If you only had $200, what scope would you put on a....

Codeman said:
I was headed to a shop to drop $500 on a "premium" scope. When I saw the build quality and clean glass, I left with a Bushnell AR/223 Riflescope, 4.5-18x40, #AR945184. it was also much brighter than the Nikon and Leopold scopes that I intended on buying., I paid $250, but I would be surprised if they can't be found online for $200.

I had heard that their quality had gone up since being bought by Leupold - this scope has proven that true.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, Leupold does not own Bushnell. They did however buy Redfield
 
Bushnell is owned by Vista Outdoor Group, just like Weaver, Tasco, Simmons, Millet, and many more brands.


-X
 
Kootaga13 said:
Question, Do you have any experience with Mueller? I have a friend of a friend who maintains a outdoor shooting range and he said, for the money, as a beginners scope, Mueller. 4.5-14X40 Tactical Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I have the 4.5-14 non-tactical version on a 22 rifle and like it. These are big scopes. So, when looking at a scope you really need to consider your use. Big scope okay for target shooting and varmint hunting (mostly from a static position). Big scope is a poor choice for deer hunting unless you hunt out of a box stand and shoot longer ranges.
 
Kootaga13, owned Simmons WTC for many years- a lot of them. Have never bought at the $250 range price shown in the Midway link-never paid more than $125 and that was on a Mil-Dot bought in last two(2) years or so.

Were heavily discounted maybe reason I bought however $250 is NEW to me.

Best.
 
I have used many scopes through the years and I still use several I guess from rimfires to long range scopes but one most seem to overlook that I would put up against most Leupolds and more exspensive scopes are Weavers ... smiplicity and solid quaility far above the cost on most models. Just my two cents worth.
 
JJ_Colt45 said:
I have used many scopes through the years and I still use several I guess from rimfires to long range scopes but one most seem to overlook that I would put up against most Leupolds and more exspensive scopes are Weavers ... smiplicity and solid quaility far above the cost on most models. Just my two cents worth.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I forgot Weavers... I've only owned one new Weaver and it was a good scope, but I've owned probably 6 or 7 old Weavers. K4's and K6's... They track good and the optics are very decent for the price you can buy them for. The really cool thing is, Weaver actually has a separate repair division for repairing and refurbing vintage scopes...
 
22-rimfire said:
I have the 4.5-14 non-tactical version on a 22 rifle and like it. These are big scopes. So, when looking at a scope you really need to consider your use. Big scope okay for target shooting and varmint hunting (mostly from a static position). Big scope is a poor choice for deer hunting unless you hunt out of a box stand and shoot longer ranges.
Click to expand...

Guys, I can't thank all of you enough. I am a greenhorn when it comes to scopes. I've had people say, why put a 3-9x40 on that.243 and under scope it. You need big magnification so it can live up to its potential. But rimfire, what you said here makes 100% sense. Is it called target acquisition? Here's a question to all of my mentors -- Having said that and shifting gears just a tad, knowing that this is a versatile round, what scope power would you all use? I can't afford two scopes. I don't want to put a 3-9 on her for deer and then a 4.5-14 for long range ground hogs. Please give me guidance.

Also, it might help to know I have 60 y/o eyes and I do use cheaters (2.75) for close up reading. My distance vision is declining but not real bad yet. I have many pairs of glasses. Do I leave my bi-focals on when using the scope?
 
Burris or Redfield would get my money if buying new.
The older Tasco World Class scopes made in Japan are superb if you check the used market.
Swifts are sleepers
 
as far as your eyesight ... if your distant vision is good and you just use readers you wouldnt need or want to leave them on but if you need them for distance leaving them on would be best you can adjust the scope for shooting with or without to a degree ... as far as scope strength ... if you plan on using it for both deer and ground hogs and you'll be shooting long ranges I would go with something of a higher power like a 4x14 you can always dial down for closer shooting. I would reccomend if you can going to a store that will let you look through some different models and see what you prefer. Just remember a bigger scope may require taller scope mounts but they should be able to set you up with what you need after you find your scope. Good luck.
 
Mr. Colt, I had a guy recommend the Game Reaper one piece but I think at $91 total, isn't that kind of pricey? I also had a guy at a local sporting goods chain tell me, if you can pass a dollar bill between the front of the scope and the barrel, you're right there where you want to be? Are you basically meaning the same thing?

And regarding you're saying use a 4-14 for deer and ground hogs -- what about what 22-rimfire said? What if the deer is 50-75 yards out? I AM NOT trying to pit one brother against another. I am trying to sort this out.
 
yes you dont need much clearance but some higher power scopes have a larger objectives and eye pieces which requires a taller mount ... but yes the closer you can mount the scope the better for line of sight use the shortest mount that will allow for clearance ... and a 3x9 is a pretty versitatile scope but if you go with a higher power such as a 4.5x14 ... you can dial the magnification down to 4.5 which isnt much more the the lowest setting of 3 on a 3x9 ... but you gain 14x magnification over the 9x on the upper end if you chose to adjust it that far. Just gives you a higher magnification if you want that for long range ground hog hunting but the lower end is close enough you wont notice much difference on the lower settings. Try lookin through some and adjusting the magnifications and you'll see what you like better.

And on the price of mounts ... Warne or Weaver are good solid mounts shouldn't be nearly as expensive as whatever one piece they mentioned. And not sure where you're buying your scope but most gun stores or better sporting goods stores will mount the scope for little or no charge if you buy the scope and rings there.

And what rimfire said holds true ... if you're shooting close range more you won't need more then a 3x9 ... that's why I would recommend looking through some different models and see what you think will work best for you personally.
 
Last edited:
Scopes are a very personal thing. Quite honestly I think most people put way to much scope on their rifles... They buy into the marketing hype and aren't realistic about the TRUE distances they will be shooting.

An old rule of thumb was, 1X for every 100 yards of distance., and that was around when scope technology wasn't as advanced as it is today. I've primarily used fixed 4 power scopes for deer and elk hunting for many years. My hunting terrain provided shots that could be as close as 40-50 yards and out to 200+ yards. The four power was low enough to work at close range, and I never felt under-scoped at longer distances... But in all honesty, I'm not one that takes 300-400 yard shots an animals. It's not that I don't have confidence in my shooting, I do, but at that distance there are a lot of variables, and it increases the odds of wounding an animal. The risk isn't worth it for me personally.

The other things to remember with high magnification scopes are, unless you buy a high quality scope, the clarity isn't always that great as you increase magnification. One more thing to think about it, variable scopes are less reliable.This isn't just my observation, a tech at Leupold told me this one day on the phone.
The fixed power scopes are the most durable scopes you can buy. This isn't really an issue if you are just target practicing, but it can be an issue if you are on a hunt and don't have a backup scope.

Granted, there aren't as many choices when it comes to fixed power scopes, but personally I think it is worth it to check them out... YMMV of course
 
Kootaga13 said:
Guys, I can't thank all of you enough. I am a greenhorn when it comes to scopes. I've had people say, why put a 3-9x40 on that.243 and under scope it. You need big magnification so it can live up to its potential. But rimfire, what you said here makes 100% sense. Is it called target acquisition? Here's a question to all of my mentors -- Having said that and shifting gears just a tad, knowing that this is a versatile round, what scope power would you all use? I can't afford two scopes. I don't want to put a 3-9 on her for deer and then a 4.5-14 for long range ground hogs. Please give me guidance.

Also, it might help to know I have 60 y/o eyes and I do use cheaters (2.75) for close up reading. My distance vision is declining but not real bad yet. I have many pairs of glasses. Do I leave my bi-focals on when using the scope?
Click to expand...


What distance do you plan on shooting? A 3-9, 3.5-10, 4-12 can be perfectly usable on a 243 and fit the rifle fine.

There's a lot of variables when it comes to scopes. Adjustable objectives/parrallax, reticles, MOA turrets for MOA reticle and vice a versa if it's MRAD, don't over scope it either. If you're hunting, you're going to want to see your target, have a wide field of view, not be able to pick out a single hair strand in a 5" area somewhere on the animal.

Also, don't buy a scope online, and never buy a scope without looking through it first or have a good idea what it will look like; also ask to look at the scope outside.

I do this with customers a lot. From our shop to some apartments close to us, it's roughly 350 yards. Closer to the road looking south, it's 1000 yards. Different scopes look different though different eyes. I've sold a lot of Vortexs to people who, to them, were clearer, crisper, and had a wider field of view than the comparable Bushnell, Leupold, Nikon, etc. That being said, people have chosen other brands over others for those reasons. TO ME, Nikons don't look right. I feel like the FOV isn't as wide as it should be and the reticles reflect light (not a fan of their BDC system either). A VX1 Leupold would be a simple scope too and, again to me, look clear and crisp.

If you go the Vortex route, get the Crossfire II line. The Diamondbacks are nice and the eye relief is very good, but the FOV appears a lot smaller.

I'd look at the CF2 4-12x40 with the BDC reticle, spend $35-$45 in a study set of rings and call it a day. Get the non AO model unless you plan on shooting way out there and to keep things more simple in the field.

Don't forget too, all these scopes in this price range will be second focal plane, not a first. If you get a BDC style reticle, the subtensions will only be correct on the highest magnification (generally). If your first has mark is 2 MOA at 100 yards, at 12 power, and your scope is only set at 6 power, that has mark will now have a 4 MOA value
 
Leupold VX1 2x7

I have more expensive leupolds, higher power etc. But love the VX1 2x7 for a hunting rifle

Plus no one beats leupold's warranty
 
JDMiller said:
Leupold VX1 2x7

I have more expensive leupolds, higher power etc. But love the VX1 2x7 for a hunting rifle

Plus no one beats leupold's warranty
Click to expand...

For fixed power scopes, the 2x8.5 Vari X3 was my favorite scope after a Bausch & Lomb Elite 4000 1.5x6. They don't have big objective lenses, but with quality glass there is plenty of light, and you can use low mounts...
 
I went to a sporting goods and looked thru a VX1 3-9X40 That sucker is clear as a can be! And I got to thinking -- the .243 is a flat shooting rifle, right? If I never take a shot further than, lets say, 300 yds, why would I ever have to re-adjust the scope for anything other than a crosswind? And, is 300 yds the magical distance for the .243?

Also, what's the difference between the 2-8.5x33 and the 3-9x40 besides field of view and gathering light? AND is the 3-9x50 worth the extra bucks?

Please help me ol wise, ever knowing ones....
 
If the two scopes you mentioned are both VX1's, the only other real difference is with a 33mm you can use low mount rings and bases if you want, and depending on which style of mounts you use, you may have to use a medium setup for the 40mm... That's not a big deal though for me because I always use mediums.

I have never owned a 50mm scope and never will. I know they are popular with some people, but I don't like having to use high rings and bases, and I didn't like the way the few rifles I have handled with them mounted felt. I know they are making 50mm scopes that are notched out so they will sit lower, but I just can't see the need.
With the modern coatings and glass being used, a quality scope like a Leupold with a 33-40mm objective lense will gather all the light you could ever need during legal shooting hours.
 
If you like the VX1 3-9X40 I say get it. One of the best dollar values available IMHO. Great warranty from an established company with a long standing reputation of quality.
 
338375 said:
If the two scopes you mentioned are both VX1's, the only other real difference is with a 33mm you can use low mount rings and bases if you want, and depending on which style of mounts you use, you may have to use a medium setup for the 40mm... That's not a big deal though for me because I always use mediums.

I have never owned a 50mm scope and never will. I know they are popular with some people, but I don't like having to use high rings and bases, and I didn't like the way the few rifles I have handled with them mounted felt. I know they are making 50mm scopes that are notched out so they will sit lower, but I just can't see the need.
With the modern coatings and glass being used, a quality scope like a Leupold with a 33-40mm objective lense will gather all the light you could ever need during legal shooting hours.
Click to expand...

Well put and observations I would never of thought of as far as using low/medium mounts.
As far as my thoughts regarding the flat shooting of the .243, how far would she shoot flat with a 100 grain bullet? I have yet to find out. I'm still putting it all together as you know. I figure I'll go with the VX1 3-9X40 even though it doesn't have the little marks on the crosshairs. If I never take a shot further than ?, I would never need them. Right?

Thanks. Fishiker, I always wanted Leupold. MADE IN AMERICA!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top