WeiserBucks
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2016
- Messages
- 2,833
I'd love to own nothing but USA Leopold optics across the board, but I need something that works like it's supposed to.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Hunting optic….strict $300 and 28 ox weight limits
- Thread starter nksmfamjp
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
BrentM
Well-Known Member
Have had a few sightron stac. Good scope for the money .
I won an Element Optics Helix 4 - 16 x 44mm FFP APR-1C MOA Reticle scope, the glass is surprising, extremely clear and bright. I haven't pulled out a Swarovski to compare them and probably shouldn't. I have Leupold, Tract, Burris, Swarovski, Leica and Zeiss in the top of the closet, maybe I should drag them out and snap pictures thru all of them for giggles.
Compare all at dusk, use US Airforce chart.
I downloaded that chart someone posted as a pdf. I had flashbacks of the peripheral vision tests my eye Dr makes me take.
I am 0 for 2 on leupolds. One fogged, then quit tracking when it got cold, and the other came apart from heavy recoil. They're both at least 23+ years old.
I'm not very happy with any of my older (23+ years old) burris scopes either. I bought probably 6 or 7 back when I was an ffl. They hold zero just fine, but you better not try to move them- they Just don't track worth a ****. I don't know if the mechanicals or optics are better these days, I refuse to buy abother one.
Vortex, nikon, old bauch & lomb has been good to me. Even an ancient bombproof Redfield on an old sentimental rifle of mine has never moved on me after 35 years of hard use.
I'm following this thread and the other one, as I'll be in the market for a lower end and a mid range scope soon.
I'm not very happy with any of my older (23+ years old) burris scopes either. I bought probably 6 or 7 back when I was an ffl. They hold zero just fine, but you better not try to move them- they Just don't track worth a ****. I don't know if the mechanicals or optics are better these days, I refuse to buy abother one.
Vortex, nikon, old bauch & lomb has been good to me. Even an ancient bombproof Redfield on an old sentimental rifle of mine has never moved on me after 35 years of hard use.
I'm following this thread and the other one, as I'll be in the market for a lower end and a mid range scope soon.
We used to say it takes more than 10 satisfied customers to make up for a dissatisfied one. We are always more vocal when we have a bad experience. My one and only chevy was a lemon, so no more chevys for me. My one and only Vortex, not clear enough for the price. Yes, great warranty service, but I will not buy another one. Yet, there are so many millions of people happy with both of those brands.
When it comes to optics, I learned one lesson. If I am bying mid-high price, I will take them out in the parking lot at dusk and look through them. For my age, clarity is what I pay for. Doubt any of the mid-high price optics won't track.
When it comes to optics, I learned one lesson. If I am bying mid-high price, I will take them out in the parking lot at dusk and look through them. For my age, clarity is what I pay for. Doubt any of the mid-high price optics won't track.
I would love to have all US-made products like we are ALL used to.
As far as my arken scope goes, brightness is the one area where it is slightly lacking. I'm not disappointed with its performance for the money, but my other scopes are Leupold and night force and there is an obvious difference but again, let's not forget the price!
Last edited:
I'm going to agree with Doug from Cameraland...
The Sightron S-TAC 3-16 is a great scope for the money....
I have three of them.
They are definately worth the money!
Good luck
The Sightron S-TAC 3-16 is a great scope for the money....
I have three of them.
They are definately worth the money!
Good luck
I am just gonna gently lay this right here........
EVERYONE'S eyes are different. And while many of us might perceive an "XYZ" brand/model scope as "great".....other will declare that it sucks. Optics are more individual than gunstocks. They are more divisive and marketed harder than ammo. Some people believe in a brand just because they have an old one - so the new one must be good. All folly. Here is the harsh truth: YOU have to pick your scope for YOU. My needs are different than yours. We may hunt together and use each other's rifles...but that sight picture including the quality of glass, field of view, eye relief, eye box, the turret design and feel of the clicks, durability, holding zero, and HOW and WHERE and WHEN ( time of day) are ALL components in how each of us balance the scales in order to determine whether a scope is good or not.
Picking a scope for another person is like picking out underwear for your hunting buddy. Maybe not as weird.....but way too personal to make for a satisfying experience.....(O.K. - maybe weird too....)
Get the guy that is going to shoot the rifle involved in his scope pick.
EVERYONE'S eyes are different. And while many of us might perceive an "XYZ" brand/model scope as "great".....other will declare that it sucks. Optics are more individual than gunstocks. They are more divisive and marketed harder than ammo. Some people believe in a brand just because they have an old one - so the new one must be good. All folly. Here is the harsh truth: YOU have to pick your scope for YOU. My needs are different than yours. We may hunt together and use each other's rifles...but that sight picture including the quality of glass, field of view, eye relief, eye box, the turret design and feel of the clicks, durability, holding zero, and HOW and WHERE and WHEN ( time of day) are ALL components in how each of us balance the scales in order to determine whether a scope is good or not.
Picking a scope for another person is like picking out underwear for your hunting buddy. Maybe not as weird.....but way too personal to make for a satisfying experience.....(O.K. - maybe weird too....)
Get the guy that is going to shoot the rifle involved in his scope pick.
cohunt
Well-Known Member
Seems like the problem today is tracking--- I'm wondering if it's always been a problem but with today's long range shooting-- and internet info-- I'm thinking more people are actually either dialing or checking tracking--- I'm guessing 40-50 years ago lots were just doing a "set ot and forget it" and hunting at 300y and closer and using "Kentucky windage" for adjustment
Get the Burris, set the rest aside and save up more money. If your friend is at all serious about hunting, I can't think of a $300 scope that I would be hunting mule deer and antelope out to 400 yds with much less punching paper at 600 yds and meeting all of the requirements but its not something I do everyday. If he can walk out his back door and kill mule deer and antelope, I would not worry about it. For people like me who have to wait years to draw tags, drive long distances, and spend allot of money, I would not put my trust in a $300 scope. Its almost a guarantee that he won't be happy in the long run and will end up saving his money and buying something better. Even better if he does not need it immediately, save up a few more months and add a couple hundred more to it. Then again, I am a little bit of a scope snob but not nearly to the degree of others.
nksmfamjp
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2004
- Messages
- 3,474
I agree. The tracking thing is weird. Scopes used to not hold zero well or move in the correct increments. That was often just accepted.
I remember being taught to adjust, bang on turret, repeat until zero's! If you hit close to your aim point ….good enough.
Maintaining zero and adjusting by the correct increments should not be open for interpretation, but as you see, even that seems to pull in many opinions. This is truly the pain in the but part. If you feel like your optic is a pita at all and cannot put your finger on it, this is it. If your zero moves without a change in ammo, or drastic weather change, there's your sign!
Glass is another thing. Honestly, when comparing $300 optics I like to $2000 optics I like, I don't see a night & day difference. There is a difference, but no where near the change from $100 to $300. Let's say you want the best glass, why? Are you aiming or spotting with it?
Turrets are odd too. There are many turrets that adjust well enough to zero, but way fewer that can drive the reticle around reliably enough to shoot 500+ yards. I find some makers offerings odd in that they put features on a turret like you can drive it all over, but then the turret is not reliable enough to actually do that!
Reticle is funny too. Often folks don't think about this enough. A reticle is fixed, meaning if the scale has a 4 mil line, it will always be the same. Meaning, even if it is 3.9 mil actually, it won't vary day to day! Why don't more 3-500yd shooters use the reticle? Fast, yep. Reliable, yep. All you need is a scope that holds zero! Still many/most refuse to shoot off the reticle!
All this said, in all my time shooting, I rarely see scopes over $500 at the range. Have seen a few. Once saw an ATACR(higher magnification) on an 8" 300 blackout at the 100yd line!
