Cheapest, decent quality scope for distance shooting??

[42769vette]

If the dude that posted his 600 yd shot grouping using a 4-12 Crossfire II can shoot like that with it...it definitely can't be all that bad of a scope. I ain't worried that it's going to be junk and I wasn't after the best scope money could buy in the first place. If you recall I was after the cheapest, decent scope for distance shooting...and the optimist in me says I found it.

Your scope is not junk. It will hold zero, and track. It does not have the the internal travel to get you much past 600 yards. Had I known your max range was 600, it would have been my recommendation, but when you mentioned 1000, that ruled the 6-18 out.

 

[jrh84]

If the dude that posted his 600 yd shot grouping using a 4-12 Crossfire II can shoot like that with it...it definitely can't be all that bad of a scope. I ain't worried that it's going to be junk and I wasn't after the best scope money could buy in the first place. If you recall I was after the cheapest, decent scope for distance shooting...and the optimist in me says I found it.

That was me that posted the 600 yard group....glad I could help you with your decision! It's not junk. You did good....no, it's not what I'd put on a dedicated 1000 yard rifle, but it's more than adequate to shoot reasonably sized targets a long way out there. It's not the only $200 or less scope that will do it, but I know they work, so I vouched for it.

So now, answer everyone's question...what are you mounting it on, what is your intended target, and how far away do you want to shoot said target? Inquiring minds need to know, man!

 

[Deuce]

All I want for Christmas is a thousand yard TINK!

A thousand yard TINK!!

A thousand yard TINK!!!

 

[Deuce]

Of course it doesn't have to be a thousand, but the tune didn't sound right with the lyrics "All I want for Christmas is a several hundred yard TINK!" Ya know? Lol

 

[bwframe]

All I want for Christmas is a thousand yard TINK!

A thousand yard TINK!!

A thousand yard TINK!!!
View attachment 72662

What are the particulars on this rifle? What mount/rings did you go with?

 

[Deuce]

The rifle is a .243 Howa 1500 w/ a 24" barrel and Blackhawk talon stock. My Vortex Crossfire 6-18×24 scope is mounted with a DNZ Game Reaper. I also picked up a Bog Pod Bipod that extends to 42" to keep her steady and true..

 

[bwframe]

Looking good. You post up some pics with groups soon also?

 

[VERT]

My intention is not to completely run the thread away from the OP but does anyone have much experience with the Burris XTRII's? I've not used one side by side with a vortex razor or a night force but honestly I felt like I was approaching that level of equipment when using it however the price is well under. I'm not saying I won't buy a Razor or AMG (I actually really like the AMG) but when you consider you could buy two XTRII's for the price of one of the nice vortex options and have money left it's temping. They are about on par with the viper gen2's in price but seem to be nicer. With that said though I've only played with an XTRII on one occasion and I've yet to be behind any of the gen 2 vortex offerings outdoors to gather an opinion. The biggest thing is that I haven't compared any glass especially side by side I'm curious of people's opinions. I've spent a fair amount of time with a 3x18 razor and it seemed very similar to that but not being able to look through them side by side I feel like you can be tricked with glass "quality." What I can say is that the turrets are super nice. I own vortex stuff and I'm thinking about picking up a razor soon but I've been on the fence about jumping ship for an XTRII, what's anyone think?

I have an XTRii mounted in Burris rings on a Remington Sendero. Rifle weighs 12 pounds and a hunting “guide” managed to toss the rifle out of a Kubota and roll it down the side of a smallish mountain in TN. The scope was scratched and the turrets were turned but returned to a perfect zero. I then did a box test and the scope tracked right back to zero. The glass is clear. I am happy with the $1000 I spent putting glass on a $500 used gun.

 

[NKBJ]

My brother tells me he floated the reticle in a Vortex on one of his 45-70's (Marlin lever gun, shooting the nickel size group 400+ grain 1800FPS soft lead paper patched prairie dog loads).

 

[Deuce]

I'd be happy to but I'm not sure what groups you're referring to..

 

[Ggreen]

I'd be happy to but I'm not sure what groups you're referring to..

Shot groups

 

[Dirtebiker]

This thread has been fun

1) Get something that tracks. If you’re shooting distance and it’s not a set it and forget it scope where you’re using holdovers, it has to track.....or it’s worthless.
2) Don’t buy Chinese scopes
3) Make sure it has enough internal travel based on your ballistics to get you to the distance you want to shoot
4) I’ve never regretted spending a bit extra on a scope to get what I need. This really is buy once / cry once stuff
5) I put this last because you mention “Cheapest.” Get a reticle that works for you, and make sure reticle and turret clicks match (ex.- moa reticle and moa adjustments). This is absolutely not as important as 1-4 above

Cheapest I’d look at are:

• SWFA fixed power scopes - made in Japan. Reliable and proven, but no bells and whistles
• Vortex - only the Philippine and Japanese ones (Diamondback or better)
• Bushnell Elite - made in Japan, solid and proven scopes
• Weaver - t series or grand slam and higher
• Sightron s3
• Nikon Black - I wouldn’t consider anything else from Nikon, but the new Black series is looking to be solid. I talked to them, and they confirmed a lot of their old issues are solved - ie plastic guts and tracking
• Sig Tango 4 or 6 - lots of ridiculous deals on these, and these scopes work

All of those have metal guts and no plastic garbage. They will track, and if something is wrong, the manufacturer will fix or replace it.

Some people mentioned Athlon. The Athlon scopes in your budget are Chinese and I wouldn’t touch them.

Excuse what might be a dumb question, but I’ve never shot any serious distance. What do you mean by “tracking”?

 

[natdscott]

Excuse what might be a dumb question, but I’ve never shot any serious distance. What do you mean by “tracking”?

1) The rifle's sighting system must move the point of impact a predictable amount per graduation, and per rotation, through the entire range of motion.

2) The sighting system must also be able to go from one setting to another that is many graduations or rotations distant, then back to the original setting, with extreme accuracy.

3) The sighting system must exhibit zero, or extremely minimal, backlash in the adjustments going from one direction of movement to the other between consecutive shots. Ie: if I put on 5.5 minutes right wind on the scope, and then need to take off 1/2 minute back to the left, the damn thing better MOVE 1/2 minute without me asking twice.

4) The sighting system must be able to do 1, 2, and 3, and HOLD the adjustments through recoil, and general rifle handling.

That covers a little more than tracking, but those are the key requirements of any sight, iron or optical.

 

[jrh84]

Great info that's answers a lot of questions for people.

How would people feel about starting a "mid-range/run-of-the-mill scope review" thread? There's some great reviews of the high end scopes (Nightforce, Vortex Razor, etc), but not a lot of objective info on the scopes that 95% of people that are concerned about performance but not looking to drop a grand are buying (Athlon Argos, SWFA
Vortex Crossfire/Diamondback/Viper, Redfield, Leupold Rifleman/VX-1/2, Bushnell, Burris Fullfield II, etc).

It would also be good to quantify just why people run down the Barskas and NC Stars of the industry and tell prospective buyers not to waste their money on them.

Any suggestions on what people would want/need to see in a standard review format? I'm thinking a box test (tracking and return to zero), tall target test (accuracy of adjustments), and total travel (vs advertised). Checking actual magnification could be done, but would be a bit more involved.

 

[Ggreen]

Great info that's answers a lot of questions for people.

How would people feel about starting a "mid-range/run-of-the-mill scope review" thread? There's some great reviews of the high end scopes (Nightforce, Vortex Razor, etc), but not a lot of objective info on the scopes that 95% of people that are concerned about performance but not looking to drop a grand are buying (Athlon Argos, SWFA
Vortex Crossfire/Diamondback/Viper, Redfield, Leupold Rifleman/VX-1/2, Bushnell, Burris Fullfield II, etc).

Any suggestions on what people would want/need to see in a standard review format? I'm thinking a box test (tracking and return to zero), tall target test (accuracy of adjustments), and total travel (vs advertised). Checking actual magnification could be done, but would be a bit more involved.

CHeck out sniper central, home page not the forum. They have a ton of reviews on low end to elite optics. The problem with 95% of forum "reviews" is that most people don't have a depth of experience on which to base a review of an optic against any other optic. Vast majority of forum reviews are highly biased due to the reviewer already having invested in the optic and wanting to keep in their own mind their scope is good. Forum's are good places for answers on specific questions, but "most" reviews are not worth the weight of the font they were typed in. We are all guilty of this at one point in our lives. Going somewhere like SC, Mel has a set of tests that he judges and rates all optics on which makes for as unbiased a review as is possible.

 

[ART338WM]

I second sniper central and Long Range Hunting. Spent more time at Long Range Hunting. Lots of GREAT info and people there. Join and use the search function.

But I will tell you if you take a cheap/cheaper/budget long range scope hunting especially on a high dollar out west elk or deer hunt you are inviting bitter tears steeped in
life long regret. IMHO cheap scopes are fine for punching paper or ringing steel but for my hunting especially hunts that happen only after accumulating bonus/preference
points only a proven dependable scope will be on my rifle.

If I were to buy a variable scope right now for long range I would have a very hard time choosing between a MIL-MIL SFP SWFA 3-15x40 or a SFP Viper HS-T 4-14x44. No have not owned either but have had a opportunity to shoot a rifle topped with both and was VERY impressed with the repeatability of both as the owners of both
made it a point to show me their ability to adjust and return to zero. Both even let me "shoot the box" as it's called and again I was left very impressed. Neither owner
would allow me to even reimburse them for ammo costs. Lastly the 5-star reviews of SWFA SS 3-15x40 and Viper HS-T reviews outnumber the negative by many, many times to one.

Bottom line is anyone who is buying a long range scope for the first time who can not some how try one out and most can not, is taking a chance on not liking one of a
multitude of things about it. That is why you need to research and do a hands on exam of any scope you are considering. That is why I haven't bought a scope in first
focal plane as is so strongly recommended by the vast majority of all long range shooters. I simply can not get a opportunity to try one actually shooting as for RIGHT
NOW all my long range shooting would be geared toward hunting first and foremost and target would be secondary and for prep for hunting, and I am fearful a FFP
reticle will not work well in all hunting situations.

I made a point to put away X amount of dollars for a number of years until I saved enough to afford the best sub $1K scope out there which is my dollar limit. As I have
no hunts planned in my immediate future requiring long range optics I am holding off on my purchase until I find a good deal or some one comes out with a scope with
all the features I want for a $1K or less, but I'm not holding my breath.

I will tell you this. Just because a scope companies set it and forget it scopes like 3-9x or 4-12x have worked well for you don't assume their long range scope will also there is a
HUGE world of difference between what goes into making a variable scope who's zero once set is seldom if ever changed and one who's zero is meant to be changed regularly.

 

[1nderbeard]

Didn't take the time to wade through the sarcasm waters and read above, but I didn't see any Nikon references above.
If your price range is $200 you can get a buckmasters that goes to 12x.
I wouldn't necessarily use them for anything beyond a deer past 200 yds on a meat doe hunt, but $200 is pretty limiting for optics today.

 

[Dean C.]

Unless it's a red dot on a rifle (because the best red dots are Aim Point and they are around $600~) I always subscribed to the school of thought were generally speaking you want to spend about what you spent on the rifle on the glass for the rifle.

The scope makes the rifle and yiu want a good one, heck on my nice LWRC AR I have a Trijicon 1-8 on it that actuakkt cost more than the base rifle! But everyone including myself all agrees that the very nice scope makes the rifle as they are an integrated system.

 

[seedubs1]

Didn't take the time to wade through the sarcasm waters and read above, but I didn't see any Nikon references above.
If your price range is $200 you can get a buckmasters that goes to 12x.
I wouldn't necessarily use them for anything beyond a deer past 200 yds on a meat doe hunt, but $200 is pretty limiting for optics today.

Because they have plastic guts and other companies make better scopes for the same price.

 

[1nderbeard]

Because they have plastic guts and other companies make better scopes for the same price.

Vortex, if you get a sale price, is the only one I've seen for under $200 at any kind of zoom. You do you though, more power to ya.