high value low cost optics, scopes binoculars, spotters ect.
- Thread starter GBA1776
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
Savageman69(Quote) And here we are again we have gone full circle for the 50th time, and we are back at square one. What out there is the best quality for the lowest price, for guys like me on a budget? Any suggestions?
Well Mate Its seems that some folks want to talk about Hi end gear On a Thread thats about Hi Value Low Cost Items, Thats fair enough too, But Im not interested on hearing about Hi cost gear On this thread just like Im dont want to hear about next doors cat with a bad attack of the Gastric and craping everywhere it goes, Hi end gear Is not what this is about, neither is the Cat with the runs doing the Ho chi min Two Step,
For heavens sake We All Know how wonderful that Gear is everytime we log on here by the Flashing adverts all over the pages, I dont give a rats *** weather if anyone wont Put Tasco on their Hand built Mag Rifle,
This Thread is about help others by finding them the best deal and getting them on the firing line,
Croney $100 Kestrel 2500NV $160 scope 100-500, Rifle $400/$800, Spotting scope 2/300 Max, Best ammo you can afford till you learn to reload, Range fees $$?? ==== FUN
And Bugger the rest, Just get out there and enjoy ya selves,
John
Well Mate Its seems that some folks want to talk about Hi end gear On a Thread thats about Hi Value Low Cost Items, Thats fair enough too, But Im not interested on hearing about Hi cost gear On this thread just like Im dont want to hear about next doors cat with a bad attack of the Gastric and craping everywhere it goes, Hi end gear Is not what this is about, neither is the Cat with the runs doing the Ho chi min Two Step,
For heavens sake We All Know how wonderful that Gear is everytime we log on here by the Flashing adverts all over the pages, I dont give a rats *** weather if anyone wont Put Tasco on their Hand built Mag Rifle,
This Thread is about help others by finding them the best deal and getting them on the firing line,
Croney $100 Kestrel 2500NV $160 scope 100-500, Rifle $400/$800, Spotting scope 2/300 Max, Best ammo you can afford till you learn to reload, Range fees $$?? ==== FUN
And Bugger the rest, Just get out there and enjoy ya selves,
John
I have a Tasco World Class on an old 742 Woodmaster, I guess I haven't dropped it enough or used it enough to notice a change in zero.
I have been buying some used Nitrex TR2 scope's. They are the same as the Weaver Super Slam and many times can be had for 200$. The Super Slam runs around 600$ They seem to work ok and track decent, glass is good. The EBX etched reticle is pretty useful and I like the pop up turrets. The internal adjustment isn't extremely high but with some offset bushings in the Burris Signature Zee rings it is enough to go past 1000 yards with what I shoot.
I picked up a Leupold 6-18x VXII for 100$, sent it to Leupold and had tactical turrets installed and a LRV reticle installed for 200$. The Leupold scope model that is the same sells for about 600$, it works pretty well. 56moa internal adjustment.
I have some cheap Garrett binoculars in 15x70 that make seeing the vapor trails to the bullet strike pretty easy, Jupiters moons are easy to see(4 of them anyway). They were 130$
So, there are three optics that are pretty decent for less than 300$.
I have been buying some used Nitrex TR2 scope's. They are the same as the Weaver Super Slam and many times can be had for 200$. The Super Slam runs around 600$ They seem to work ok and track decent, glass is good. The EBX etched reticle is pretty useful and I like the pop up turrets. The internal adjustment isn't extremely high but with some offset bushings in the Burris Signature Zee rings it is enough to go past 1000 yards with what I shoot.
I picked up a Leupold 6-18x VXII for 100$, sent it to Leupold and had tactical turrets installed and a LRV reticle installed for 200$. The Leupold scope model that is the same sells for about 600$, it works pretty well. 56moa internal adjustment.
I have some cheap Garrett binoculars in 15x70 that make seeing the vapor trails to the bullet strike pretty easy, Jupiters moons are easy to see(4 of them anyway). They were 130$
So, there are three optics that are pretty decent for less than 300$.
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
Yep, But I'd rather drop that Tasco than A S&B or NF, Think if I dropped one of them I'd be on A Life support System for about 6 months if I did that,
A few of us have been saying all along that they are not the same in any respect NO ONE said they were/Are,
John
Sami
Well-Known Member
If you are on a budget then you need to spend as little as possible on a basic quality rifle. Something like Savage or Tikka, even used, and then use whatever is left on a scope. Spotting scope I would skip at least until you get a decent set of binoculars.
Meopta MeoStar 3-10x50 perhaps? Would go long ways on top of a Tikka T3. Stevens 200 won't have a nice trigger or stock but on accuracy it won't be your weakest link.
If that is still out of budget then something with iron sights for below 300y with an old quality fixed 10x or 6x on quick attach rings for the long range.
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
Yes thats Right Sami, I was just picking Items out of the hat just to show some of our less well versed members the max limit that the would need to spend,
The Gear you listed is perfect for gettin people out from under the cooks feet and give her some peace and quiet, And thats whats good about this sport there is something out there for everybody Male or Female
thanks, John
westcliffe01
Well-Known Member
I have 2 Weaver Classic K 6x38 scopes. They are compact, the magnification is close to ideal for most deer hunting at Michigan type ranges (10-120 yards) and they seem robust as hell. I use one on my 50 cal muzzleloader and the other on a 20ga rifle barreled slug gun.
Negatives are that the eye relief is closer to 3" instead of 4" and because of the short tube it can be harder to mount close enough unless you have a picatinny style base. The turrets are mushy and take a few shots to settle after making an adjustment. I would NEVER dial one of them in the field, period.
I think they were about $130 each
For someone with my eyesight, it sure as hell beats any kind of iron sight hands down and I have taken a doe at 170 yards with my Savage 220 slug gun while using it.
I agree with the general sentiment in this thread that one needs to compare the cost of any failure to what you have invested in a hunt or else risk serious disappointment and potential financial loss. In some circumstances equipment failure could even be life threatening, but that will not be at the range or shooting groundhogs.
Always keep in mind whats at stake and invest appropriately. I just read a story today on a SC physician who was gored 4x by a hog that he wounded with his 243 and he just managed a final shot on it as it was preparing to put the final hole in him. He had just about bled out by the time his buddy arrived, who had gone to bring the truck to pick up the hog, but ended up making a mad dash to the ER instead.
Negatives are that the eye relief is closer to 3" instead of 4" and because of the short tube it can be harder to mount close enough unless you have a picatinny style base. The turrets are mushy and take a few shots to settle after making an adjustment. I would NEVER dial one of them in the field, period.
I think they were about $130 each
For someone with my eyesight, it sure as hell beats any kind of iron sight hands down and I have taken a doe at 170 yards with my Savage 220 slug gun while using it.
I agree with the general sentiment in this thread that one needs to compare the cost of any failure to what you have invested in a hunt or else risk serious disappointment and potential financial loss. In some circumstances equipment failure could even be life threatening, but that will not be at the range or shooting groundhogs.
Always keep in mind whats at stake and invest appropriately. I just read a story today on a SC physician who was gored 4x by a hog that he wounded with his 243 and he just managed a final shot on it as it was preparing to put the final hole in him. He had just about bled out by the time his buddy arrived, who had gone to bring the truck to pick up the hog, but ended up making a mad dash to the ER instead.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
I bought a Nitrex TR One years back, and for the $300 I paid for it, the glass was phenomenal. Liked it so much I bought some Nitrex binos, and have been using them ever since.
I have this same one. Nitrex TR-One Rifle Scope 3-10x 50mm TrexPlex Reticle Matte
Unfortunately they appear to have been discontinued by the mfg....Which sucks, b/c those were excellent scopes for the money.
If you come across one, I highly recommend giving it a try. I wouldn't mind having another one for a backup scope, or for a budget build.
Last edited:
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
I have 2 Weaver Classic K 6x38 scopes. They are compact, the magnification is close to ideal for most deer hunting at Michigan type ranges (10-120 yards) and they seem robust as hell. I use one on my 50 cal muzzleloader and the other on a 20ga rifle barreled slug gun.
Negatives are that the eye relief is closer to 3" instead of 4" and because of the short tube it can be harder to mount close enough unless you have a picatinny style base. The turrets are mushy and take a few shots to settle after making an adjustment. I would NEVER dial one of them in the field, period.
I think they were about $130 each
For someone with my eyesight, it sure as hell beats any kind of iron sight hands down and I have taken a doe at 170 yards with my Savage 220 slug gun while using it.
I agree with the general sentiment in this thread that one needs to compare the cost of any failure to what you have invested in a hunt or else risk serious disappointment and potential financial loss. In some circumstances equipment failure could even be life threatening, but that will not be at the range or shooting groundhogs.
Always keep in mind whats at stake and invest appropriately. I just read a story today on a SC physician who was gored 4x by a hog that he wounded with his 243 and he just managed a final shot on it as it was preparing to put the final hole in him. He had just about bled out by the time his buddy arrived, who had gone to bring the truck to pick up the hog, but ended up making a mad dash to the ER instead.
Hello Mate, long time no see,
I think that what you have said here is One time you Do need to be very careful with what gear you buy, Dangerous Game has no room for error even if the hunt only costs you gas money, and only if you really know your gear should you attempt such a hunt
John
Sami
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. When you're bear hunting you need a scope where the magnification starts at 6x minimum.
Just kidding of course. I heard a comment about my 1.1-4x24 Victory that it was not suitable for the task since it wasn't a true 1x.
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. When you're bear hunting you need a scope where the magnification starts at 6x minimum.
Just kidding of course. I heard a comment about my 1.1-4x24 Victory that it was not suitable for the task since it wasn't a true 1x.
Sami from what I see here them Bears are Big enough without making them look bigger with a Hi power scope, That would be an Underware Moment,lol.
For dangerous Game and Real Tacticle Moments is the Time when you Buy the Real Deal, But most other times A person can get by with the many other options that are out there and for some reason I like to go with Tac Gear because its suposed to be the best, But most of my gear is just very reliable for its purpose and Like my Tasco gear it makes shooting Fun but the higher end gear I have is a pride thing and the truth is I dont need Tac quality gear anymore, Mind you there I one scope that I would buy just for its Name alone
But I just dont need it,
John
mildot1960
Well-Known Member
Went it come to Optics we all know the sky is the Limit,
Well heres a Deal for you, Leupold Binoculars for $89.99 . Now this has to be a good thing, Does'nt it??? I think they are great for hunting in the wood or semi wide open places, But its a good company and even their lower end stuff is better than alot of the other cheaper brands out there, Surely
67715 Leupold BX-1 Yosemite Binocular 6x 30mm Porro Prism Armored Black 843009035129 | eBay
John
Well heres a Deal for you, Leupold Binoculars for $89.99 . Now this has to be a good thing, Does'nt it??? I think they are great for hunting in the wood or semi wide open places, But its a good company and even their lower end stuff is better than alot of the other cheaper brands out there, Surely
67715 Leupold BX-1 Yosemite Binocular 6x 30mm Porro Prism Armored Black 843009035129 | eBay
John
pinchegil
Active Member
A couple of years back Natchezz had Nitrex2 2x10 x 50 for $229.00 with $100 rebate mounted on 338 edge, fantastic scope. I also use Burris Fulfield II 3x9 x 40 on my mountain rifles out to 700yds. I bought 4 silver ones from Natchezz for 130.00 last year. I have had one on a 7mag elk for 4 years with great results.
benchracer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,652
Here are some of my VALUE picks (as opposed to being merely cheap):
Binos: Steiner 8x30 Predator
I paid about $175 for these. Great glass. Light, compact carry binocular. Work surprisingly well even in low light.
Spotting Scope: Vortex Viper 20-60x80 (non-HD)
I paid about $750 for it. I bought it because I started shooting F-class. Before that, I couldn't really justify the expense. Clarity and resolution are excellent. I have used spotting scopes in the $200-$300 range and been unsatisfied to say the least. A good spotting scope is not cheap. The Vortex is a lot of scope for the money. If you are trying to count points on that distant trophy animal in failing light, the Zeiss or Swarovski might be what you need. For my use, the Vortex is about perfect.
Rifle Scopes: Low End
Simmons Whitetail Classic 6.5-20x50
I paid $99 for mine. This scope is big and heavy and has to be mounted pretty high. At the top end of the magnification range, eye relief gets critical and resolution degrades. The absence of turret adjustments is a minus. Still, it can be had with a Mil-dot reticle, has precise and repeatable adjustments, and is provides surprisingly clear images through most of its magnification range. This is a clear, robust scope. It has its weaknesses, but it is a very good scope for the money. I had mine mounted on a varmint rifle. It was a good scope for that purpose. I believe it would have worked just as well on a .308 or 30-06. When I replaced it with the BSA, I gave it to a friend of a friend. He mounted it on his .22 and loves it!
BSA Tactical Mildot 30mm Tube 6-24x44
I paid about $125 for mine. This scope has a glass etched mildot reticle, side focus, and turrets. It has more down adjustment than up, which implies to me that it was intended for use with a canted base. I like this scope a LOT. The entire magnification range is clear and useable. Eye relief gets more critical at max power, but is still forgiving. Adjustments are not particularly crisp, but they are accurate and repeatable. This scope can be mounted low enough to make it easy to get a good cheek weld. I have it mounted on my varmint rifle now. It is a good varmint/target scope.
Rifle Scopes: Mid-Range
Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14x40 and 6-18x40
I paid $250ish for the 4.5-14 w/BDC reticle and a little over $300 for the 6-18 with mildot reticle and target turrets. Both scopes have side focus. Both scopes have pleasing clarity and resolution through their entire range. Eye relief is not critical at any power. Adjustments are accurate, crisp, and repeatable. I like the mildot reticle more than the BDC reticle. Both scopes perform surprisingly well in twilight and darkness. They are very useable at night with just a bit of starlight or moonlight and careful power management. Be advised that the 6-18 has 1/8 MOA adjustments. Some may see that as a negative. My 6-18 is mounted on a 6.5x55 that is very accurate. The first time I shot it at 600 yards my first two sighters went into the ten ring of an F-class target and I blew the spotter disk out of the target with my next shot. For the money, the 6-18 is tough to beat.
My other scopes include a Meopta, a Kahles, and a couple of Zeiss Conquests with Rapid-Z reticles. They are all superior optical instruments and a joy to use, but they offer very little practical advantage over the Nikons on my other rifles.
All of the scopes I have mentioned so far have one thng in common: they are good, solid hunting and target scopes that can easily get me to at least 600 yards if they are mounted on a rifle chambered in any reasonable cartridge. Some of them may even get me to 1000 yards (I haven't shot that far yet, so I don't really know), but some rough ballistic tables tell me that I will run out of adjustment to go much past that. I can crutch them with canted bases and gain a bit more, but that is more or less the limit for these scopes.
When talking about rifle scopes, most discussions involve things like magnification range, clarity, resolution, low light performance, reticle style, and repeatability of adjustments. One thing that tends to get overlooked is the amount of internal adjustment that is available. Once shooting distances approach or exceed 1000 yards, the amount of adjustment needed eliminates a lot of otherwise quality scopes from being suitable instruments.
If a person really pays attention to internal adjustment range, and intends to reach much past 1000 yards, they will find that suitable scopes for that purpose start at around $1500 for a Nightforce, or maybe a bit less for a Leupold Mk IV, and go up from there.
The only exception that I am aware of is the SWFA Super Sniper line of scopes. They combine good optics, robustness, and repeatability with enough adjustment range to reach past 1000 yards if mounted on a suitably chambered rifle. They are no-frills scopes, but they have enough adjustment to take you where the average hunting scope fears to tread and they will do it for about half the cost of comparable scopes.
I shot my first F-Class match with a fixed 10x SWFA SS that cost about $300. More magnification would have been nice, but I didn't feel handicapped by it @ 600 yards. I think I would feel differently @ 1000 yards. When my skills progress to the point that I am ready to reach out to 1000 yards and beyond, I intend to start with SWFA's 3-15x42 SS. I may eventually step up to a Nightforce or S&B, but the SWFA will be enough to get me in the game and allow me the trigger time to hone my skills.
To find REAL values in shooting optics, one has to have an accurate understanding of what is really needed to accomplish their performance goals. Armed with that understanding one can then come up with a list of suitable instruments for the purpose and get a realistic idea of the price range required to meet the intended performance level. From there, it is a matter of budget and taste.
IMO, if you think $300 is too much to pay for a rifle scope, you have NO business playing the long range game. That is a mentality that is better suited to the 250 yard and under, 3-9x40, one box of shells every ten years crowd that hangs out on Graybeard's. There is nothing wrong with being a member of that group. I got my start there. Many people who fit that description are excellent hunters and masters of fieldcraft. I have friends who fit that description who showed me the ropes in the whitetail woods. They deserve respect and they will always get that from me.
But, they are not LONG RANGE shooters/hunters. That is a completely different discipline that requires a different sort of dedication to develop and master. For hunting at normal ranges, gear is less important and the degree of marksmanship required to be successful is not particularly demanding. The best hunters under these circumstances are true woodsmen who are masters of their environment.
To be a LONG RANGE hunter, one must master his equipment, himself, and his environment and it takes a higher standard across the board to achieve that. I am not there yet, myself. I am working on it. I am always looking for VALUE in my equipment to help me achieve my goals, but I also recognize that simply because something is a value doesn't mean it is cheap.
No matter how you slice it, a $99 Tasco is NOT a long range instrument. It can get a person started and be a platform for learning, but it won't get you there. It is a first step. That is not snobbery, it is physical and economic fact.
Binos: Steiner 8x30 Predator
I paid about $175 for these. Great glass. Light, compact carry binocular. Work surprisingly well even in low light.
Spotting Scope: Vortex Viper 20-60x80 (non-HD)
I paid about $750 for it. I bought it because I started shooting F-class. Before that, I couldn't really justify the expense. Clarity and resolution are excellent. I have used spotting scopes in the $200-$300 range and been unsatisfied to say the least. A good spotting scope is not cheap. The Vortex is a lot of scope for the money. If you are trying to count points on that distant trophy animal in failing light, the Zeiss or Swarovski might be what you need. For my use, the Vortex is about perfect.
Rifle Scopes: Low End
Simmons Whitetail Classic 6.5-20x50
I paid $99 for mine. This scope is big and heavy and has to be mounted pretty high. At the top end of the magnification range, eye relief gets critical and resolution degrades. The absence of turret adjustments is a minus. Still, it can be had with a Mil-dot reticle, has precise and repeatable adjustments, and is provides surprisingly clear images through most of its magnification range. This is a clear, robust scope. It has its weaknesses, but it is a very good scope for the money. I had mine mounted on a varmint rifle. It was a good scope for that purpose. I believe it would have worked just as well on a .308 or 30-06. When I replaced it with the BSA, I gave it to a friend of a friend. He mounted it on his .22 and loves it!
BSA Tactical Mildot 30mm Tube 6-24x44
I paid about $125 for mine. This scope has a glass etched mildot reticle, side focus, and turrets. It has more down adjustment than up, which implies to me that it was intended for use with a canted base. I like this scope a LOT. The entire magnification range is clear and useable. Eye relief gets more critical at max power, but is still forgiving. Adjustments are not particularly crisp, but they are accurate and repeatable. This scope can be mounted low enough to make it easy to get a good cheek weld. I have it mounted on my varmint rifle now. It is a good varmint/target scope.
Rifle Scopes: Mid-Range
Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14x40 and 6-18x40
I paid $250ish for the 4.5-14 w/BDC reticle and a little over $300 for the 6-18 with mildot reticle and target turrets. Both scopes have side focus. Both scopes have pleasing clarity and resolution through their entire range. Eye relief is not critical at any power. Adjustments are accurate, crisp, and repeatable. I like the mildot reticle more than the BDC reticle. Both scopes perform surprisingly well in twilight and darkness. They are very useable at night with just a bit of starlight or moonlight and careful power management. Be advised that the 6-18 has 1/8 MOA adjustments. Some may see that as a negative. My 6-18 is mounted on a 6.5x55 that is very accurate. The first time I shot it at 600 yards my first two sighters went into the ten ring of an F-class target and I blew the spotter disk out of the target with my next shot. For the money, the 6-18 is tough to beat.
My other scopes include a Meopta, a Kahles, and a couple of Zeiss Conquests with Rapid-Z reticles. They are all superior optical instruments and a joy to use, but they offer very little practical advantage over the Nikons on my other rifles.
All of the scopes I have mentioned so far have one thng in common: they are good, solid hunting and target scopes that can easily get me to at least 600 yards if they are mounted on a rifle chambered in any reasonable cartridge. Some of them may even get me to 1000 yards (I haven't shot that far yet, so I don't really know), but some rough ballistic tables tell me that I will run out of adjustment to go much past that. I can crutch them with canted bases and gain a bit more, but that is more or less the limit for these scopes.
When talking about rifle scopes, most discussions involve things like magnification range, clarity, resolution, low light performance, reticle style, and repeatability of adjustments. One thing that tends to get overlooked is the amount of internal adjustment that is available. Once shooting distances approach or exceed 1000 yards, the amount of adjustment needed eliminates a lot of otherwise quality scopes from being suitable instruments.
If a person really pays attention to internal adjustment range, and intends to reach much past 1000 yards, they will find that suitable scopes for that purpose start at around $1500 for a Nightforce, or maybe a bit less for a Leupold Mk IV, and go up from there.
The only exception that I am aware of is the SWFA Super Sniper line of scopes. They combine good optics, robustness, and repeatability with enough adjustment range to reach past 1000 yards if mounted on a suitably chambered rifle. They are no-frills scopes, but they have enough adjustment to take you where the average hunting scope fears to tread and they will do it for about half the cost of comparable scopes.
I shot my first F-Class match with a fixed 10x SWFA SS that cost about $300. More magnification would have been nice, but I didn't feel handicapped by it @ 600 yards. I think I would feel differently @ 1000 yards. When my skills progress to the point that I am ready to reach out to 1000 yards and beyond, I intend to start with SWFA's 3-15x42 SS. I may eventually step up to a Nightforce or S&B, but the SWFA will be enough to get me in the game and allow me the trigger time to hone my skills.
To find REAL values in shooting optics, one has to have an accurate understanding of what is really needed to accomplish their performance goals. Armed with that understanding one can then come up with a list of suitable instruments for the purpose and get a realistic idea of the price range required to meet the intended performance level. From there, it is a matter of budget and taste.
IMO, if you think $300 is too much to pay for a rifle scope, you have NO business playing the long range game. That is a mentality that is better suited to the 250 yard and under, 3-9x40, one box of shells every ten years crowd that hangs out on Graybeard's. There is nothing wrong with being a member of that group. I got my start there. Many people who fit that description are excellent hunters and masters of fieldcraft. I have friends who fit that description who showed me the ropes in the whitetail woods. They deserve respect and they will always get that from me.
But, they are not LONG RANGE shooters/hunters. That is a completely different discipline that requires a different sort of dedication to develop and master. For hunting at normal ranges, gear is less important and the degree of marksmanship required to be successful is not particularly demanding. The best hunters under these circumstances are true woodsmen who are masters of their environment.
To be a LONG RANGE hunter, one must master his equipment, himself, and his environment and it takes a higher standard across the board to achieve that. I am not there yet, myself. I am working on it. I am always looking for VALUE in my equipment to help me achieve my goals, but I also recognize that simply because something is a value doesn't mean it is cheap.
No matter how you slice it, a $99 Tasco is NOT a long range instrument. It can get a person started and be a platform for learning, but it won't get you there. It is a first step. That is not snobbery, it is physical and economic fact.
