Difference between <$300 and >$500 scopes.

pickeringchris

Regular
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Ok, I own a Bushnell Elite and currently looking for a less expensive scope for my 17hmr. Ive looked thru then all at the stores. From Tasco to Zeiss. Right off the bat my untrained eye could tell the difference between the clarity, crispness and brightness of the higher end scopes. Clearly if you spend more (in most cases) you get better glass. My question is beyond what my eye can see. Do the more expensive scopes hold zero better? Will i be disapointed with a sub $300 scope? Not talking crispness here. Talking repeatable precision and accuracy. I looked thru Bushnell's legend series and they look awesome. I'm even considering a trophy xlt. Maybe a Mueller. Your thoughts?

Cheers.
 
For what range? 0-100 yards $200-250 is plenty. Beyond that ... you'd be looking for an AO, which usually means $400+.
 
For a .17 HMR? I've had a Nikon Buckmasters 6-18x40SF on my Savage 93 .17 HMR for years...never felt the need for something better.
 
In many cases, the higher priced scopes do track better, and do hold zero better when exposed to recoil or rough handling.
If you intend to dial turrets regularly, precise,repeatable, tracking, is a big advantage. If you are going to zero the scope and leave it , tracking isn't as important.
 
I've had excellent luck with the Futong/Fitco scopes on low recoiling rifles.

Both my scoped .22's mount 6x-24x Futong/Fitcos, My wife and daughter's .22's both mount 3x-9x. All have held zero for years. (I'm a set it and forget it kind of guy)

I had an 8x-32x that was mounted on my 'Rinco M14 for a couple hundred rounds, then my .30-'06 for a few dozen, and finally on my .338WinMag, where it died after about 20 rounds.

I really like higher powered scopes, and generally am willing to put up with the drawbacks of a 6x or even 8x bottom end to get the 24x or 32x top end.
That written, my .338 mounts a 2.5x-16x 6500, which I love. I wish I could afford a bunch of scopes with really big power ranges. If you want to contribute to the Buy Splatter a March fund, send me a PM ;)
 
For what range? 0-100 yards $200-250 is plenty. Beyond that ... you'd be looking for an AO, which usually means $400+.

News to me...I frequently shoot my Bushnell Elite 1-6x with no AO and I have no problem hitting targets even beyond 300y. Are you absolutely certain AO is required? If you are, I will run out and buy an AO scope right away.
 
i'm thinking at the bottom end a used busnell 3200 series and work up. cheep glass and high magnification don't go hand in hand. new pricing i think you will be disapointed at the under $300 mark.
 
I don't play with turrets. I set em and forget em.
Looking for something 16x minimum for 100m target.
Nikon Buckmaster is no sloutch. It's a $400 scope. :)

16x mag is quite a lot of 100m....is this for target shooting or hunting? There is something to be said for field of view if its the latter.
 
Try hawke optics. They have a hawke elicpse for 249 at shooters supply. 4x16.
Alot of scope for the money. You may of not heard of them but they have a large percentage of the uk market. Excellent scopes for the money.
 
Thanks so much guys. I appreciate the support.
First of all, I am a new shooter. Just setting up my 2nd rifle. My tikka 204 has a elite 4-16. I really like 16 for shooting target @ 100. I get pretty good groups too. < 1.25". Good for me anyway. What mag do target shooters typically use for 100m?
The 17 will be for target and whatever else. Possibly small game. I got it as a cheaper alternative for plinking vs the 204.
 
no expert here but i bought a mueller apt 4.5 - 14 last year for my 22. which i hunt and target shoot quite a bit with and i really like it. I can see 22. holes at 100 no problem and with hi vis targets at 200. the apt has target turrets which i like for the 22. to dial it up or you can buy the apv without. There are lots of good scopes out there. you can pick up a 4-16 for about $250 I have compared them to the bushnell xlt and find it alot clearer. The turrets when adjusted from 50 yards to 200 always stay dialed in and are nice percise clicks oppose to other scopes in this price range. It made my 22. group alot better getting moa at 100 yrds now with a remington 597. Just bought a t3 lite in 223. and probley going to put a 4-16 mueller on it.
 
By mounting it on a low-recoil gun, and by setting the turrets once and not constantly dialing up and down, you have probably eliminated two of the main issues that might arise with an inexpensive scope. Higher-end scopes probably also have superior seals and waterproofing, and generally more robust construction to withstand impacts and bumps. So what? On a big-game hunting rifle, that might be called upon to take a once-in-a-lifetime shot, I would always buy the best scope I could afford...for me, that means Leupolds. But on a pure fun gun like your .17, I get excellent results with less-expensive Bushnells. Keep in mind that your location is within easy driving distance of Bushnell's warranty center in Markham...the few times that I have visited them with problem scopes, they have replaced the scopes on the spot with brand-new models, usually superior in quality to the old ones. They did that in one case with a Simmons scope that was something like 20 years old, and had cost me no more than $40 when I bought it new! For the money, their products are good, and they will take good care of you if you have a problem.

AO? A nice feature, but not absolutely necessary. The AO removes parallax, which exists only when you move your head side to side, or up and down, relative to the scope axis. Keep your eye centered in the scope, and parallax is not an issue. AO can even be a hindrance in the field, requiring you to refocus to change target distances. Your .17 is easily a 100+ yard cartridge...so standard centerfire scopes are already well adjusted for you.
 
dont forget to look at older used leupolds here in the ee they are the best bang for your buck and still carry warranty.
 
My choice for a low cost scope for .17HMR would be a Mueller APV. It has nice glass, It's has AO and the 4.5-14x40 is around $170. With a set of good rings it should work well.

Are there better scopes? Absolutely. But they're substantially more $. The next level seems to be around $300 and up from there.
 
I'm looking at getting a cheaper scope too, but I'm concerned as to what is considered 'low recoil'. Obviously a cheaper scope on a 30-06 won't last long. How about a Fitco on a heavy barrelled 22-250???
 
For what range? 0-100 yards $200-250 is plenty. Beyond that ... you'd be looking for an AO, which usually means $400+.

What? Total nonsense.

All of my Leupold scopes (except the rimfire) are to be parallax free at 150 yards. I have a couple of Bushnell Elites which are set parallax free at 100 yards and I use them to shoot regularly out to 300+ at the range and in the field. No probles what so ever.

You do realize that Parallax is a non-issue if you have a consistent cheek weld, right? Even if you don't, there is no signifigant concern.
 
Back
Top Bottom