Scope Comparison Recommendation

[Damage Inc.]

Before sorting by price-point…. I typically sort into two categories:

Scopes that: Track, RTZ, and retain zero….. and those that don't.

A riflescope's job, is steering bullets…. if it can't do that consistently, and through some bumps and bruises…. then I couldn't care less how "good the glass" is, or how light it is, or what the eye relief is, or how much mounting flexibility it has, or the power range, or the objective size, or how much it costs.

I don't need an observation device, I need a bullet-proof bullet steering device.

 

[JustMe2]

Before sorting by price-point…. I typically sort into two categories:

Scopes that: Track, RTZ, and retain zero….. and those that don't.

A riflescope's job, is steering bullets…. if it can't do that consistently, and through some bumps and bruises…. then I couldn't care less how "good the glass" is, or how light it is, or what the eye relief is, or how much mounting flexibility it has, or the power range, or the objective size, or how much it costs.

I don't need an observation device, I need a bullet-proof bullet steering device.

I believe everyone wants a scope to do these things, that's no surprise. If you only have X dollars, wouldn't you want to compare scopes within that dollar amount for your criteria? That's why categories are needed, so you can compare fairly various scopes in your price range and not have someone trying to compare a $500 scope to a $3000 scope.

 

[7.62 Gunner]

everybody has a make of scope they like best but if you want a make that will not let you down NF is the way to go.

I personally know almost a half dozen shooters who've had their NF not track, or fail to hold zero.
One guy had to take them to court and agree to an NDA to get them to fix his faulty NX8.
They're certainly better than many cheap scopes but it's total BS that they don't fail like the rest of their Competitors

 

[Litehiker]

Perhaps THE most definitive scope comparisons are from "The Precision Rifle Blog". Yeah, they are all about PRS competition scopes BUT the testing and comparison criterion are excellent. Cal, the blog owner/author/tester is an engineer so he brings that kind of precision to the blog. The blog is highly respected in the PRS community.

Just browsing the scope comparisons will give you an idea of the relative quality of the scope companies' products.

 

[Mark37082]

It is difficult to separate endorsements and paid support from reality in the world of rifle scopes. Manufacturers know that showing their scopes being used by the top PRS pros should translate to better sales of the top end scopes as well as create brand recognition for their other offerings. The same goes for well known bloggers and firearms media. In general it boils down to following the $$$ when trying to understand why products are endorsed.
This is why it is so difficult to get a true objective evaluation of products. Everyone will need to define what is important to them. Value, dependability, and functionality along with a company that stands behind their products are the table stakes in choosing a rifle scope for me. If you think there is a zero defect manufacturer out there with an affordable rifle scope, you are kidding yourself.

 

[Rick Richard]

Perhaps THE most definitive scope comparisons are from "The Precision Rifle Blog". Yeah, they are all about PRS competition scopes BUT the testing and comparison criterion are excellent. Cal, the blog owner/author/tester is an engineer so he brings that kind of precision to the blog. The blog is highly respected in the PRS community.

Just browsing the scope comparisons will give you an idea of the relative quality of the scope companies' products.

None of those scopes for the most part would be anything I would put on a hunting rifle that would be lugged in the mountains. So, if the purpose is to evaluate brand name than…maybe, but in my mind comparison is not "apples to apples" for hunting scope consideration...long range shooting and that would be a yes. Just my opinion.

 

[JustMe2]

It is difficult to separate endorsements and paid support from reality in the world of rifle scopes. Manufacturers know that showing their scopes being used by the top PRS pros should translate to better sales of the top end scopes as well as create brand recognition for their other offerings. The same goes for well known bloggers and firearms media. In general it boils down to following the $$$ when trying to understand why products are endorsed.
This is why it is so difficult to get a true objective evaluation of products. Everyone will need to define what is important to them. Value, dependability, and functionality along with a company that stands behind their products are the table stakes in choosing a rifle scope for me. If you think there is a zero defect manufacturer out there with an affordable rifle scope, you are kidding yourself.

All scopes are affordable or they wouldn't sell any - it just depends on your budget which category appeals to you. LOL This is why when we discuss scopes, we need to discuss and compare within categories. You pick what features, reputation, etc. you like the best within your category. Different things are important to different guys, but everyone is constrained by money, even billionaires. So, compare within "your" category, not your neighbors category.

The exact number we agree to use per category isn't that important neither. Maybe your budget falls between Cat 1 & 2, so all you do is look at both categories to make your decision. Categories give everyone a "common language" to begin discussions so the discussion doesn't go every which way and outside what the poster can afford. That's just wasting the poster's time and confusses them.

 

[JustMe2]

I would like to see brcfo outdoors' categories made as a sticky at the top of the forum, so we have a "common language" to discuss scopes. New members could see these categories and not have to learn or rehash or define in their minds what old members have been discussing for years. Who knows, maybe other forums and authors would pick up on these categories and use them also.

• Entry Level (up to $500)
• Mid-Range ($501-$1200)
• Upper Mid-Range ($1201-$1800)
• High End ($1801-$3000)
• Top End ($3001 and upward)

Of course every maybe 5 years these categories would need adjusting for inflation, but they would still be standardized.

 

[osok-1k]

Years ago I bought a Bushnell E6500 2.5-16X42 for under $600 (wish I had bought the 50mm version). It has been my go to scope and have put it on several rifles for hunting. I've compared it to Tract Toric 3-15, Riton X7 4-32, Leupold VXIII 4.5-14 and others that I have but I don't find any real improvement in practical optical quality or low light usability. I can hunt until it ain't legal light with the Bushnell. I did actually read your parameters and hope to respond in kind with something that is useful. Sadly Bushnell no longer makes this scope and good used ones cost more than they should. You can spend money on features that don't mean much in the real world and unless you really train on those features, they only clutter your basic need to put a round on target when the brief moment arrives. As stated earlier, Euro-optic has some amazing deals on both Vortex and Trijicon. I just looked and they have Vortex Strike Eagle 4-24x50 for $299. and a PST 6-24x50 for $450. Pretty good scopes for the money and a great lifetime warranty. You don't have to have the latest and greatest to be very effective.

 

[Aoudad shooter1975]

There is always value that raises it head scopes in certain price points change for best of class—and I also look for that—-when bushnell was closing out there LRHS line for 700-800 dollars…amazing value…when they were $1300..well good a worth the money. I bought a Burris XTRIIi for $999…again a lot of bang for the buck—is it my TT 315 hunter—no but incredible for $999–I wish they would "close out" TT 315 hunters for $1500–id be in for 2 or 3…

Ed

 

[flyguy1]

Just beware that lots of these "The Best ..." are comparisons done on paper by bloggers hoping to make a buck who may never have used the actual product. They often get kick-backs on purchases through their sites.