Scope Requirements

[Ray B]

Anything that moves and uses springs to operate it can meet its match in acceleration/deceleration. so I prefer externally adjustable scopes. the scope can be designed with full aperture access for light with no limitations caused by the adjustment paraphernalia. If the scope is to be in-place without need to be removed I prefer the Leupold adjust-O-mount or the Buehler adjustable mount. If the scope is to be removed I prefer the Bausch & Lomb plunger ring mount. Since most people are buying into the current marketing programs such scopes and mounts can be obtained quite reasonably priced. they meet all five of your points.

 

[Von S.]

65+ years ago there were very few scopes on rifles and today there ate very few who can shoot with a damned with iron sights.

These days it doesn't really appear that there who can shoot really well with scopes either.

 

[Ray B]

These days it doesn't really appear that there who can shoot really well with scopes either.

I think a lot of that is due to lack of practice, and one of the primary causes of lack of practice is lack of nearby places to shoot. 30 years ago I could walk out my back door and shoot across a vacant field. Now that vacant field has turned into a time-share resort. then there was the gun club two miles down the road. It was closed because a bunch of big city folks that had vacation cabins near the range petitioned the commissioners to make the valley a "no shooting zone". Money talks so the range was closed down. then there was the next range, six miles down the road. It was closed by the EPA because there was a ;possibility that lead fired from shotguns at clay targets could make it several hundred yards into a creek that during the winter had water in it and flowed into a river. then there was the range 12 miles down the road - ditto, but at least it was a river that has water in it year-round. So now the nearest range is nearly 30 miles away, so to shoot it's an all morning or afternoon event. One needs to pack up the guns, ammo, targets, etc and drive to the range, hoping that it isn't one of their competition or police training days.

So instead of being a spur of the moment, hey lets go to the range and practice a few shots, now it takes significant planning- the result is that even those that would like to shoot are inhibited from doing as much as they would like. Which leads to hunters going hunting without having shot their rifles since last year- and maybe longer.

 

[Von S.]

Ray,

I have went shooting with guys who were amazed that with a peep sight that I could outshoot them with their scoped rifle and I shot like I stunk on ice.

There are 45,000 people on this site and I would believe that 44,000 of them couldn't tell you where or when they ever went to a 300 yard range.

The best thing is that most of my friends are so bad at shooting is that they completely miss everything that they shoot at so wounds are few and far between.

 

[Dr Ray]

Great! Just terrific!

 

[sgt_zim]

I think a lot of that is due to lack of practice, and one of the primary causes of lack of practice is lack of nearby places to shoot. 30 years ago I could walk out my back door and shoot across a vacant field. Now that vacant field has turned into a time-share resort. then there was the gun club two miles down the road. It was closed because a bunch of big city folks that had vacation cabins near the range petitioned the commissioners to make the valley a "no shooting zone". Money talks so the range was closed down. then there was the next range, six miles down the road. It was closed by the EPA because there was a ;possibility that lead fired from shotguns at clay targets could make it several hundred yards into a creek that during the winter had water in it and flowed into a river. then there was the range 12 miles down the road - ditto, but at least it was a river that has water in it year-round. So now the nearest range is nearly 30 miles away, so to shoot it's an all morning or afternoon event. One needs to pack up the guns, ammo, targets, etc and drive to the range, hoping that it isn't one of their competition or police training days.

So instead of being a spur of the moment, hey lets go to the range and practice a few shots, now it takes significant planning- the result is that even those that would like to shoot are inhibited from doing as much as they would like. Which leads to hunters going hunting without having shot their rifles since last year- and maybe longer.

That's about the size of it.

The nearest outdoor range to my house is about 15 minutes, but it's a private range whose annual membership opens in March, and the vacancies are filled within minutes. The next nearest range is about 25 minutes. The one after that is also a private range that can go several years without any membership openings. Next nearest one after that is about an hour and 45 minutes away, also a private range. Membership isn't difficult to obtain, but it's about $1000/yr. I'd happily pay that, but I probably couldn't get there more than once a month (that's about as often as I go now), if even that. With almost a 4 hr round trip, that's an all-day outing.

It gets worse. The two nearest private ranges, while 30+ miles from downtown Houston, are having the city start to grow around them. I expect both of them will be shut down within the next 5 or 10 years.

 

[postoak]

I put $300 scopes on my deer rifles. I am shooting over a corn feeder 100 yards away and with these scopes I can see to after legal hours even on an overcast day.

 

[Red Leg]

Anything that moves and uses springs to operate it can meet its match in acceleration/deceleration. so I prefer externally adjustable scopes. the scope can be designed with full aperture access for light with no limitations caused by the adjustment paraphernalia. If the scope is to be in-place without need to be removed I prefer the Leupold adjust-O-mount or the Buehler adjustable mount. If the scope is to be removed I prefer the Bausch & Lomb plunger ring mount. Since most people are buying into the current marketing programs such scopes and mounts can be obtained quite reasonably priced. they meet all five of your points.

Good Lord Ray, are you also a member of the Flat Earth Society!?! I haven't seen anyone using a modern rifle with such a scope and mounts in a generation (maybe two). Of course the old Redfield mounts and their ilk with opposing screws were a legacy of old vertically adjustable only scopes. Many Euro mounts had similar set ups for windage. I also remember the old Unertl rings for non-adjusting target scopes were the thing for many years among the bench rest target crowd- though I think I would as soon take the aiming system from an artillery piece as one of those out on a deer hunt. I haven't seen a varmint rifle so equipped for thirty-years.

Genuinely curious who now makes such scopes and mounts for general hunting applications. Assuming quality optics, it would indeed be solid as the Bank of England once set up for a particular load. I personally think modern quality scopes have become so dependable, that such a solution no longer addresses a real issue - else the market would demand it.

 

[Red Leg]

That's about the size of it.

The nearest outdoor range to my house is about 15 minutes, but it's a private range whose annual membership opens in March, and the vacancies are filled within minutes. The next nearest range is about 25 minutes. The one after that is also a private range that can go several years without any membership openings. Next nearest one after that is about an hour and 45 minutes away, also a private range. Membership isn't difficult to obtain, but it's about $1000/yr. I'd happily pay that, but I probably couldn't get there more than once a month (that's about as often as I go now), if even that. With almost a 4 hr round trip, that's an all-day outing.

It gets worse. The two nearest private ranges, while 30+ miles from downtown Houston, are having the city start to grow around them. I expect both of them will be shut down within the next 5 or 10 years.

I think this is indeed a major factor in the accelerating demise of our sport. For huge geographic swathes of the country (the blue ones on election night - where most of the population is located), there is no place to shoot a rifle and few places to take one hunting. The little bit of available public range availability is typically an indoor pistol range - one reason the NRA maintains a toehold in Blue State America. I regrettably see no way to reverse what seams to be an ever accelerating trend where most of our fellow countrymen live. And as Zim notes, it is becoming the norm wherever large cities and urban sprawl are the located - regardless of state or province.

 

[meigsbucks]

“Good” glass is very important. Eye relief is important (I won’t buy a scope with less than 3.5”). But durability and precision are numero uno to me. If it doesn’t perform when needed, it’s worthless.
Price is a major consideration. For some, paying $2-3k for a scope isn’t a big deal. For others, $500 is major money. Using a basic 3-9x as a baseline, I think buy the best you can afford but decent scopes start at around $300.
If someone can only afford, say, a Savage Axis. Rather than buying the “package”, buy the rifle, save up some money and buy some good mounts and a decent scope, rather than some $100 special. Their experience will be a lot better.
What goes along with this is magnification variables. 3x (3-9x), 5x (2-10x), 8x (1-8x). Obviously the more variable range, the higher the price. But this doesn’t necessarily equate to a “better” scope.
I look for a good crisp view, with good eye relief and precise adjustments.
The durability is based on not only reputation, but your experience. It never fails that I take at least one good fall each hunt.
Some scopes have wonderful glass but lack in other areas. So far (knock on wood), Leupold have been my go to. But I have Zeiss that I like too. I had a Swarovski. Great glass but knock it against something and it would go out of zero in a heartbeat.
One criteria not originally mentioned is weight. Some of the high end scopes weigh 4 to 20 oz more than others. I can probably live with 4oz, but an extra pound? I don’t think so.

 

[Red Leg]

“Good” glass is very important. Eye relief is important (I won’t buy a scope with less than 3.5”). But durability and precision are numero uno to me. If it doesn’t perform when needed, it’s worthless.
Price is a major consideration. For some, paying $2-3k for a scope isn’t a big deal. For others, $500 is major money. Using a basic 3-9x as a baseline, I think buy the best you can afford but decent scopes start at around $300.
If someone can only afford, say, a Savage Axis. Rather than buying the “package”, buy the rifle, save up some money and buy some good mounts and a decent scope, rather than some $100 special. Their experience will be a lot better.
What goes along with this is magnification variables. 3x (3-9x), 5x (2-10x), 8x (1-8x). Obviously the more variable range, the higher the price. But this doesn’t necessarily equate to a “better” scope.
I look for a good crisp view, with good eye relief and precise adjustments.
The durability is based on not only reputation, but your experience. It never fails that I take at least one good fall each hunt.
Some scopes have wonderful glass but lack in other areas. So far (knock on wood), Leupold have been my go to. But I have Zeiss that I like too. I had a Swarovski. Great glass but knock it against something and it would go out of zero in a heartbeat.
One criteria not originally mentioned is weight. Some of the high end scopes weigh 4 to 20 oz more than others. I can probably live with 4oz, but an extra pound? I don’t think so.

The weight issue on quality scopes was resolved years ago. Everyone uses light metal alloy tubes now. Optical performance and durability are most important to me. In the mid-range brands, I would agree that Leupold is likely the best buy for most folks. I have several. For instance, I prefer their mid-range scopes to the Zeiss Conquest line. All that said, the only two scopes that I ever had to send in for warranty work were Leupolds. Schmidt & Bender, Zeiss Victory, and Leica (Their ERi series is in the same ball park as the better Leupolds) really are a different sort of thing. I have never had an issue with any of them - at least not yet. But you are absolutely correct. Such optics are not needed on every rifle or for every application. My best optics are used with those rifles that are used on my most critical hunts (expense or quarry). For instance, if hunting buffalo, I want every possible advantage in threading a bullet into exactly the right spot regardless of light or shadow.

And excellent advice on spending a bit more for a better scope than one typically finds on the "package deals." Many of these hundred-dollar wonders have plastic lenses.

 

[2L8]

Hi,

Agree with 2L8 on "What Do We Require in a Scope."
By the way, a friend has just bought a Nightforce NXS 2,5-10x42. After I saw it (I have read only good things about their mechanics AND optics), I can only say WOW!! Of course, what you can "see" is their optics. The mechanics would show in the use. I would like NF would offer some strictly hunting reticles, illuminated or no, like a GOOD European Nr 4 with center hairs not to thin. As I say, illuminated or no.
This is a scope with unquestionable dependability, short and small enough, with superb optics that will outlast everyone of us. Its weight is just a little high, but a price I would pay in a trade for its virtues!

They do have the SHV Line that's supposedly the same glass and more hunting oriented. It is made with the German #4 but for some reason they don't make it available in the US. The US reticle is a Leupold style Plex.

 

[Ray B]

Good Lord Ray, are you also a member of the Flat Earth Society!?! .

I'm not a member of any society, however the Earth IS Flat. It just isn't flat in the three dimensional world. Move to the fourth or more and view anything in the third and it will be flat. As empirical evidence I note that when someone dies their soul escapes the three dimensional world and moves to at least a fourth dimension. Those that have had near death experiences and "left their bodies" recount the direction they went as UP. This didn't matter what time of day or position of the Earth. That would indicate that someone having the experience in Alaska and someone having the same experience in New Zealand would both see themselves as going UP, but relative to the Earth, going in opposite directions, but from their perspective, they were going in the same direction, ergo, from that dimension, the EARTH IS FLAT.

 

[Ray B]

I've taken a few photographs of some of those obsolete & outdated scopes and if I can remember how to post them, I have some show & tell.

 

[Ray B]

 

[Ray B]

Photographs of some older scopes #1 Leupold Pioneer with Leupold Adjust-o-Mounts; #2 Balvar 8 with Buehler Adjustable mount; #3 Unertl 7/8" 10x with Unertal mounts; #4 Unertl UltraVarmint 12x with Unertl mounts; #5 Zeiss Zeilvier 4x with Horizontally adjustable mount. All are in fine working order.

 

[Red Leg]

Photographs of some older scopes #1 Leupold Pioneer with Leupold Adjust-o-Mounts; #2 Balvar 8 with Buehler Adjustable mount; #3 Unertl 7/8" 10x with Unertal mounts; #4 Unertl UltraVarmint 12x with Unertl mounts; #5 Zeiss Zeilvier 4x with Horizontally adjustable mount. All are in fine working order.

Oh Lord. Like I said.

 

[meigsbucks]

Photographs of some older scopes #1 Leupold Pioneer with Leupold Adjust-o-Mounts; #2 Balvar 8 with Buehler Adjustable mount; #3 Unertl 7/8" 10x with Unertal mounts; #4 Unertl UltraVarmint 12x with Unertl mounts; #5 Zeiss Zeilvier 4x with Horizontally adjustable mount. All are in fine working order.

I start to quiver and shake when I see an Unertl scope. Withdrawal! Used to have one on my Winchester 75 when I shot small bore competition as a junior almost fifty years ago.

 

[Hogpatrol]

If it's in one's budget and wants bulletproof reliability, consider a Nightforce NXS of some stripe. This is a 5.5-20x56 mounted on a 28 nosler custom. As others have noted, if weight is a consideration, this is on the heavy side, two pounds.


http://www.nightforceoptics.com/torturetest2

 

[Dwight Beagle]

The scopes on my rifles cost approximately the same amount as the rifle they are mounted on or cost a little more than the rifle. My taste does NOT run toward the Axis, RAR, 783, etc. I don’t own any expensive rifles but own Model 700, Model 70, CZ 500 and Weatherby Vanguard.

If I had more disposable income I’d stick with the same rifles and buy nicer glass. I grew up shooting iron sights and appreciate scopes, I buy the best I can afford.