Originally Posted by Orkan
I disagree with this.
If we were to take a rifle that shoots 1/4 moa, and top it with a fixed 4x, it would be harder to make it perform to its potential than if it were topped with a 5-25x.
A scopes features are what differentiate it from the rest of the offerings out there, provided that we are comparing optics that function/track correctly.
For instance, the externally adjustable tool-less zero stop on Premier Tactical scopes. Adjusting the zero stop and turret zero on them, is far easier, and takes much less time than on any other rifle scope in existence. That is a function which differentiates it from others, in that it allows the shooter to more easily manipulate the optic. The same can be said of the ultra-solid clicks which leave no guess-work as to which click you are currently in.
It is these core functions of optics which separate the various models out there. Think of all the different functions of which optics are judged by:
1) Clarity and resolution of image
2) Tracking ability
3) Reticle choices and subtension accuracy
4) Magnification ability
5) Ability to hold zero
6) Turret clicks, and how solid or defined they are
7) Zero stop, and how easy it is to adjust
8) Turrets that easily reset to zero
Imagine the difference it would make to setup a shot on two sequential targets, one at 600yds, and the other at 1200yds. In one instance you have an optic with no zero stop, only 4 mils per turret revolution, and a fixed 10x magnification. In the other instance, you have a Premier 5-25 with all of its features.
To say that the two optics with each functioning properly make no difference in a good shooters hands, is quite untrue. Hardware choice makes a big difference in performance capability, regardless of skill level. After all, you don't see factory corvette's entering in the indy 500.
And an amateur driver driving an Indy car is still an amateur. You totally missed what he is saying. Hes saying that a good scope doesn't make a crappy shooter shoot better. We're obviously comparing 2 working scopes of equal features and different perceived quality and/or price. Its a no brainer that picking the options that fit the job best well make the job easier for anyone.. but putting an amateur in an Indy car and tossing them in the Indy 500 doesn't make them a good driver. It makes them a bad driver with a fast car.
Pick the scope features which make a difference in the job you're trying to do..after that its all on the shooter. Most tactical scopes nowadays are equipped with similar. features...retical, mag range, knobs...you get the point. Glass is over rated although i agree with the one poster above in that my premier has been the best of them all in the glass dept. I did break it though... along with 2- Schmidt's. Nightforce has been rock solid for me and believe it or not I've had great luck with the Bushnell DMR lately too. So in this case a scope does not make a person shoot better. A working scope does make a person shoot better.