Magnification for scope on 22LR rifle

[grauhanen]

This is what the OP asks and says he is looking for:

I'm looking to scope a few CZ 452's, but it's been a while since I owned a scoped 22LR

The rifles will only be used at the range, not for hunting, and I'm looking to keep costs around a few hundred dollars per scope. I do recall owning Banners and Muellers in the past that went up to 18x, or 24x, but even with a 50mm bell, it got really dark, and a bit blurry. The CZ 452's are fairly accurate rifles, so I don't really want them to be limited by a weak scope.

He is looking for more than one scope at a few hundred dollars each. The scopes are for range use only, no hunting. He has tried Banners and Muellers but is not keen on them -- the skepticism about the former being especially well-deserved.

A good compromise scope is the Leupold VX-2 6-18 40mm AO... I have one on a 77/22 and it is really good glass.

This would be a great compromise if the OP is looking for something between a lower power 3-9 or 4-12 hunting scope and a high power 24X or more target scope.

Agreed leupold is a great mid range priced scope.

To put it in perspective for the purposes of this thread, at over $800 before taxes the Leupold 6-18 does not come close to the OP's budget, and may well not really be a mid-range priced scope for anyone shooting a CZ rimfire. (But as a compromise between posters it is indeed great.)

Examples of 18X scopes that are closer to the OP's budget, yet still break it, are the Redfield Revenge 6-18 and the Vortex Crossfire II 6-18, but I've never seen either and can't endorse from first hand experience. Another example, this one within his budget, is the Bushnell Legend 5-15X40 scope that can still be found in Canada for under $200. All these scopes have an adjustable objective, which is something the OP should have on a scope.

In the end, the OP is looking for a budget-friendly scope that is good for shooting a .22LR at the range. As always, however, the bugaboo with scopes is that, while there are a lot of inexpensive scopes that offer higher magnification, the vast majority of them are not worth buying. These days it is increasingly difficult to find half-decent scopes with magnification for range shooting for a couple hundred dollars each. I wish CanuckShooter good luck in finding the scopes that meet his needs.

 

[Mount Sweetness]

For .22lr I like 7x

 

[little_airwolf]

If someone is buying something you know there is a good chance they will regret, do you sit and say nothing.
Ive gone through 4 low end scopes with money being the first concern. About 50% of people I asked on here when I first started shooting told me to save and spend more.
I was frustrated and felt that they werent listening to me and my budget. I also felt most of these guys probably make 2x-10x the salery I do, so sure they can afford to drop $500-$1+k on a scope. I have two kids so I have priorities.
Only after spending money on 4 scope I sold did I understand why people said what they did on my first post.
Buy once, Cry once

 

[Saskatchestan]

For most folks a 3x9 is perfect for a .22 if you are just going after gophers and stuff like that. You "can" mount a more powerful scope if you want to reach out and touch things at range but with a round as small as a .22 shooting at longer range is difficult, you'll need a more expensive rifle and ammo to be able to shoot consistently at longer ranges. I'd say look for a 3x9 at around $200-$300 no need to go crazy. Sometimes good enough is good enough. Avoid cheap scopes they are a pain in the ass. Just my 2 cents. Good luck.

 

[a j cave]

Again, for a paper only gun more is better. I want to see bullet holes at 100. That eliminates most "hunting scopes 3-9, 4-16 etc." I asked this already and was happy with the advice of, get 24 power or more. Big cross hair in a scope can and do cover the 1/4 -1/2 in X. You do not need a variable scope, that helps save a few $$. Good luck. PS. Look at the "My22 shoots 1/2" all day" thread and see what they are using and that is at 50.

 

[Grawfr]

I just use a $45 Simmonds fixed power 4x32 scope on my Henry H001T for shooting up to 50 yards. Call me heretic.

Weights less than 9oz and lets me plink well enough. made some 2MOA groups from a front rest with match grade ammo. Don't really need more magnification at the ranges I shoot, though I might one day get a 3-9x32 just for target shooting.

 

[1000yards]

Minute of gopher, I use a Simmons 3-9

Moa, I use bushnell 4-16

Submoa I use someone who owns a sightron's target lol

 

[rosebute]

I have a few 22s, but my current favourite is a new Browning t bolt. I use it for hunting & very informal target shooting off the bench & have a leupold ultralight 2x7 on it
I use 7x for the bench & leave it on 2 or 3x for hunting. Trying to hit a beavers head using 7x while standing in my little boat is far too frustrating, so i prefer less magnification.
I also use a 1-4x on my 30-06, leaving it on 2.5x all the time. Big scopes are not always better in my opinion.

 

[Eagleye]

My Heavy BR 22 rimfires all have 36X Scopes on them....Leupold and one weaver T36

Very accurate sporters wear 6.5 - 20 x 40 EFR Leupolds or 24X fixed power Leupolds or Weavers.

Plinkers are mostly 3x9 or 2x7 Rimfire Leupolds. One wears a fixed 10x

Optics make the difference in an accurate 22. Buy once, cry once as the man said. Dave.

 

[CanuckShooter]

I wouldn't say I was put off by the Banner or Mueller, especially for the price. They got a little dim at full magnification, but it wasn't a deal breaker. In fact, if Mueller still provided warranty coverage here in Canada, I'd most likely go that route and grab their 8.5-25 Tactical (again) or the even more powerful 8-32 model from Amazon. Unless that warranty situation has changed?

An adjustable objective is a must for any rimfire scope I buy, and a lot of the lower end Leupolds, etc don't appear have that feature, which is understandable. It seems that the only "respectable" AO scopes that are in my price range, have warranty coverage in Canada, and get good reviews are the Bushnell Legend HD and Bushnell Elite Tactical 5-15. Not very powerful scopes, but many people are saying that clear quality glass lessens the need for super high magnification. I wouldn't know as I've never peered through anything better than the Mueller I had. Maybe ignorance is bliss?

A common complaint about the Bushnell 5-15 Tactical Elite is the thickness of the reticle. Anyone here familiar with that particular scope? For shooting 100yds is the reticle thickness going to make much difference? I did say I\d like to shoot out to 200yds, but I think that might just be a pipe dream, or if I visit one of the ranges with a gong at 200yds.

Thanks for all the info so far. Lots to take in.

 

[calvados.boulard]

My Heavy BR 22 rimfires all have 36X Scopes on them....Leupold and one weaver T36

Very accurate sporters wear 6.5 - 20 x 40 EFR Leupolds or 24X fixed power Leupolds or Weavers.

Plinkers are mostly 3x9 or 2x7 Rimfire Leupolds. One wears a fixed 10x

Optics make the difference in an accurate 22. Buy once, cry once as the man said. Dave.

Sage advice as always. I agree on all fronts.

Thanks,
Cal.

 

[hoytcanon]

I just use a $45 Simmonds fixed power 4x32 scope on my Henry H001T for shooting up to 50 yards. Call me heretic.

Weights less than 9oz and lets me plink well enough. made some 2MOA groups from a front rest with match grade ammo. Don't really need more magnification at the ranges I shoot, though I might one day get a 3-9x32 just for target shooting.

You are shooting a lever action plinker, scope magnification doesn't matter at that level of accuracy... and what you call target shooting with your 3-9X32 is still plinking... just at a paper bullseye.

 

[hoytcanon]

He is looking for more than one scope at a few hundred dollars each. The scopes are for range use only, no hunting....

To put it in perspective for the purposes of this thread, at over $800 before taxes the Leupold 6-18 does not come close to the OP's budget...

The OP's budget was "a few hundred" for each scope... what exactly is "a few hundred?" The VX-2 6-18 40mm AO can be had locally for $700 (I just bought one on sale for $600 tax in).. certainly not out of range of "a few."

 

[Grawfr]

You are shooting a lever action plinker, scope magnification doesn't matter at that level of accuracy... and what you call target shooting with your 3-9X32 is still plinking... just at a paper bullseye.

Yup! If I wanted to make ragged holes with 5 bullets, I'd get an Anchutz bolt action, put a x40 scope on it, feed it match grade ammo and never bring it anywhere other than the range in good weather. I see shooters like this on the ranges, and they get superb accuracy with their rigs. It's impressive to watch them perform, makes me a little jealous because they can make 24 bullseyes fit on a 8 1/2"x11" sheet and never get confused as to which hole belongs to which group. Talk about economy in their paper costs!

I like to take my Henry in the woods and scare the squirrels, though, so that's the purpose for which I picked the scope. Was little point in spending $500 for that goal, but I admit I'm very tempted to get one of those rimfire 2-7x or 3-9x Leupolds, be it only to see what the difference would be!

 

[elimsprint]

A common complaint about the Bushnell 5-15 Tactical Elite is the thickness of the reticle. Anyone here familiar with that particular scope? For shooting 100yds is the reticle thickness going to make much difference? I did say I\d like to shoot out to 200yds, but I think that might just be a pipe dream, or if I visit one of the ranges with a gong at 200yds.

I have one of the Elite 3200 5-15's It is on my "hunting" 10/22 and for grouse heads out to 50 yds the cross-hairs are just fine. That said they are a little thicker than I would like, I think a lot of mil-dot scopes are the same, but the glass is very clear and I rate the scope to be a good buy. To give you an idea the cross-hairs cover a plastic push pin @50yds (you can see little bits of it in each corner) and also cover a spent .223 case @75yds. I can still hit them at those ranges but they are covered.

 

[bigdyno]

I have Bushnell Trophy XLT 3-9x40 that was about $140 that I use on a .22, but when I bought my TRR this spring I put a Vortex Diamondback HP 4-16x42 on it at three times the price. Totally worth the extra price and very suited for the job. After I bought my Nightforce (definitely NOT for a .22) I have become a bit jaded with cheap glass. Sure it can do the job, but good glass does it so much better. I'm a firm believer in spending as much as possible on glass, this usually results in costs higher than the rifle. YMMV....