Entry level rifle scope

[Scotty]

I am very new to the scope but the eye relief seems to be an important feature to me. I remember I first looked (and only time tried) my friend's refile scope and was almost impossible to see the target, all dark or see half of the image

Your was either too close or too far from the scope. Your head/eyes are in different location relative to the scope depending on shooting position. Standing puts your head more vertical that if you are prone. When you mount the score, you have to set it in a position where you can see clearly for the positions you are shooting. Typically you set it for prone, and tilt your head forward when standing. For AR's this results in needing an offset mount to move it far enough forward.

[JagerDog]

Thanks and good to know the eyebox. So eyebox is not normally listed as a spec for a scope, and may only be experienced once you get them. Is your Vortex is a Vortex Crossfire II model? Thanks

No. I don't have a Crossfire. Just saying I've been impressed by Vortex at a few different price points (Viper, Strike Eagle, Strikefire). The Viper exceeds a very similar spec 5-20 Nikon Monarch I have. I gravitate to Leupold, but you are in part paying for a name, albeit not a bad name to pay for. On "classic" guns I like their "classic" shape as well. Vortex has the more Euro shaped occular piece.

Above was asked your application. Some like to shoot 22LR at paper at 100 yards. Not my thing. My 22's rarely see beyond 75 yards. They might see an indoor range at 25 yards to sight in. More commonly they shoot cans, pine cones and small game in the 25-75 yard range. 2-7 suits this well.

[Cowboy T]

Thanks and good to know the eyebox. So eyebox is not normally listed as a spec for a scope, and may only be experienced once you get them. Is your Vortex is a Vortex Crossfire II model? Thanks

Out here, Dick's Sporting Goods (yes, I know, I know) has riflescope examples mounted on rifle "props" for people to check 'em out. These rifle "props" are secured via fairly thick metal cords for security, but those cords are long enough to shoulder the rifle prop. Do the Big 5 Sporting Goods or other sporting goods stores have a similar setup where you are?

I know Redfield Revolutions are out of stock 'cause Leupold paused production on them a couple of years ago. That's why I mentioned that you'd have to find 'em used. Have a look on FleaBay to get an idea.

[freonr22]

Since you're new to scopes you'll find this 101 info useful to explain terms and the usefulness/benefit of a given feature/s. Otherwise it's a coin flip.

https://scopesfield.com/choose-the-best-rifle-scope/

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=263710

this maybe of interest as well op

[mtenenhaus]

I almost purchased this one recently but i was reminded that we're supposed to be saving our money
...it's a great sale but you'll have to backorder albeit from a great shop Eurooptic

it even comes with a mount and a lifetime warranty

https://www.eurooptic.com/Sig-Sauer-Tango-MSR-1-6x24mm-Illuminated-MSR-BDC6-SFP-Black-Riflescope-w-Alpha-M.aspx

[Jimi Jah]

I have the Bug Buster on the 350 Legend AR. It's ok as that rifle leaves large holes.

The Henry Golden Boy has the Leupold 2x7 33mm, an excellent scope but now it's $299 when I paid $189 for it. The front diopter makes it sharp at 25 yards or at 100 or more.

I just put a Vortex Crossfire II 2x7 32mm on the new Henry Big Boy 357 mag. I got that scope for $113 shipped from Right To Bear. It's quite a performer for that price, 1/3 what the Leupold now costs. Parallax is not an issue as long as you center the view in the eyepiece. Henry sent me a nice Talley one piece ring mount for $49. Now I don't waste expensive 357 mag ammo.

[newStar]

Hi all, I finally got UTG 3-9X32 BugBuster from Amazon.

Studied its manual and noticed the followings:

- it has a MIL-Dot reticle
- its reticle is in MIL while the knob is in MOA.
- reticle is calibrated at 10x magnification.
- distance between two adjacent dots on reticle is 1 MIL.

So if I zero at 100 yard and setting the power to its max. of 9, and see N MIL offset on the target, should my MOA click like below?

N * 10/9 * 3.4377 * 4
(power scale: 10/9, 1 MIL=3.4377 MOA, 1 click = 1/4 MOA)

If zero at 50 yard, double the number of clicks above:

N * 10/9 * 3.4377 * 4 * 2

Never did this before and not sure if this is correct. I studied all of helpful information provided in this thread as well as posted links, this is what I can get. Please comment if this is correct.

Thanks.

[sigstroker]

what kind of shooting are you going to do?
if you will be shooting things up close, fixed parallax at 100 yards might not be ideal and so maybe the utg would work better in that case.

since i don't have any direct experience with these, you might call doug at cameralandny.com and tell him what you're doing and your budget and let him suggest some options. at least he won't suggest something he knows people don't like much.

Someone makes a nice scope meant for .22's that has adjustable parallax below 100 yards for about $125. I can't remember if it was a Vortex or a Bushnell or what.

Thanks for the information. I searched the Internet and found Vortex 2-7X has 3.9 inches eye relief, but not one for UTG. When you say UTG has limited sys relief, I guess it much be shorter than 3.9. Correct?

I am very new to the scope but the eye relief seems to be an important feature to me. I remember I first looked (and only time tried) my friend's refile scope and was almost impossible to see the target, all dark or see half of the image

I will do more research to see if I can find more on UTG eye relief.

Thanks

Eye relief isn't a concern with a .22. They don't recoil much.

[sigstroker]

I almost purchased this one recently but i was reminded that we're supposed to be saving our money
...it's a great sale but you'll have to backorder albeit from a great shop Eurooptic

it even comes with a mount and a lifetime warranty

https://www.eurooptic.com/Sig-Sauer-...w-Alpha-M.aspx

This one is much cheaper, and is probably adequate. The BDC is not useful obviously.

https://www.sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/products2.cfm/ID/271940?utm_source=123121&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=123121

[kcheung2]

Hi all, I finally got UTG 3-9X32 BugBuster from Amazon.

Studied its manual and noticed the followings:

- it has a MIL-Dot reticle
- its reticle is in MIL while the knob is in MOA.
- reticle is calibrated at 10x magnification.
- distance between two adjacent dots on reticle is 1 MIL.

So if I zero at 100 yard and setting the power to its max. of 9, and see N MIL offset on the target, should my MOA click like below?

N * 10/9 * 3.4377 * 4
(power scale: 10/9, 1 MIL=3.4377 MOA, 1 click = 1/4 MOA)

If zero at 50 yard, double the number of clicks above:

N * 10/9 * 3.4377 * 4 * 2

Never did this before and not sure if this is correct. I studied all of helpful information provided in this thread as well as posted links, this is what I can get. Please comment if this is correct.

Thanks.

I'm a simple man, and I like simple solutions. I would ignore the reticle, shoot onto a 1" grid target, and make my adjustments based on that. At 100 yards, if my hits are 3 squares low, that means I need to adjust up 3 inches, which with that scope is 12 clicks.

But sticking with the simple theme, I would also chose a mil/mil scope (or moa/moa) and first focal plane lenses. That means the units on the reticle are the same as the units on the dial, and the subtensions are the same regardless of magnification. That saves on the math.

But if you like math, then the adjustment in clicks would be -(N*3.4*4) at 10x magnification. Notice that it is negative, meaning if your hit is high, you would dial DOWN, and if your hit is low you dial UP.

In practice, I've found that cheap scopes don't track all that well, nor do they click well, and it's easy to lose track when counting a large number of numb clicks, and combined with the limitations of significant digits (3.4377492368 is useless when your dial is limited to .25 increments) I just dial to the nearest whole MOA and then fine tune with actual shots. So if my hits are 2 mils low according to the reticle, while the math says it should be 6.87 moa or 27.48 clicks, I just crank the dial to 7 and shoot again. Then I do the fine tuning with just a few click adjustments.

[newStar]

I'm a simple man, and I like simple solutions. I would ignore the reticle, shoot onto a 1" grid target, and make my adjustments based on that. At 100 yards, if my hits are 3 squares low, that means I need to adjust up 3 inches, which with that scope is 12 clicks.

But sticking with the simple theme, I would also chose a mil/mil scope (or moa/moa) and first focal plane lenses. That means the units on the reticle are the same as the units on the dial, and the subtensions are the same regardless of magnification. That saves on the math.

But if you like math, then the adjustment in clicks would be -(N*3.4*4) at 10x magnification. Notice that it is negative, meaning if your hit is high, you would dial DOWN, and if your hit is low you dial UP.

In practice, I've found that cheap scopes don't track all that well, nor do they click well, and it's easy to lose track when counting a large number of numb clicks, and combined with the limitations of significant digits (3.4377492368 is useless when your dial is limited to .25 increments) I just dial to the nearest whole MOA and then fine tune with actual shots. So if my hits are 2 mils low according to the reticle, while the math says it should be 6.87 moa or 27.48 clicks, I just crank the dial to 7 and shoot again. Then I do the fine tuning with just a few click adjustments.

Very good information. I will try that when I get the chance to test in range.