Tweet
Some people, not all, who spend $1,000 or more rifle will tell you that those $500, $600 and $700 rifles are junk. If true, then Remington 700's, Browning A-bolts, Tikka, Weatherby and other top manufacturers are making junk...right? Wrong. Even the $350 Marlin SL7 is an excellent economy rifle that will last a hunter a lifetime. Nothing wrong with Marlin's, as I own two. Many are the same folks who say that you should spend 3x the amount on a scope that you spend on a rifle. I don't know who these people hunt with or where they hunt or how much money they make, but I don't know of any of my hunting buddies that spend $1,000 or $1,500 on scopes and we kill just as many animals as the rest. I've killed 13 elk and more deer than I can remember, and all were shot with scopes costing less than $250. These animals were killed on days with clear skies, snowy conditions or during rain storms, mornings, afternoons and late in the evening. My scopes never failed, and I never had a problem finding enough light to make an ethical and clear shot.
If you hunt pigs, deer, bear, etc. a half dozen times a year and maybe spend a half dozen sessions at the range each year, there is nothing wrong with any of the Nikons, Leupolds, Redfield or Vortex scopes priced between $160 and $250. All of these have decent glass for those who typically hunt a few times a year or have a limited budget. And all of these price point scopes have lifetime warranties. These are very good quality scopes, with manufacturers having a lifetime of experience producing quality products. I just bought two Leupold VX-II's at the Sportsman's Warehouse for under $250 each. Does someone want to go out on the ledge and say that these are junk or poor scopes? Vortex....I absolutely love them. They are clearly equal (some say better) than Leupold. Nikon? Gee, they've only been in the scope and lens business for 50 years. All have lifetime warranties for their hunting scopes.
If anyone wants to go out and spend $500, $700, $1,000 or more on quality glass, then go right ahead - it's probably good money spent. Just don't make silly unsubstantiated claims that spending anything less results in low quality or junk scopes. It's all in one's personal perspective and bank account.
If you hunt pigs, deer, bear, etc. a half dozen times a year and maybe spend a half dozen sessions at the range each year, there is nothing wrong with any of the Nikons, Leupolds, Redfield or Vortex scopes priced between $160 and $250. All of these have decent glass for those who typically hunt a few times a year or have a limited budget. And all of these price point scopes have lifetime warranties. These are very good quality scopes, with manufacturers having a lifetime of experience producing quality products. I just bought two Leupold VX-II's at the Sportsman's Warehouse for under $250 each. Does someone want to go out on the ledge and say that these are junk or poor scopes? Vortex....I absolutely love them. They are clearly equal (some say better) than Leupold. Nikon? Gee, they've only been in the scope and lens business for 50 years. All have lifetime warranties for their hunting scopes.
If anyone wants to go out and spend $500, $700, $1,000 or more on quality glass, then go right ahead - it's probably good money spent. Just don't make silly unsubstantiated claims that spending anything less results in low quality or junk scopes. It's all in one's personal perspective and bank account.
. There's something very fundamentally wrong when a company burdens YOU to offset THEIR costs for warranty service. Burned & lesson learned.
Well said.
I've read thread after thread on here bashing the budget scopes. Lots of "If you pay $XXX for rifle, you should pay at least $XXX for scope" type of comments. Lots of blanket statements condemning entire brands, etc. 
Comment