A Vortex Diamondback Tactical 4-16x44 just hit the EE for $350, probably wont last long. As Suther has pointed out it is one of the more popular models in the production class of the Rimfire PRS scene and ticks most of your boxes. The glass quality isnt going to be in the same tier as the high end brands but for what it is you get good dollar value.
Best all around scope for a bolt action 22
- Thread starter Glockenspiel
- Start date
Funny, I never considered myself a "scope snob" because I wanted something better than a covenant or vortex, but if using Leupolds and Zeiss makes me a "scope snob" than I am okay with that. It` not like we`re talking about S&Bs, Swaros or March.
You came to a thread where a guy set a budget of $350, then proceeded to say you can't get what he wants for under $1000...
For the record I have no problems with scope snobs in general - I'm of the mindset that you should buy the best gear you can afford (although best isn't necessarily the most expensive), and if you can afford $1k for glass on your 22 then cool! Have fun! I don't think it's fair for those people to say the perfectly functional stuff that guys like me can actually afford sucks though.
Trust me us poor mofos are well aware that better stuff exists, and we don't need you reminding us of our limited funds to pursue this hobby.
Check out Wanstalls. They have sezzle now. 4 payment instalments, checkout counts as one payment. I've used sezzle i few times its pretty good. Example something's $1000 would equal to 4 biweekly payments of $250 with 0% interest. The first $250 payment would be what your checkout amount would be.
$350 is pretty limiting with that feature set. Only scopes that come close are diamondback tactical and covenants. Maybe Athlon?
The DBTs are decent for the price, the reticle is excellent and they track OK, but the glass on my 6-24 isn't great. If you get a DBT get the 4-16, better glass to my eyes and more useable elevation.
The DBTs are decent for the price, the reticle is excellent and they track OK, but the glass on my 6-24 isn't great. If you get a DBT get the 4-16, better glass to my eyes and more useable elevation.
The OP mentioned "target" and "possibly hunting". Some folks are bringing in PRS capability and FFP scopes.
The OP did not mention PRS. I would submit that a SFP scope is a better choice for hunting, especially since he mentions grouse and wabbits. I hunt grouse with my .22 and 3-9 SFP scope, and I find that the SFP duplex reticle is not thick enough for peering into the dark forest, and it often disappears, and I may miss the head/neck shot on the grouse. And I find most of my grouse are shot at close range using 3 to 4 power.
A FFP scope reticle is way, way, way too thin at low magnification to hunt grouse and rabbits with, especially at close range looking into a dark background. It is illegal and unsafe to shoot down a road. When I hunt grouse along old logging roads, I have to wait for the bird to walk off the road into the bush, and then the background is always dark. At lowest magnification I cannot see the fine lines of a FFP scope, and certainly the hash marks and numbers are not visible for hold overs at the lower magnifications.
For the OP's specified uses, with hunting being the limiting factor, I suggest a SFP reticle is the only choice. Luckily SFP scopes of reasonable quality can be had for less cost than FFP scopes, all else being equal.
For me, I would never again buy a hunting rimfire scope without side parallax focus. The fixed 50m to 60m parallax scope I own means my grouse are blurry at roughly 5-15m which is where I take alot of birds.
That forces me into the 12x or 14x magnification scope market, if not higher magnification, but I need a bottom end of no more than 3x magnification, preferably 2x, and that adds to the price for decent glass. And the selection gets even fewer if the parallax minimum is not about 10m. Most scopes that are advertised for rimfire PRS like FFP scopes start at 25m parallax focus, which is still too far for my hunting needs.
The OP did not mention PRS. I would submit that a SFP scope is a better choice for hunting, especially since he mentions grouse and wabbits. I hunt grouse with my .22 and 3-9 SFP scope, and I find that the SFP duplex reticle is not thick enough for peering into the dark forest, and it often disappears, and I may miss the head/neck shot on the grouse. And I find most of my grouse are shot at close range using 3 to 4 power.
A FFP scope reticle is way, way, way too thin at low magnification to hunt grouse and rabbits with, especially at close range looking into a dark background. It is illegal and unsafe to shoot down a road. When I hunt grouse along old logging roads, I have to wait for the bird to walk off the road into the bush, and then the background is always dark. At lowest magnification I cannot see the fine lines of a FFP scope, and certainly the hash marks and numbers are not visible for hold overs at the lower magnifications.
For the OP's specified uses, with hunting being the limiting factor, I suggest a SFP reticle is the only choice. Luckily SFP scopes of reasonable quality can be had for less cost than FFP scopes, all else being equal.
For me, I would never again buy a hunting rimfire scope without side parallax focus. The fixed 50m to 60m parallax scope I own means my grouse are blurry at roughly 5-15m which is where I take alot of birds.
That forces me into the 12x or 14x magnification scope market, if not higher magnification, but I need a bottom end of no more than 3x magnification, preferably 2x, and that adds to the price for decent glass. And the selection gets even fewer if the parallax minimum is not about 10m. Most scopes that are advertised for rimfire PRS like FFP scopes start at 25m parallax focus, which is still too far for my hunting needs.
Last edited:
That is why I love a pair of good open sights with no glass to get in my way.Rich people will always try to show that money is what it takes, rather than having fun.They will get humiliated by a kid with an old Cooie at the range one day.
Must be nice to have great eyesight. For some of us a scope has become a necessity. My old eyes really struggle to get a sight picture with irons nowadays.
My advice for what it's worth is at the price point laid out by the OP is to find a used scope with the best quality glass you can find within the budget.
Maybe take a hard second look at the requirements in terms of dial adjustments and reticle as those can add quite a bit to the overall cost of the scope. Do you really need those if you plan to hunt small game within 50 meters? If some of those are not essential the number of options will increase.
Can you live with some cosmetic damage such as scuffs to the exterior of the tube if the lenses are pristine?
A 3x9 Leupold or an older German (Swaro/ Kahles, etc) scope might suddenly come into your price range.
Not sure if this would qualify as the "best all around scope for a 22" but it might check some of the boxes. Click the second photo in this link, love the first one. (upside down)
https://www.amazon.ca/Sightron-SIH-Tac-Adjustable-Objective-Riflescope/dp/B00DSZ6XXW
I paid $275 + tax for mine when I got it about 5+ years ago, they were around $300 last I looked. Looking today, to reply to this thread, it looks as though Sightron might have dropped allot of their S1 scopes. This model isn't even listed in the 2 places I look for Sightron stuff. Which I quite like. Mine is the one listed, with the HHR. (hunter holdover reticle=hash marks lower half of the vertical crosshair) The pandemic has given me lots of time to reconsider what scopes I've chosen for what role, and oddly enough..this Sightron S1 is on the 22 rifle that has seen the most field use. I have "better" scopes on 22s that leave the house 4-5X a year. Budget/features are what drove the idea of getting one of these at the time, and it's really been an excellent scope. I'll also add, I've only ever used this rifle/scope for gopher shooting out west where it certainly gets bounced around a bit. I haven't even shot with it since my last trip, which was a few years back. I have better scopes to compare it to, including a Sightron SIII and a Sightron S-Tac...I just never have. I did, at the time I bought it, feel it was far better/clearer glass than the Vortex Diamondback I was using, and edge-to-edge clarity superior to the Vortex Viper HS I had on my .223 at the time.
I've considered upgrading it, as I now find that that with my eyes just do a little better after a long day if I'm not straining to see things. That wasn't an issue with this scope, but that reality could be different now. I plan on using this gun a bit this fall, and making a decision. I don't imagine I'll switch it out. The S-Tac is a recent purchase, and I'm really impressed with it for the $.
https://www.amazon.ca/Sightron-SIH-Tac-Adjustable-Objective-Riflescope/dp/B00DSZ6XXW
I paid $275 + tax for mine when I got it about 5+ years ago, they were around $300 last I looked. Looking today, to reply to this thread, it looks as though Sightron might have dropped allot of their S1 scopes. This model isn't even listed in the 2 places I look for Sightron stuff. Which I quite like. Mine is the one listed, with the HHR. (hunter holdover reticle=hash marks lower half of the vertical crosshair) The pandemic has given me lots of time to reconsider what scopes I've chosen for what role, and oddly enough..this Sightron S1 is on the 22 rifle that has seen the most field use. I have "better" scopes on 22s that leave the house 4-5X a year. Budget/features are what drove the idea of getting one of these at the time, and it's really been an excellent scope. I'll also add, I've only ever used this rifle/scope for gopher shooting out west where it certainly gets bounced around a bit. I haven't even shot with it since my last trip, which was a few years back. I have better scopes to compare it to, including a Sightron SIII and a Sightron S-Tac...I just never have. I did, at the time I bought it, feel it was far better/clearer glass than the Vortex Diamondback I was using, and edge-to-edge clarity superior to the Vortex Viper HS I had on my .223 at the time.
I've considered upgrading it, as I now find that that with my eyes just do a little better after a long day if I'm not straining to see things. That wasn't an issue with this scope, but that reality could be different now. I plan on using this gun a bit this fall, and making a decision. I don't imagine I'll switch it out. The S-Tac is a recent purchase, and I'm really impressed with it for the $.
Thanks .22LRGUY for pointing out that Sightron S-Tac. I had forgotten about those.
I may revise what I said in an earlier post above about not being able to find a scope that meets the OP needs list for under $1000. On one of the CGN site sponsors websites here I see they are selling the S-Tac 3-16x42 for roughly $600. Based on the good reputation of Sightron, I would guess that is an honest price for reasonable quality. I have never looked through this model. At this price I would not be expecting the brightest glass, but for that price I would expect better than the competition in the same class based on Sightron's good reputation, and Sightron is known for its crisp and repeatable turrets (I own the Sightron 45x45 target scope and turrets are great). Reticles on that S-Tac are duplex and MOA-3. For hunting I would choose the thicker duplex reticle, as I would predict the MOA-3 thin lines would disappear against a dark forest background. For target shooting I would chose the MOA-3 of course.
I may revise what I said in an earlier post above about not being able to find a scope that meets the OP needs list for under $1000. On one of the CGN site sponsors websites here I see they are selling the S-Tac 3-16x42 for roughly $600. Based on the good reputation of Sightron, I would guess that is an honest price for reasonable quality. I have never looked through this model. At this price I would not be expecting the brightest glass, but for that price I would expect better than the competition in the same class based on Sightron's good reputation, and Sightron is known for its crisp and repeatable turrets (I own the Sightron 45x45 target scope and turrets are great). Reticles on that S-Tac are duplex and MOA-3. For hunting I would choose the thicker duplex reticle, as I would predict the MOA-3 thin lines would disappear against a dark forest background. For target shooting I would chose the MOA-3 of course.
I believe in buying decent optics . I like Burris Leopold and even some of the new Bushnell scopes . on my one 22 I have a 3x9 and its a decent quality scope . you don't have to go crazy but don't cheap out . as you said up to $350 . I've seen people over the years buy poor optics and you just don't get the clarity that you do if you spend a little more . Redfield makes some nice stuff also . I have never tried Vortex scopes but have heard some positive comments about their products . good luck in your choice and happy shooting . ps get some good rings also .
Homesteader
CGN Regular
- Location
- In a Wallow West of Edmonton.
Leupold Freedom 2-7 Rimfire with MOA reticle comes close to perfect for an all rounder.
Re: reticles-I have the MOA-2 on my SIII and the MOA-3 on the S-TAC. The MOA-3 is even finer than the MOA-2, which is already a fine reticle. I was expecting "as" heavy, possibly a little heavier, and was surprised at how fine the MOA-3 is. I've only had it out of the house 1X, it's on my 527 in 17Hornet. Really like it so far.
Buy what you can - not what you want.
To add to my post #12 on this, I had a Bushnell Engage 6-24x50 SFP before the Covenant. It cost $350 +tx and the SFP and NO numbers on the tree made me relegate it to my .223 varmint rifle. This might be what the OP wants ??
To the 'Scope snobs', if you don't have $1000 to blow on a scope, $500 might be within reach -especially on a $350 rifle.
To add to my post #12 on this, I had a Bushnell Engage 6-24x50 SFP before the Covenant. It cost $350 +tx and the SFP and NO numbers on the tree made me relegate it to my .223 varmint rifle. This might be what the OP wants ??
To the 'Scope snobs', if you don't have $1000 to blow on a scope, $500 might be within reach -especially on a $350 rifle.
To add to my post #12 on this, I had a Bushnell Engage 6-24x50 SFP before the Covenant. It cost $350 +tx and the SFP and NO numbers on the tree made me relegate it to my .223 varmint rifle. This might be what the OP wants ??
To the 'Scope snobs', if you don't have $1000 to blow on a scope, $500 might be within reach -especially on a $350 rifle.
Well, Buck, I BUY WHAT I WANT- WHEN I WANT-IF I WANT Sorry to hear that you can`t and so will never be able to fully appreciate and enjoy shooting as much as possible. Also sorry to hear that you shoot a savage B22 with a covenant scope, but hang in there and maybe things will get better for you ?
I read some of the back and forth this weekend, the "scope snob" stuff, etc. I think we can all agree that inexpensive scopes usually function without too many issues. If you've been around long enough, you've probably had a few duds...but as many surprises. (=working better than the price point) I've seen my share of both. However, when you spend long days behind a gun, or, in my case...get to look through/shoot with a few gems all in one day..your perspective can really change. Mine did.
Still can't swing top-tier stuff or anything, but I've whittled things down in the pursuit of improved glass on the guns I use/like the most. Once owned a Leupold V3 with a 1" tube (for comparison), my nicest is a Sightron SIII. I have a few scopes I really like. Less than 10 years ago, you couldn't make me believe a scope could be worth more than about $150. Anything is possible.
If you're on a shoestring budget, do what we ALL do=get the best you can afford and have fun with it. Never stop wondering what's around the corner though, or, underestimate how much more enjoyable shooting CAN really be with a nicer scope. For me, it's still tough saving for a scope, but I've also never regretted buying a decent one.
Still can't swing top-tier stuff or anything, but I've whittled things down in the pursuit of improved glass on the guns I use/like the most. Once owned a Leupold V3 with a 1" tube (for comparison), my nicest is a Sightron SIII. I have a few scopes I really like. Less than 10 years ago, you couldn't make me believe a scope could be worth more than about $150. Anything is possible.
If you're on a shoestring budget, do what we ALL do=get the best you can afford and have fun with it. Never stop wondering what's around the corner though, or, underestimate how much more enjoyable shooting CAN really be with a nicer scope. For me, it's still tough saving for a scope, but I've also never regretted buying a decent one.
Any Leupold used will work and have the parallax set closer.
The odd VX II in 2x7-28 (33) would make a nice fit.
VarX's can be a gooder value also.
Korth can set you up as purr yer reqwest awn parallax distance.
The odd VX II in 2x7-28 (33) would make a nice fit.
VarX's can be a gooder value also.
Korth can set you up as purr yer reqwest awn parallax distance.
Last edited:
