Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Decent, low cost 24-32x mil-dot scope?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • #31
    JMP
    Internet Warrior
    CGN Contributor - Lifetime
    • Feb 2012
    • 17056

    Originally posted by stretch2
    Thanks. I'm in San Diego. Been to Turners, DGM and Dicks already. Most have just 3-9x and nothing bigger. My goal is to shoot past 100 yds so I'm definitely, absolutely positively certain 9x isn't enough. I've got vision issues thanks to my many years in the glare and sun at sea. Shooting is just one of my many expensive hobbies and limited funds mean I have to accept the fact that I can't afford the "best" or sometimes even "good" and settle for just "ok".
    9x should be more than enough. Otherwise, you end up with a beast on a .22lr and it'll make the rifle an ergonomic catastrophe. If you are only shooting from a bench 100-300 yards, and you want to get as much magnification for cheap, get a fixed power. Here's an inexpensive 20x fixed. Magnification of 20+ is okay at 100-300 yards. For longer distance shooting, folks will need to start reducing magnification due to mirage.

    Most decent fixed power scopes will be at 10x or 12x since that will work at just about any distance.

    If it is just seeing where you hit, then a spotting scope is what you need.

    Comment

    • #32
      stretch2
      Member
      • Sep 2013
      • 173

      Originally posted by Ninask
      Also
      We all get what we can afford, period
      If you go with a cheaper scope (less than $300)
      Its best to get a fixed power, less moving parts, no changes in poi as you change magnification
      N
      After some research I came to the same conclusion, so am now looking for a suitable fixed power scope.

      Ergonomics? Here's my dream scope:



      Just kidding...

      Comment

      • #33
        screate
        Junior Member
        • Sep 2012
        • 22

        Pentax Gameseeker 30 or any Bushnell Banner

        sigpic
        "Character is much easier kept than recovered." Thomas Paine

        Comment

        • #34
          bombadillo
          I need a LIFE!!
          • Nov 2007
          • 14810

          I had the 8-32 pentax gameseeker and it SUCKED. Poor image quality, even worse at high magnification, and very grainy. Exit pupil was horrible above about 18-20x and almost unusable at 32x. I wouldn't recommend it even though the specs on it are great.

          Comment

          • #35
            skyblue
            Member
            • Nov 2005
            • 436

            Originally posted by AKS-762
            "Low cost" and "decent" are very subjective terms and often at opposite ends of the spectrum when talking rifle scopes. I would be looking at offerings from Nikon, Bushnell, Vortex, or Burris for "decent" glass at a reasonable price point.

            You should also have no problem shooting to 300 with 14x. Nikon Buckmasters 4.5-14x40 Side Focus Matte BDC would be a good choice - $270 on Amazon. If you need to see POI, get a spotting scope.

            The bitterness of poor quality lasts far longer after the sweetness of low price is long forgotten...
            This is the thread that I meant to start after a trip to the range last weekend! Just like the OP, age has started to dim my vision, and I'm starting to find my Weaver RV7 lacking when shooting my 10/22. I can see the target through the scope at 100 yds, but I would really love to see the POI without having to switch to my 10x50 binoculars after each shot (don't have a spotting scope yet).

            I second your advice regarding avoiding scopes from Barska, Simmons et al, and would probably be looking in the Mueller-Weaver price range, but what magnification should I be looking at if I wanted to see POI at 100 yds and beyond? Would 16x be enough, or should I go for 24x or 36x? Kinda worried about shake at higher magnification...

            Comment

            • #36
              THEJAPINO
              Senior Member
              • Apr 2012
              • 745

              The target rimfire guys rave over Weaver T-series fixed 24x and 36x. Also look up older fixed Japanese Tasco's if you could find one. They'd be a bit cheaper that the Weaver scopes.
              "We got the m*thaf*ckin' champion blood!" - Hunter Pence

              Comment

              • #37
                Dinosaur Jr
                Senior Member
                • May 2012
                • 1707

                Originally posted by skyblue
                This is the thread that I meant to start after a trip to the range last weekend! Just like the OP, age has started to dim my vision, and I'm starting to find my Weaver RV7 lacking when shooting my 10/22. I can see the target through the scope at 100 yds, but I would really love to see the POI without having to switch to my 10x50 binoculars after each shot (don't have a spotting scope yet).

                I second your advice regarding avoiding scopes from Barska, Simmons et al, and would probably be looking in the Mueller-Weaver price range, but what magnification should I be looking at if I wanted to see POI at 100 yds and beyond? Would 16x be enough, or should I go for 24x or 36x? Kinda worried about shake at higher magnification...
                It all depends on your eyes and if your using "Shoot N C" (or similar) targets, which I highly recommend. My most recent scope purchase is a 6-24x.
                Laws against murder and attempted murder should have been the only gun control laws ever needed in America...

                Comment

                Working...
                UA-8071174-1