Author Topic: Redfield revolution (Read 4997 times)

Jim Miller · « **on:** April 19, 2011, 03:45:09 PM »

Anyone have any experience with the new redfields? Good, Bad, or otherwise.

TIA
Jim

Spanky · « **Reply #1 on:** April 19, 2011, 04:18:59 PM »

Good scopes for the money. I've got 2 of them and no problems at all.

Spanky

carbineman · « **Reply #2 on:** April 19, 2011, 05:45:47 PM »

Jim, page thru the various page numbers below, and you will see alot of topics concerning rthe Redfield Revolution scope line.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #3 on:** April 20, 2011, 03:01:51 AM »

ive had nothing but problems with them. One 4x12 was sent back because it wouldnt tract right or hold zero. It came back with a slip that said they rebuilt the windage and elevation mechinisoms rebuilt and it said the objective lens was loose and had to be replaced. Got it back put it on a 260 ar10 and less then 20 shots later and zero went to hell again. Just sent it back the second time. Had one other its a 2x7. It suffered from the same thing. I got it back and they said they rebuilt the wind and elv. I put it back on the gun and shot it about 20 times and so far so good. Would i buy another? Not in this lifetime. To bad as in there price range they have excellent glass.

Dand · « **Reply #4 on:** April 24, 2011, 12:03:57 AM »

LLoyd, could the back and forth recoil action of your AR be a factor here - like for springer airguns? I know even some modest spring air rifles can trash scopes that are not made for the 2 way recoil. With a 260 there might be enough recoil to be an issue. Seems like I'm seeing more and more scopes that claim to be designed for ARs and such - but I haven't studied the issue at all.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #5 on:** April 24, 2011, 02:34:19 AM »

got it back again yesterday. The note with it was about identical to the first time--- replaced windage and elevation mechinisms and reinstalled objective lens. I doubt if it was the ar causeing it as the first time it failed it was on my 257 weatherby and the recoil from that 10lb 260 is much less then the weatherby and hardly more then a .223 ar15. It will sit on the shelf until im desperate or broke enough to have to break down and use it again as i will never have confidence in it again. After having problems with 2 out of 2 of them i wont spend my money on another.

Quote from: Dand on April 24, 2011, 12:03:57 AM

LLoyd, could the back and forth recoil action of your AR be a factor here - like for springer airguns? I know even some modest spring air rifles can trash scopes that are not made for the 2 way recoil. With a 260 there might be enough recoil to be an issue. Seems like I'm seeing more and more scopes that claim to be designed for ARs and such - but I haven't studied the issue at all.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #6 on:** April 24, 2011, 02:42:21 AM »

I have one on a Maximum. I havent fired it all that much...Maybe a couple boxes of bullets and so far so good. I had good expectations but worry now after reading Lloyds post....

CW

carbineman · « **Reply #7 on:** April 24, 2011, 03:22:15 PM »

CW, I have two and really like them. Ok glass, ok construction, good eye relief. Unlike Lloyd though, I set mine up for one weight bullet and never have to make an adjustment to the scope reticle.
That said though, with Lloyd's luck I wouldn't purchase another either.

My go to scope for the smaller caliber deer hunting rifle is the Leupold VX I in 1-4x20mm. Or similar 20mm Leupold in a used model.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #8 on:** April 25, 2011, 02:23:37 AM »

dont know if i just had ### luck or if they are just cheap junk. I was talking to my buddy today about it and told him guys all over the internet are bragging on these things and very few seem to have problems. He made a good point about that. He said half the scopes sold are nothing but decorations on guns sitting in safes that are never used. Another 25 percent go on hunting rifles and are sighted in and after that are lucky to see a half a box of ammo a year out of them. Use like that it could take years for problems to crop up in one. But ill about guarantee you one thing. If a problem is going to arrise it will usually arise at the worse possible time. Id sure not bet a hunt on one of them anymore.

Swampman · « **Reply #9 on:** April 25, 2011, 02:29:13 AM »

I prefer the Nikon Prostaff or the Bushnell 3200 Elite myself.

jmayton · « **Reply #10 on:** April 25, 2011, 05:15:26 AM »

I'm getting a 4-12 Revolution from a friend of mine this week. It's going on my 338-06 so we'll see how it holds up. But I gotta agree with Swampy about the Nikon Prostaff. I had it on the 338 until yesterday when I switched it back to the Savage 30-06. It had been bore sighted on the 338 but I left my zero indicators for the 30-06. Once I got it back on the rifle and leveled I just turned the knobs back to zero and it was good to go. It doesn't track as well as Leupold MK4's or a Nightforce, but for $150 it's pretty darn good. For me it's the scope I compare all the under $200 scopes to. I'll see how the Redfield compares.

burntmuch · « **Reply #11 on:** April 25, 2011, 05:43:50 AM »

Quote from: Lloyd Smale on April 25, 2011, 02:23:37 AM

dont know if i just had ### luck or if they are just cheap junk. I was talking to my buddy today about it and told him guys all over the internet are bragging on these things and very few seem to have problems. He made a good point about that. He said half the scopes sold are nothing but decorations on guns sitting in safes that are never used. Another 25 percent go on hunting rifles and are sighted in and after that are lucky to see a half a box of ammo a year out of them. Use like that it could take years for problems to crop up in one. But ill about guarantee you one thing. If a problem is going to arrise it will usually arise at the worse possible time. Id sure not bet a hunt on one of them anymore.

Thats a good point, Before I trust a scope on a hunt, I put as many rounds down range with gun / scope combo as possible. Nothing worse than sitting in a treestand looking at a scope & hoping? wondering if its still holding zero. With that being said. I have a new redfield 4X12 enroute to me. It will go on my rem 700 223. Hopefully I ll have the time to run it thru its paces & see how it holds up.

Swampman · « **Reply #12 on:** April 25, 2011, 06:03:14 AM »

Here is a pretty good test report on some of the scopes we've been discussing. I hope it is ok to post it here.

http://www.opticstalk.com/topic21176&KW=cheap+review_post267216.html#267216

bikerbeans · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2011, 06:50:48 AM »

FWIW, I bought a new 4 12 40 Redfield scope last year and mounted it on a 45-120. This is an eleven pound gun that I shot heavy loads with. After several hundred shots I have had no issues with the scope. I also have (2) 3 x 9 x 40s, one on a 50 cal inline MZ and the other on a 444M single shot and no problems with these scopes either. Like anything else you buy there is always the chance of a lemon.

BB

Swampy,

thanks for the link to the scope review.

eye shot · « **Reply #14 on:** April 25, 2011, 07:03:17 AM »

I think the review was very honest when he stated he should have done it by price range. The Redfield is the lowest priced of the bunch and I think it held it's own very well with being compared to higher price scopes.

Swampman · « **Reply #15 on:** April 25, 2011, 07:13:43 AM »

A little shopping will get you a 3200 for a whole lot less than you think.

eye shot · « **Reply #16 on:** April 25, 2011, 06:09:51 PM »

Yes now on the 3200 and a good deal, but not when that artical was written. I would guess the replacement for the 3200 will have a little more eye relief.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #17 on:** April 26, 2011, 02:42:57 AM »

i will go with the 3200 being a better scope but the prostaffs you can keep. Ive had a few of them and there about as good in low light as a tasco bought at walmart. The two redfields i have do have much better optics then the prostaffs and in my opinion are better opticaly then even a buckmaster. Only nikon that will be on a gun in this house is a monarch. there a dammed good scope.

jmayton · « **Reply #18 on:** April 26, 2011, 04:12:39 AM »

I got the Redfield mounted and boresighted. The glass is great but the mechanics leave something to be desired. As many have said, the knobs have an odd feel (different depending on which direction you go) and there's not as much total adjustment. The old enfield's scope mounts are a bit off, so the scope needs a lot of right windage to compensate. The Nikon was ok, but the Redfield pretty much bottomed out. Again, we'll see how it does after I shoot it.

Spanky · « **Reply #19 on:** April 27, 2011, 05:37:55 PM »

I've got a couple hundred rounds through my 44 mag and no problems at all.

Spanky

boarhuntr · « **Reply #20 on:** May 09, 2013, 06:35:26 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on April 25, 2011, 07:13:43 AM

A little shopping will get you a 3200 for a whole lot less than you think.

I have a Bushnell Elite 4200. Good scope, but the glass clarity is not as good as my Redfield Revenge in 4x12

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #21 on:** May 10, 2013, 12:11:17 AM »

everyones eyes are obviously differnt. I look through my only 4200 and to me its hands down bettter then the optics in my redfield but the redfield is a tad better then the 3200s. But reliability has to be the major consern with me even more so then optical performance and the redfields just feel cheap and dont tract well so bottom line is there wont ever be another in this house. Ive never had a diamondback and probably should look at one. Like i said the redfields out the prostaff is just so pour in low light that its out. Bushenll doenst make the 3200 anymore so its out and my tract record with burris is about ### pour. I think ive sent more burris scopes for repair then all others combined. That said i only have one right now a fullfield II 3x9 and it held up to being used on a 300 wby mag for 4 years. But you know how it is once you have multiple problems with a brand you just loose confidence. Personaly i like to step up a notch from these anyway. Something lilke a vx2 leupold or a nikon monarch or a 4200 bushnell is about a 100 bucks more and id rather save my pennys for a couple more months as that 100 bucks seems to get you out of the mediocure class and into decent scopes by all the manufactures. Ill throw vortex vipers into that mix to. I have a 2x7 and it seems like a real good scope. About equal to my vx2 2x7 in all catogorys and its a bit cheaper to boot.

FPH · « **Reply #22 on:** May 10, 2013, 12:45:11 AM »

I've considered the Vortex Viper. However, my buddy has raved about IJK optics. IJK is much cheaper, so I'm at a crossroads. Glass in even more important to me these days. I hate bad glass.

jmayton · « **Reply #23 on:** May 10, 2013, 05:25:26 AM »

Well, since I said I'd update after I shot it, I guess I'll do just that. The Redfield is no longer on the .338. I couldn't get consistent groups. Thought it might be the rifle or my handloads, but decided to change the scope just in case. Mounted a Nikon Buckmaster and all of a sudden the rifle could shoot! The Redfield is now on my wife's .243 and is doing just fine with the low recoil but it would not hold up to the .338. So no more Redfields for me.

Graybeard · « **Reply #24 on:** November 26, 2019, 05:33:46 AM »

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #25 on:** November 27, 2019, 01:21:50 AM »

well whats changed in the last few years?? Still don't like redfields and the prostaff has become an excellent scope.

Graybeard · « **Reply #26 on:** November 27, 2019, 02:49:53 AM »

Don't believe I've ever owned a pro staff or for that matter any Nikon scope. In years long since past I've looked thru a grand total of two Nikon scopes that I can remember. One was their 2X handgun scope. It actually made me think I was looking thru it backward as it seemed to make things look smaller not a bit larger.

They other was a Monarch and I have to say that was the overall worse image I've ever seen thru a scope and that includes some truly dirt cheap ones.

Maybe just a coincidence of luck but those two soured me so badly on Nikon I'd never spend money on one.

Once I thought of Redfield as a really good scope and then I didn't and haven't owned one since. They are now made by Leupold so I think I'd not mind owning one but am not sure.