re: Scope Suggestion

quote:

---

Never had an issue with them

---

Nobody ever does until they do. If youve ever had to tweak your zero, youve had an issue. Swarvoski scopes all fail drop tests miserably.

Do you really want to spend a boatload of money on a sight that might no longer be right because it got bumped?

quote:

---

there is a LOT to be said for having high quality glass

---

There really isn't. It only needs to be good enough to see what youre trying to shoot when it is legal to shoot it. Your scope isn't for glassing, it's for telling you where the bullet will land. If it can't do that 100% reliably in 100% of used conditions, the glass is worthless. Good glass matters when you're spending a few hours behind binoculars or trying to "measure" a buck at very long range. It doesn't matter for your sight.

I've gone from great glass and questionable reliability to good enough glass and absolute reliability and trust me, it's the right way to be. Glass quality, features, weight, etc are all meaningless without 100% reliability.

Eta: I'm using a non-HD SWFA right now which is absolutely poo garbage glass compared to anything swarvoski. I can still easily kill deer in the last minutes of legal light in thick woods. That's all it needs to be able to do.

quote:

---

Eta: I'm using a non-HD SWFA right now which is absolutely poo garbage glass compared to anything swarvoski.

---

Meh, Swarovski has price ranges like anybody else. I haven't looked through an SWFA in a long time but it's probably better than anything produced 30 years ago.

That's why I compared the $500 Trijicon to Razor HD glass. Whatever one thinks of Vortex their Razor HD is legit $1k glass by any standard. An optics junky might could pick out some "chromatic aberration" difference between the Huron and the Razor that I couldn't see, but at some point clear is just clear to these 50+ year old eyes. And as you correctly point out, a sight that doesn't accurately show point of impact because the rifle was leaning against the truck and got knocked over is worthless regardless of how much resolution it has.

Meopta - for that price range. I have one. Love it

If I was buying a new scope it would be Leupold VX 3.5-10 x 40 with illuminated Firedot Reticle.MSRP-$699.99.

I have 7-8 Leupold scopes and have never had a problem with any of them.I have 2 of the 3.5-10 x 40 and have been very happy.1 is 30 years old and has never lost zero.
I have a 3-9x 40 with Firedot Reticle (discontinued)on a .308 for evening hunts if I think a hog might come out.Makes all the difference on a black hog in low light.

There’s some good deals on DVOR, they normally get you with shipping but there’s free shipping codes floating around that end today.

If you want to dial:
Optika6 3-18x50 $580-$640 depending on the model, this scope did well on the rokslide drop tests that downshift mentioned. It eventually failed after 3k rounds and riding down mountain roads, uncased in the bed of a truck.
Trijicon credo 2.5-15x44 $845
On the swfa website they are still discounted, the 3-9x42 with HD glass is $420, I bought some of those and shipping was like $7 or something

If you aren’t sure about dialing the optika6 2.5-15x44 is under $500 with illumination and a seemingly decent elevation turret under the cap.

I’m pretty interested in cheap scopes, I think you’re in the price range that’ll get you 100% of the function you need for hunting and shooting for fun. If you think you’ll eventually want to dial, I’d just get one with a zero stop and locking turrets, that way you can learn it and start to see if you use it for your eventual magnum purchase.

Also, don’t feel like you need 15x magnification for box stand shooting whitetails. Once you shoot some on like 4-6x you realize how much info you can gather after the shot through your scope on low powers.

What info are you gathering?

Honestly, go to Bass Pro, Cabelas, etc. Look through every possible scope that meets your criteria and get what you like. You can get all the suggestions in the world but you like what you like.

Oh, I meant like knowing what happened at the shot. When you shoot a deer at 100 yards on 12x, your image is moving so much at the shot it’s tough to know where you hit, which direction it ran, if it was hunched up, or whatever.

You definitely don't need 15x or even 10x for any normal hunting. When I first started dabbling in "long range" I was amazed that I could make hits on a 12" plate at 600 yards with an 8x scope.

I also shot two deer this year at 30 yards, and shot both of them with giant FFP telescope on about 4.5/5x and it was easy.

Since then I've basically quit caring about maximum magnification. I care about the minimum and I want that no higher than 4x.

Moral of the story is that when it comes to making good hits, basically none of that shite matters. You need reliability and durability and a visible reticle. Everything else is lagniappe.

I think that is correct.

You should verify on a grid though if you're going to use hold-over at different magnifications for long range. The markings on the power ring aren't ultra precise. I would scribe the ring at the exact right spots. You can do the same thing to use the bottom post on a duplex scope for hold-over. It's crude and backwards because you have to zoom out as you get farther out, but it works.

You can do a pretty slick job of having range markers on the zoom dial and eliminate dope charts and stuff too. A SFP scope can be used in some cool ways that a FFP can't.