotting scopes were invented, you know!

edit: and don't confuse parallax-free setting with the distance you can see a 22 hole at. They're not related.

 

[magdump]

where did you get this scope?
thanks

btw, here is a shot of it mounted..

 

[radmacks]

I expected what I was told here that 3-9 was good for 100 yards. More like 30 yards.

That's a low end 32mm scope. What do you expect from it? What's the light transmission ratio? 90%?
22 cal holes are difficult to see @100 on a cloudy day even with high end scopes.
There's a reason spotting scopes were invented, you know!

edit: and don't confuse parallax-free setting with the distance you can see a 22 hole at. They're not related.

 

[magdump]

I expected what I was told here that 3-9 was good for 100 yards. More like 30 yards.

Buy reactive targets

 

[thav.]

btw, here is a shot of it mounted..

Looks Great!




I think it really depends what your trying to do at a 100 yards.

If your trying to have a fun gun, that can shoot anywhere, 2-7 , 3-9 and some of the 4.5-12 type stuff is what id suggest.

If your only going to shoot off of a bench, my as well get like a mueller 8-32x and have a single purpose gun.


I have a Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 3-9x on my .17 HMR and it is perfect for what i use it for. Side Parallax, not huge.

On my Dlask .22 im running a 3-10 x 50 cant remember the brand, and i will prob swap for another Legend.

I grabbed mine at reliable in bc, good price there.

 

[Enfield303]

9x is plenty fine for 100 yards. I can shoot the primers out of 12ga shells at 100 yards.

My tools of choice are Nikon 3-9 x 40 BDC 150 on a Savage mk II BV. With CCI Stingers and a bipod this bad boy was a tack driver right out of the box.

 

[legi0n]

I expected what I was told here that 3-9 was good for 100 yards. More like 30 yards.

It may be good to 100yds. You don't have to see the holes to group well.
The 50yds parallax-free setting means the scope is most forgiving to your not having a consistent cheek weld at 50 yds.
Absent said weld, you can not expect good groups at 100.

 

[mcmack]

second vote for the Hawke Sport 2-7 x 32 AO. from D&L. Had it on my Savage BRJ .22 and now on my Remington 552 speedmaster. Great plinking up to 100 yards with no issues at all. Very impressed !! Even with rings/mount the total will come in under your $200 budget.

 

[radmacks]

ill admit I do a lot of work with a jewelry eye loop on boards. I guess I'm just used to magnification allowing great detail.

 

[metalbender]

Makes me wonder if the 9X guys have blinders on, that's all they have or are used to, nothing else matters. The blind leading the blind. Scopes here in Canuckland are pretty expensive to experiment with. You try to do as much research as you can to make an informed decision for your purchase. Been bit by a few poor choices myself. Still comes down to being able to see the target clearly for a consistent poa. Lots of good stuff on RFC comparing scopes and through scope pics.