- 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 4:24 pm to bradygolf98
Posted on 12/8/23 at 4:24 pm to bradygolf98
My favorite is my Swarovski Z8i but I also just recently got a Meopta scope and that’s some great glass for the relatively low price.
0
Posted on 12/8/23 at 5:12 pm to scrooster
quote:I’d buy Riton before Arken.
Pro Tip ... Arken.
I just bought a cheaper Arken to play around with. Not bad for the price.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 8:32 pm to bradygolf98
OP, there are plenty of great options mentioned here but you can find this one for around $350 if you look around and be done with it. No parallax adjustment, no turrets to dial, no bullshite, just great glass and durable.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 11:26 pm to LSUA 75
quote:
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.
They absolutely are. But you should find a swarovski at a store or something and compare them head to head. I also have a TON of Leupolds. It's my main hunting scope brand. But if I had the money, I'd got Swarovski. I'm getting older and my eyes aren't what they used to be. That crystal clear clarity helps. For sure.
Posted on 12/8/23 at 11:48 pm to Captain Rumbeard
Comparing at a store vs at last light in the field does nothing.
The question on whether it’s worth spending a grand or better more on a scope with a bird on the side vs a gold band and for 99% of hunters, it’s not.
The question on whether it’s worth spending a grand or better more on a scope with a bird on the side vs a gold band and for 99% of hunters, it’s not.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 6:44 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
A $2000 swarvoski gives you absolutely nothing that a $400 leupold doesn't give you.
Yeah Ima have to disagree there my man...but look, I'll rephrase my earlier statement for a less polarizing position:
You shouldn't skimp on the quality of your optics..within reason. Although most of todays features on high end scopes won't ever be realized by most hunters, ensuring you have a quality made product by a reputable manufacturer is more important even that the brand of gun it is going on.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 7:32 am to DomincDecoco
quote:
You shouldn't skimp on the quality of your optics
I dont shoot outside of 300 yards, usually get decent enough light and glass with a $300 scope. Even in low light of winter, my low-mid tier LVPOs work fine
I get it for people who use it for long distances and such. But 90% of the population dont need $1,000+ glass.
Just went through this mental process again with myself for the 10th time as I'm doing a couple more rifles. I want a nice scope, but no way can I justify the cost.
This post was edited on 12/9/23 at 7:33 am
Posted on 12/9/23 at 7:49 am to RogerTheShrubber
I know it was mentioned earlier but if you want a 3-9 in the 40mm class and you don’t want exposed turrets or illumination, I don’t think you’ll beat the trijicon huron at $300. I’m going to take mine off my 350 legend and move it to my little 308 soon so I can use it more.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:01 am to RogerTheShrubber
I also believe that scope technology today is superior to 20 years ago.
I'm also 50, so in my mind rifles are roughly 500. So 800-1000 is what I was thinking.
Now that guns are closer to 1000 my "roughly twice for optics" doesn't add up.
If you can, having a Kahles, Swarovski or the like is sublime, but a 300.00 Leupold is more than adequate.
I'm also 50, so in my mind rifles are roughly 500. So 800-1000 is what I was thinking.
Now that guns are closer to 1000 my "roughly twice for optics" doesn't add up.
If you can, having a Kahles, Swarovski or the like is sublime, but a 300.00 Leupold is more than adequate.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:07 am to bbvdd
quote:
My Nightforce scopes scoff at that statement
Buddy of mine missed an elk after his son had taken a lil bit of a spill sidehilling and said that he didn’t think the gun had hit or hit that hard.
If I’m shooting 50-150yd 1moa shift is not that big of a deal hell 2-3moa probably ain’t gonna matter. But if I have spent thousands of dollars traveling saving points to make a hunt 12-20hrs from my house I want to know my gun and scope are capable of being everything short of destroyed and still hold zero, that’s why I bought a NF.
To the op
For most applications and most people a leupold freedom /vortex diamond back those scopes are 200-300$ tier scopes that I have experience with and have not let me down and have plenty of light to shoot well past legal light at 100-200yd which is what most people are shooting.
This post was edited on 12/9/23 at 8:09 am
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:15 am to DomincDecoco
I picked up a Riton Optics 5 Primal 2-12X44 for my Thompson Center Icon and love it. The rifle is .5 MOA accurate, and the scope makes sure I'm getting all of that. The MOA reticle works great for fast and accurate bullet drops, and the adjustable throw lever is a nice feature. The glass has very good low-light properties, too. Riton has a promo right now where they are giving away a Red Dot optic with a scope purchase. Having 2X on the low end is perfect for the places I hunt.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:17 am to DomincDecoco
quote:yeah the equivalent to a 20 year old $800-$1000 scope can be had for $300 or less dollars today. Just like you can get a 65” 4k tv for less than what a crappy 32” tv would cost you 20 years ago.
I also believe that scope technology today is superior to 20 years ago.
I'm also 50, so in my mind rifles are roughly 500. So 800-1000 is what I was thinking.
Now that guns are closer to 1000 my "roughly twice for optics" doesn't add up.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:19 am to Ol boy
Backpack elk hunting is a different monster. Durability is basically the only concern. For a deer rifle, meh. My deer rifle is basically pampered. The elk rifle lives a rough life for 2 weeks a year.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:37 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
Backpack elk hunting is a different monster. Durability is basically the only concern. For a deer rifle, meh. My deer rifle is basically pampered. The elk rifle lives a rough life for 2 weeks a year.
After talking with several buddies over the years a lot of their failures in the mountains and they owned them came from things they could have controlled.
Scope issue, rangefinder battery issue, boot issue, not in shape.
I’m trying to learn a lil bit from each of them, I have a trip booked for col in 24 and hoping to do a diy with a guy in 25 I had met several years ago when I deer hunted Montana.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:37 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
The elk rifle lives a rough life for 2 weeks a year.
I hear that. Belly crawlin across a rock river bed for caribou left a permanent scar on mine.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 8:39 am to Ol boy
quote:
I want to know my gun and scope are capable of being everything short of destroyed and still hold zero, that’s why I bought a NF.
Blink twice if they have your house surrounded with chalmations in tacticool gear
Posted on 12/9/23 at 9:58 am to DomincDecoco
quote:
I also believe that scope technology today is superior to 20 years ago
Way way better.
You can find cheap Chinese scopes sub $200 that hold zero and have decent glass. Almost everything I have was on sale. Have a couple of decent Burris scopes I paid less than $350 for.
They do what expensive scopes used to do.
My only considerations for upgrades will be distance as my eyes are old and better glass would be needed. Even then I can find a sub $800 scope that works sufficiently.
This post was edited on 12/9/23 at 10:00 am
Posted on 12/9/23 at 10:41 am to TheDrunkenTigah
quote:
Blink twice if they have your house surrounded with chalmations in tacticool gear
lol I saw your comments about rokslide, those drop test are pretty scientific unless the ol boy is sponsored by NF and trijicon. Internet is loaded with ford/chevy arguments and everyone has their brand.
I based my decision not only from internet research but also friends who I know and respect that being said, Monday I will probably be sitting with a leupold freedom 2-7 onna 30-30 and not at all feel like my gun or scope is a weak link.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 11:42 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:more times than not it’s the edge to edge clarity that separates the top from the bottom, it’s what makes that $1500 scope pop more than the $400 scope at the gun counter, when you’re about to pull the trigger you’re not paying attention to the crispness of the leaves on the edge of your field of view.
My only considerations for upgrades will be distance as my eyes are old and better glass would be needed. Even then I can find a sub $800 scope that works sufficiently.
Posted on 12/9/23 at 1:10 pm to bradygolf98
Leupold or Zeiss
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News