Apologies To The Optics Nazis

mmattockx

mmattockx

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
100   0   0
Location
Done with sheeple
I see lots of threads where guys have put ridiculously big scopes on weenie rimfires and thought those guys were nuts to blow that kind of money on glass for a rimfire. Until today...

Well, I was out at the range playing with my Mossberg 140K. I put a new Tasco 3-9x32 rimfire scope on it this spring and wanted to fine tune the zero for 50yds. With max magnification, I could make out the staples holding the targets on the board at 50yds and even managed to hit one, with nice 1"-1-1/4" groups around a couple others. Went out to 100yds and could hardly zero on the 3/4" bull I had on my targets because the crosshairs covered it completely. It was also fussy on eye relief at 9x and generally not as user friendly as I would like. To hit the same targets at 150yds would be a stretch at best, maybe clays would be a reasonable target but nothing less.

I plan on upgrading to a Savage Mk.II BTVS this winter and I will now be spending at least the same on the scope as the rifle. I want rimfire precision out to 200yds or so and I can see that a Bushnell 3200 5-15x50AO is probably going to be the minimum I will live with.

So, to the ones who say glass is critical, even on a .22 rimfire, I have to say you were right and it does matter.:D

Mark
 
I was using a 4x scope for target shooting, you can barely see anything at 25 yards with it :)

I got a 4-12 and it makes the whole world of difference now, I have yet to try it out at 50 yards though. I will when I get my range keys.
 
Once you've used a good quality scope it becomes almost painful to struggle with anything less. It doesn't matter what the gun is.

I have a 6-24 Bushnell 4200 on my CZ .22 and the 10X 3200 on my Khornet isn't good enough anymore.

My advice to anyone putting together a rifle is to set your budget and plan to go 50/50 for the gun and the scope. Maybe more 40/60 for a varmint rig or bench gun.
 
mmattockx said:
I can see that a Bushnell 3200 5-15x50AO is probably going to be the minimum I will live with.

Mark
Click to expand...

Thats what I put on all my rimfires and I couldnt be happier... the Tasco 6-24 scopes are actually pretty nice for the cheap value you get them at though. I was surprised.
 
I still get a kick out of so many people that have rimfires that don't treat them like legitimate parts of their firearm inventory. AAAhhhh Its "just a .22".


I am asked so many times why I would spend so much money on my rimfires. Plain and simple answer....I shoot my rimfires......hands down.....25 times more than all my centerfires combined. Why NOT invest some time and money into the one or two rifles you will shoot more than any other.

Why the common misconception that because rimfires are affordable ......They're cheap?? Good glass isn't required....Sure it is.

As stated many times before with optics.......you get what you pay for. The chioce of a 5-15 is perfect for the application you stated. I love my 4-12 for stretching the .22 way out there
 
I have a Leupold VXII 4.5-14x40AO on my Sako Quad and really like it. I should have gone with a little more magnification for paper, but for gophers I usually shoot at 10x.
 
kphebert said:
"I want rimfire precision out to 200yds "wouldnt you have to go to a .17hmr for 200 yard shots?
Click to expand...

Well, it's all relative. Look at this for what I want to play around with:

http://www.6mmbr.com/rimfiretactical.html

The .17 is a better long range cartridge, but the price of ammo is hardly cheap anymore and I want the challenge of wind doping and hitting long range targets with a dopey old .22. Also, look at that link posted by flyer415. That shooter repeatedly hit a turkey at 300yds on a windy day.

Mark
 
Barks said:
I still get a kick out of so many people that have rimfires that don't treat them like legitimate parts of their firearm inventory. AAAhhhh Its "just a .22".
Click to expand...

Mostly it's because I have not spent any time at a range or working on getting my .22 to shoot small(ish) groups at anything beyond plinking ranges. I was out of shooting completely for near 20 years and this is my first year back at it, so I am learning and re-learning a bunch of things.

As I said, I plan to buy a Mk.II BTVS this winter (my Christmas present to myself :D), mostly because I am really enjoying shooting cheap ammo and want a serious rifle to do it with. After today, I have a new appreciation of the glass required to match up to that rifle.

Edit - I don't regret buying the Tasco for my Mossy, it is a decent scope for the capabilities of that rifle and the price and I will be keeping it mounted on that rifle. But I can clearly see it will be inadequate for the better accuracy of the BTVS. Horses for courses...

Mark
 
Last edited:
I had a 4x TruGlo that did everything I wanted it to.

It's rimfire, my friend. Yes, you might be able to hit something at 300 yards with a $500 scope as opposed to a $100 one, but it's kind of a moot point.

expensive guns require good optics. Rimfire is a run what you brung situation.
 
I've been using the Falcon Menace scopes on a a lot of my rimfires lately. The 4-14x 44mm FFP and 4.5-18x 56mm. With the 4.5-18x there is a line that works for 200 yards just below the reticle. Where you get the box. Line up the top of that on 18x and I can reliably hit 200 yard gongs. Also they parallax down to 10 yards so shooting indoors isn't a problem.

They work well.

The main issue for a scope with rimfires is the parallax adjustment. After that it's feature set/reticles etc. Rimfires are very accurate and cheap to shoot. There's no point putting crap scopes on them. You'll have a lot more fun with good optics.
 
targettarget said:
expensive guns require good optics. Rimfire is a run what you brung situation.
Click to expand...

It's a "tough" call: .22's can do a heck of a lot, from short-range plinking to distance-gophering. The versatility is maddening, and it sorta defies classification. :eek:

Still, I stand in awe of those long-distance shots made with .22's...:cool:
 
6x24 Tascos work great on my son's Stevens 300 .22 and my 1947 Mossy 151. We were out after gophers a week ago and were hitting at 200 yards. The 3x9x were fine to 100 or so.
 
If you are picky regarding optics, buy a fixed power scope rather than a variable. Cheap variable powered scopes are very, very bad, but a bargain fixed power can still be passable. Fixed power optics are always preferable, so unless you shoot under varying circumstances, go with a fixed. Variable power optics are an exercise in compromise.
 
Last edited:
i use a fixed 36 power weaver on my 22 heavy barrel.its great for shootin 100 yards with it .
 
Bobby Ironsights said:
If you are picky regarding optics, buy a fixed power scope rather than a variable. Cheap variable powered scopes are very, very bad, but a bargain fixed power can still be passable. Fixed power optics are always preferable, so unless you shoot under varying circumstances, go with a fixed. Variable power optics are an exercise in compromise.
Click to expand...

Now that's an interesting "take" on the matter. :cool:
 
Leupold FX-II "ultralight" 2.5X20mm. :D

n647466120_1147849_2022.jpg


http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=277980
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom