ok, are they really worth it? a $1000 scope better than a $50 scope

[Graybeard]

Many many long years ago when Weaver kinda ruled the roost as most popular I had one on my rifle when what I think is likely the largest racked buck I've ever seen in the woods came running over a hill down into the hollow I was sneaking along in. I had heard a shot over that way and no doubt someone had spooked it my way.

The buck ran down into the bottom behind a thick clump of brush. I could see glimses of it moving around but with the elcheapo optics I could not see to get a shot even tho I feel sure a shot was there had I had a quality scope on the rifle. I felt sure it would eventually reveal itself to me for a shot but it did not. Clearly it knew I was there and walked or ran away directly from me with the brush hiding the escape. I'll always blame the loss of that buck on that cheap Weaver. Soon afterward I bought new Redfield then went to Leupold scopes and have not taken a cheap piece of junk scope hunting with me since and never again will.

If that had been a Leupold or even Redfield that day I'd have that head hanging on my wall today. Of that I have no doubt. I did end up killing a four pointer later that day but the big boy got away.

[Drilling Man]

I own LOTS or rifles If I started putting $1,00 scopes on them I couldn't afford more than a few. I only have one rifle that is scoped with something as expensive as a Leopold, most have something in the $100 range. I can only remember a couple of scopes cratering on me, and that only happened while I was screwing on the dials sighting them in.

As far as a scope failing at a critical moment, some folks sure have a lot of bad luck. I never go hunting with only one gun along, if one were to fail there is always backup. But I've never needed to change rifles because of a failed scope.

  I never could understand why someone would rather have LOTS of average guns when they could have a couple REALLY well made superior guns, with top of the line optics?  AND money left over to go hunting!

  I've flown into places that were so far out into the bush, you just couldn't haul in extra guns/gun cases ect...  Where i had to sit on a pile of meat flying out, because there was no room for a second seat, nor did we want the weight of that seat in the plane.  Those are my kind of hunts!  That was the EXACT case on this hunt!



  I've always carried a tried and true rifle, with a scope i knew i could depend on!  I've seen all too many of those price beater scopes crap out, for me to take a chance on one of them on "my" rifle.

  You don't have to be rich to have good gear, you just have to stop the American way of thinking, that "more is better".

  You will be amazed how much better rifleman you will become, when you settle down to a few good guns, and shoot them more!

  DM

[hunt-m-up]

  You don't have to be rich to have good gear, you just have to stop the American way of thinking, that "more is better".

  You will be amazed how much better rifleman you will become, when you settle down to a few good guns, and shoot them more!

  DM

So you only have 1 TV, 1 car or truck, live in a 3 room house, have 1 pair of shoes, drink only water and eat bologna and cheese sandwiches everyday? Because in theory that's all anyone would ever need.

The second sentence I agree with, but probably won't get much traction on a gun-lovers site.

[Guy Pike]

The law of diminishing returns certainly applies here. For example 90% of the perceived goal can be achieved for 10% of the price. The other 10% of the goal will cost 90% of the money. The percentages will always vary but we get the idea. The extra costs can indeed insure a better product, but it's no guarantee. Anecdotally, I have a $450 dollar scope in which the cross hairs are so out of square to each other as to make it unusable. It will go back. All the $29 dollar scopes with 90 degree cross hairs are now in my opinion, better scopes. Way too hard for me to make any blanket statements as to dollars paid vs. value received but I have received good customer service and poor at every price level at one time or another. We live in interesting times!

[Drilling Man]

  You don't have to be rich to have good gear, you just have to stop the American way of thinking, that "more is better".

  You will be amazed how much better rifleman you will become, when you settle down to a few good guns, and shoot them more!

  DM

So you only have 1 TV, 1 car or truck, live in a 3 room house, have 1 pair of shoes, drink only water and eat bologna and cheese sandwiches everyday? Because in theory that's all anyone would ever need.

The second sentence I agree with, but probably won't get much traction on a gun-lovers site.

  When did "a couple" turn into one???

  My post was aimed at ALL the posters who -----------------> whine that they can't afford "good" gear, so they don't own it.  YET, they own a closet full of average (or worse) gear!  That doesn't make sence to me, as that closet full of gear cost them more than couple higher end complete guns.  Do you understand the concept now??

  BTW, i fixed the "quote" for you...   

  DM

[Skunk]

My post was aimed at ALL the posters who -----------------> whine that they can't afford "good" gear, so they don't own it. YET, they own a closet full of average (or worse) gear!

Well let's take Mueller for example. Their products are not expensive but might easily fall into the category of "very good" gear. According to their website, the prices of their scopes are less because the company does not get involved with huge, expensive, marketing campaigns. Instead, they rely on word of mouth sales, and advertisements through sponsorships of forums, as is the case here at GBO. The savings in marketing expenses is then passed on to the consumer. Perhaps through programs like this, all of us can get great optics at a very reasonable price without the need to "whine."

[30-30man]

Simmons has changed hands, maybe you caught them in one of these times. I don't know.  I do know that $1000 optics are just not necessary even $500 for that matter.  You can hunt with a $100 scope if you buy the right one and you will not be able to tell much of a difference between the more expensive stuff.    Most folks just can't afford the high dollar stuff, and it's just not necessary to enjoy a hunt.  Most people don't travel across the planet to hunt elephant, so a $60 scope works fine.

[charles p]

I can't disagree with you because I've never laid my season on the line with a $60 scope.  Hardly seems like a risk I wish to take after waiting all year.

I hunted in Idaho two years ago.  A US hunter flew in from Dubai, where he was an executive for an oil company.  He had a bargain scope!  Man was it ever a bargain.  What ever you looked at, you saw several crosshairs, and a terrible out of focus image to boot.  We could not sight his rifle in because nobody knew where to aim.  He managed to hit a 3' X3' piece of cardboard at about 75 yards.  Hope he enjoyed the scenery.

[Drilling Man]

My post was aimed at ALL the posters who -----------------> whine that they can't afford "good" gear, so they don't own it. YET, they own a closet full of average (or worse) gear!

Well let's take Mueller for example. Their products are not expensive but might easily fall into the category of "very good" gear. According to their website, the prices of their scopes are less because the company does not get involved with huge, expensive, marketing campaigns. Instead, they rely on word of mouth sales, and advertisements through sponsorships of forums, as is the case here at GBO. The savings in marketing expenses is then passed on to the consumer. Perhaps through programs like this, all of us can get great optics at a very reasonable price without the need to "whine."

  OK, lets take Mueller for example...  As i said eariler, i have experience with TWO of them.  My friend bought one new, and it's already puked and been replaced!  Mines still new in the box, and will end up on a 22lr that i'll use for "plinking"!

  DM

[bilmac]

A lot of this argument depends on your perspective. If I lived in a city and made gobs of money, and spent my whole year waiting for one big adventure where I spent gobs of money to go to some exotic place, I expect I might spend more for my scopes.

I don't have a lot of disposable income, a lot less since I've retired. But I can go hunting right out my back door anytime I want. I seldom hunt with the same gun for very long, I may start the day with a 270, and finish with a 45-70. If I miss a chance at an animal, then that means I just get to hunt a little longer. Soon as I fill all the tags, then hunting is over for another year, so why get all worked up about it.

[Skunk]

OK, lets take Mueller for example...  As i said eariler, i have experience with TWO of them.  My friend bought one new, and it's already puked and been replaced!  Mines still new in the box, and will end up on a 22lr that i'll use for "plinking"!

Sounds like excellent customer service from Mueller. In all fairness, even Leupold scopes sometimes have to go back for repair.

As long as that scope has an adjustable objective for close range, placing it on a .22lr is an excellent application. I've seen .22s sporting U.S. Optics, Swarovski, and many Leupolds. Just because a scope goes on the old .22 plinker, doesn't make it any less of a scope.

[hunt-m-up]

  You don't have to be rich to have good gear, you just have to stop the American way of thinking, that "more is better".

  You will be amazed how much better rifleman you will become, when you settle down to a few good guns, and shoot them more!

  DM

So you only have 1 TV, 1 car or truck, live in a 3 room house, have 1 pair of shoes, drink only water and eat bologna and cheese sandwiches everyday? Because in theory that's all anyone would ever need.

The second sentence I agree with, but probably won't get much traction on a gun-lovers site.

  When did "a couple" turn into one???

  My post was aimed at ALL the posters who -----------------> whine that they can't afford "good" gear, so they don't own it.  YET, they own a closet full of average (or worse) gear!  That doesn't make sence to me, as that closet full of gear cost them more than couple higher end complete guns.  Do you understand the concept now??

  BTW, i fixed the "quote" for you...   

  DM

I do understand quite clearly, you spend too much time in other people's closets and need to quit pontificating

[Drilling Man]

OK, lets take Mueller for example...  As i said eariler, i have experience with TWO of them.  My friend bought one new, and it's already puked and been replaced!  Mines still new in the box, and will end up on a 22lr that i'll use for "plinking"!

Sounds like excellent customer service from Mueller. In all fairness, even Leupold scopes sometimes have to go back for repair.

As long as that scope has an adjustable objective for close range, placing it on a .22lr is an excellent application. I've seen .22s sporting U.S. Optics, Swarovski, and many Leupolds. Just because a scope goes on the old .22 plinker, doesn't make it any less of a scope.

  For a cheap scope i agree on the service.  BUT, i'd be willing to bet you IF my friend had bought a better Leupold, Zeiss conquest or perhaps a couple others, he wouldn't have needed that service!  In all the years i owned a gunshop, (i no longer do) MAYBE i sent back a couple Leupolds?  But, i saw a pickup load of cheapo's fail, and some of them failed in the field.

  Bottom line is, if you buy a cheapo scope, your chances of it failing in the field go up "drastically" over a higher quality scope.  Doesn't mean it WILL happen, but it does all to often, and will you be out on a hunt when it does???

  I know it won't happen to me though, because i'd sell an extra gun to finance a better scope, BEFORE i'd chance a hunt on a terd.  BUT, then again, i love being outdoors, hunting in out of the way places, and i don't want to have to worry about my gear pukeing when i need it most.

  As for rimfires...  The rimfire i depend on "most" here on my place, is a Rem. 597M, and it has a straight 7.5x Leupold on it.  The scope i've owned for many years, and the gun i bought new several years ago.  Both work perfectly, and have never failed to give 100% when i need them to.

  DM

[Skunk]

But, i saw a pickup load of cheapo's fail, and some of them failed in the field.

I know it won't happen to me though, because i'd sell an extra gun to finance a better scope, BEFORE i'd chance a hunt on a terd.  BUT, then again, i love being outdoors, hunting in out of the way places, and i don't want to have to worry about my gear pukeing when i need it most.

I definitely agree that some cheapo scopes are nothing but junk. A testament to that fact is the pile of new model tascos that my friend (a gun dealer) has piled up on is service desk. All of them had the reticle suddenly do a 90 degree turn inside the Bell after just a few shots with medium caliber rifles. My hope is that a few more companies like Mueller will at least try to give us a good quality product at a decent price.

I can find no fault whatsoever in your approach to buying scopes if that's what works for you. Judging from the excellent pictures of your hunts, your methods have proven success.

[Swampman]

My hope is that a few more companies like Mueller will at least try to give us a good quality product at a decent price.

Bushnell & Nikon have been giving us inexpensive & excellent products for some time.

[wareagleguy]

In the first post you said...
"I dont see how  but then again I couldnt begin to afford the higher priced ones and never had a chance to look threw them , so maybe I am making due and not even knowing it..lol"

Then on the same page you said the "HIGH PRICED" Leupolds are too dark.  I call BULL when I see it.  You sir are a L I E R.

This will be my last post to you.  Good day.   

[newstart2k]

When your buddy asks you which you think is a better buy, the Malibu or the Fusion, try to refrain from replying "Well the Bugatti of course."
I try to buy the best I can afford AND justify to myself. And at my age that doesn't mean I'll be saving up for 20 years to get one "really great one" of anything. What would be the point?
That's one of the reasons I rarely ask for opinions here about which is better (this year) the Bushnell Banners or the BSA's? I get too many "Well the Bugatti of course." answers.

[SHOOTALL]

I have a banner that i got at age 17 , i am now 54 and it works still . I once got a BSA and it lasted less than 6 weeks .
BTW i saw a Bugatti once , didn't seem like the ride to hunt or fish in so i passed on it !

[Swampman]

In the first post you said...
"I dont see how  but then again I couldnt begin to afford the higher priced ones and never had a chance to look threw them , so maybe I am making due and not even knowing it..lol"

Then on the same page you said the "HIGH PRICED" Leupolds are too dark.  I call BULL when I see it.  You sir are a L I E R.

This will be my last post to you.  Good day.   

You've gotten confused as to who posted what.

[30-30man]

The internet is full of those who spend more time on the computer than they do in the field.  They love to tell others how to spend their money. They have no experience with the things you ask, but are willing to give advice the same.  Read through the bull.... It's up to you, but there is a point where extra money on optics really doesn't pay off.  To some, an expensive scope is worth every penny.  I on the other hand would rather spend my money on others that I love.   It's up to you to determine yourself. I myself hunt with what works for me.  Thousands of deer die every season with less than $100 scopes.

[wareagleguy]

SWAMP,
I do apologize.  You are correct and I should have made a better attempt at reading the post.  I hope you don't hold me too much in contempt at my error.

[Swampman]

I don't take anything posted on an internet forum very seriously.  Don't worry about it.

[trotterlg]

It's just hard for me to spend more on the glass than the gun.  If it works for  you and you can afford it then life is good.  I am old and have had a lot of scopes, low power fixe scopes all seem to work fine, higher power scopes you will need to spend some money to get a good one, repeatablity with the adjustments seem to be one place that you will gain with the cost, but if you just get it zeroed and leave it that way then it is less of an issue.  Good luck, if it was in focus and you killed it then the scope was good.  Larry

[charles p]

I'm 63  myself.  Took me a few years to realize that the scope is every bit as important to success as the rifle, if not morel

I have no problem putting a scope valued twice a rifles value on something I plan to hunt with.  Do it all the time.  I feel the scope is far more likely to let me down than the rifle.

[SHOOTALL]

why is it hard to spend more on the scope ? you look thru. it way more time that you pull the trigger !

[Drilling Man]

why is it hard to spend more on the scope ? you look thru. it way more time that you pull the trigger !

  AND, once you get a good scope, you keep that scope, even if you sell the rifle...  My Leupolds are fairly old scopes and are still as clear and dependable as the day i bought them.

  Good scopes and bimo's are a life time investment.

  DM

[lilabner]

If you must have an expensive rifle scope, buy one. However, I believe your money is better spent on a top quality pair of binoculars or a fine spotting scope unless you are a bench rest shooter. I have inexpensive scopes on some rifles and find that a riflescope in the 200-300 dollar price range is adequate for big game hunting. Scopes in that price range are sturdy and waterproof. Many states tell you what time of day you can start and stop hunting and there is adequate light at those times. Try glassing for 8 hours with a pair of inexpensive binoculars or an inexpensive spotting scope. Your vision will blur and a headache is possible. You will likely miss spotting some trophy grade animals.

[Freezer]

    First, I have a novel idea, if nobody responds to Swampman's post maybe he'll get the idea
    Second this was an interesting informative thread.  I'll never buy cheap optics.  My first scope was a 2x7 leupold I've hunted years with it with no regrets.  I have bought three older Redfields.  Nice scopes not as bright as my leuies but good quality. 
    I learned a very important lession years ago when I finished a Mauser sporter for a friend.  I begged him to buy a 2x7 leupold but he bought a $89 Bushnell.  He had to change the base and rings which requried the reciever to be drilled and taped for the new base.  Buy the time we finished he spent more for the rig than a VXII would have cost him.  When I took is gun to the range I found the scope was hazy on the perimeter and wasn't clear.  It got worse at higher powers. 
    Binoculars are no different IMHO.  Cheap glass isn't worth it nor are binos that don't fill the bill.  I found a good pair of Stieners for $150 at a show.  I knew the quality I was looking for and wouldn't settle for less.  They are clear and gather light well.  They're not compact this have a little more weight but the trade off was worth it.  On a hunt with my brother he saw my binos and said they wee a little big, he carried Leupold compacts.  I didn't argue leupolds are good but we were hunting large open fields amd woods.  I let him use my Stiener in a blind one evening, the next day when I was ready to leave he said, "I have a present for you" and handed me his Leupold compacts.  I didn't know how to tell him I had no need for them but said thanks as ernestly as I could.  He replied "Don't thank me I'm keeping yur Stieners"
  I'm not a rich man, I save change to buy what I want.  I save $450 in change for duck hunting gear and bought the best quality I could.  I've done the same with my guns and optics.  I don't have time or money to deal with junk.  Save your money, get the best quaility you can afford with as much versility as you can muster then don't look back.
 

[jasonprox700]

    First, I have a novel idea, if nobody responds to Swampman's post maybe he'll get the idea
    Second this was an interesting informative thread.  I'll never buy cheap optics.  My first scope was a 2x7 leupold I've hunted years with it with no regrets.  I have bought three older Redfields.  Nice scopes not as bright as my leuies but good quality. 
    I learned a very important lession years ago when I finished a Mauser sporter for a friend.  I begged him to buy a 2x7 leupold but he bought a $89 Bushnell.  He had to change the base and rings which requried the reciever to be drilled and taped for the new base.  Buy the time we finished he spent more for the rig than a VXII would have cost him.  When I took is gun to the range I found the scope was hazy on the perimeter and wasn't clear.  It got worse at higher powers. 
    Binoculars are no different IMHO.  Cheap glass isn't worth it nor are binos that don't fill the bill.  I found a good pair of Stieners for $150 at a show.  I knew the quality I was looking for and wouldn't settle for less.  They are clear and gather light well.  They're not compact this have a little more weight but the trade off was worth it.  On a hunt with my brother he saw my binos and said they wee a little big, he carried Leupold compacts.  I didn't argue leupolds are good but we were hunting large open fields amd woods.  I let him use my Stiener in a blind one evening, the next day when I was ready to leave he said, "I have a present for you" and handed me his Leupold compacts.  I didn't know how to tell him I had no need for them but said thanks as ernestly as I could.  He replied "Don't thank me I'm keeping yur Stieners"
  I'm not a rich man, I save change to buy what I want.  I save $450 in change for duck hunting gear and bought the best quality I could.  I've done the same with my guns and optics.  I don't have time or money to deal with junk.  Save your money, get the best quaility you can afford with as much versility as you can muster then don't look back.
 

+1

[Freezer]

   My wife needed the computer, I'll finish my thought.
   I have a Rem 700 chambered in 280 Rem.  I paid $100 for the gun.  It started with a 2x7 VXII Leupold.  2x7 because I hunt both woods and shore lines.  It has become my distance gun with a 4x12 VXII.
   Later I bought a partically sporterized Arg Mauser with a 20 in barrel.  This was my first brush to 200yrd bolt gun.  I couldn't afford to buy a better scope for the 280 so I got a 2x7 Redfield widefield for it after many hunts it's still there.
   Then came what is now my favorite rifle a 99 Savage f in 308.  The 2x7 leupold went on it and after some barttering I put the 4x12 VXII on the 280.
    I found a deal on a custom rifle (I always wanted one)  a Rem Model 7 in 7 TCU.  This is a fine little package with a 200yrd range so it was time for another scope.  This gun deserves better and after a lot of research and a year of saving change I mounted a 2x7 leupold VXII on it, I couldn't afford a 2.5x8 VXIII
    I've always wanted a gun that could do everything and bought a NEF Handi in 25-06 with a ?x20 Bushnell on top.  The first time I hunted with it it fogged up.  To salvage the hunt I bought an old Weaver (not a bad scope).  I now have 270, 243 and 223 barrels for that gun and they all wear older Redfields.  Not as good my Leupolds but affordable at less than $90 each.  I'd rather buy a quality used scope than buy one of Bushnells junk scopes.  I have three Simons scopes and a couple Bushnells in a box that I aquired but will never mount them on my rifles, I don't trust them.  I considered selling them but I can't in good conscience sell something I consider junk. 
   My thought on warranties.  Leupold has the best because they know you probably won't need it.  If you do and they take care of you, you'll be back.  Bushnell didn't fix the scope that fogged and the experience I had with my buddy's has soured me on Bushnell.  I've considered a Burris Fullfield II and a friend has a Nikon on his Ruger that seems real nice but I had to ask myself a question, with five weeks of deer hunting every year can I afford to chance another hunt on a questionable scope?  I can hunt bear until Febuary and that's in bad weather and heavy woods should I chance a fogged scope if the bear appears close in?  I'll stay with Leupold and Redfield for my lesser guns.
  There are other good scopes out there Nikon, Sworski, Ziess.  I've handled a few of the but for my money I'll stay with Leupold.