- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Looking at getting a new scope for my hunting rifle
Posted on 12/8/23 at 11:45 am to bradygolf98
Posted on 12/8/23 at 11:45 am to bradygolf98
I have both in Leupolds. The 50mm definitely gathers more light, but honestly at the end of the shooting day, that 40mm is still working. Plus on some guns you will need to elevate the scope to get it up off the barrel which can change your head position on the stock.
That said, I love that Leupold VX3 3.5-10 x 50mm.
And to whoever said glass doesn't matter, I love leupold but when you pick up a Swarovski, you'll realize in the first second how stupid that statement is.
That said, I love that Leupold VX3 3.5-10 x 50mm.
And to whoever said glass doesn't matter, I love leupold but when you pick up a Swarovski, you'll realize in the first second how stupid that statement is.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 11:52 am to Captain Rumbeard
quote:
when you pick up a Swarovski, you'll realize in the first second how stupid that statement is.
And when you miss because that ultra sexy and ultra delicate swarvoski had it guts jiggled around on a fourwheeler ride, you'll realize how stupid THAT statement is.
A rifle scope is a fancy gun sight. It isn't an observation device. Glass quality becomes totally irrelevant in any scope over about $100. They're all more than adequate to kill things within legal shooting hours.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 12:06 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
And when you miss because that ultra sexy and ultra delicate swarvoski had it guts jiggled around on a fourwheeler ride,
My Nightforce scopes scoff at that statement...

Posted on 12/8/23 at 12:52 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
you miss because that ultra sexy and ultra delicate swarvoski had it guts jiggled around on a fourwheeler ride, you'll realize how stupid THAT statement is.
At least my scope rides on a fourwheeler! Some of those rokslide boys really just have to worry about the 30 seconds they take their $6K builds out of the safe so they can snap a pic and argue about what it would be like if they dropped it off a mountain.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 12:57 pm to Captain Rumbeard
quote:The thread is about a sub $200 scope, similar to the vortex crossfire or copperhead, a realistic upgrade would be the leupold freedom line or the vortex diamondback
Sig Sauer Buckmasters
quote:a low end Swarovski is $900-$1300, there’s nothing a Swarovski does that makes it 3-5x better than any $200-$400 scope on the market, and they have super limited options. You want a 4-12x it comes in 50mm, you want a 40mm objective, tough. How about a 44mm, that’s a 6-18x, now give us $1500 and be sure to tell your friends it’s like a 4k television compared to regular HD. Have you ever watched 4k vs regular HD? Would you pay $500/month for your cable to be 4k instead of $75/mo? The answers probably no.
whoever said glass doesn't matter, I love leupold but when you pick up a Swarovski, you'll realize in the first second how stupid that statement is.
This post was edited on 12/8/23 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 12/8/23 at 1:24 pm to TheDrunkenTigah

The whole gun sight vs observation tool argument is a very valid one. IMO there's no reason to spend hundreds or thousands on a sexy piece of glass. You need to make bullets land where you want them in legal shooting hours. You can do that just fine with basically any scope made and some TLC.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 1:32 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
My binos cost more than my scope, you aren’t gonna hear me disagree that a scope needs to hold zero and most glass can see well past shooting light, where they lose me is the notion that only a handpicked few brands that also happen to be good for playing operator qualify as durable.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 1:33 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
IMO there's no reason to spend hundreds or thousands on a sexy piece of glass.
Yeah, Ive been through this a few times. Seems most $200-$300 scopes will do what you need them to do. Most people end up paying extra for something slightly better.
Its the innovation and the slight increments at the top that cost so much. Most dont require those refinements.
I want something nice, but its just not really worth the expense.
This post was edited on 12/8/23 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 12/8/23 at 1:41 pm to TheDrunkenTigah
Right. Your average dude doesn't care if his rifle loses zero after it falls on a log from 15 feet in the air.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 1:48 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I enjoy a clear scope to know precise point of aim when sighting in. A clear scope will also let you zoom out and be more confident in the shot, without seeing all the movement of the crosshairs, and that helps a lot more than people realize with target panic/yanking the trigger. It took me a long time to understand why people talked about low power being fine for hunting, with good glass that picture is crisp and clear enough for it to be true. High magnification in a cheap scope is counterproductive. It’s not critical, but really clear glass is also just awesome in anything and tends to be contained in a better made anything.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 2:05 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:unfortunately a lot of those innovations are working their way into the middle tier scopes. I personally don’t want a 30mm tube, 56mm objective, quick adjust elevation turrets, side focus, or a red dot reticle on a deer rifle
Its the innovation and the slight increments at the top that cost so much. Most dont require those refinements
Posted on 12/8/23 at 2:40 pm to bradygolf98
If your scope costs less than your gun, you prob aren’t doing it right. Or, you are not hunting in challenging conditions.
There are exceptions, but generally follow that rule.
There are exceptions, but generally follow that rule.
This post was edited on 12/8/23 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 12/8/23 at 3:08 pm to DomincDecoco
quote:
you prob aren’t doing it right.
If “it” is instagram
Posted on 12/8/23 at 3:13 pm to DomincDecoco
quote:
If your scope costs less than your gun, you prob aren’t doing it right
That's a terrible policy to live by.
A $2000 swarvoski gives you absolutely nothing that a $400 leupold doesn't give you.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 3:20 pm to DomincDecoco

Posted on 12/8/23 at 3:40 pm to bradygolf98
What scope do you have now?
Posted on 12/8/23 at 3:44 pm to bradygolf98
I just sighted in my third Burris Signature HD. I use the 3-15x44. They run about $500 but you can catch them on sale cheaper. I likely won’t buy anything else for a “good” rifle again.
In general I have a lot of faith in Burris and Vortex scopes. I haven’t tried Sig scopes but if the reviews are solid, go for it.
In general I have a lot of faith in Burris and Vortex scopes. I haven’t tried Sig scopes but if the reviews are solid, go for it.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 4:18 pm to LoneStarTiger
I can’t say I’ve ever looked though a Swarovski scope so I can’t really speak to how much better than Leupold they are.
All I know is I have about dozen Leupolds and I have been very happy with them.I feel they are quality scopes at a reasonable price.
All I know is I have about dozen Leupolds and I have been very happy with them.I feel they are quality scopes at a reasonable price.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 4:21 pm to 257WBY
Just the stock one that came on the .308 I have. It works just fine, honestly was just wanting something new so I started looking around.
Popular
Back to top
