Rimfire Scope Recommendations for 100 Yards

[kenl]

For some other options to consider

Hawke has a Vantage 3-9 and a 4-12 AO with a .22lr, .22mag, or a .17hmr reticle. A Vantage 2-7AO lives on a springer air rifle. Very nice scope for the money.

Sightron has a si in 3-9 and 4-12 AO with several types of reticles. I have a si 4-12, and think the glass and build is better than my primary arms 4-14. I'm using a sightron stac 3-16x42moa on the cz455 .22mag. Imho it is a very nice scope....one of the best in my collection. I can clearly pick up .17 cal holes at 100 yards on a plain paper target with it.

Btw the scope collection includes a leupold freedom 3-9 rimfire, several other leupolds, 1 other sightron, plus scopes from nikon, Burris, PA, vortex, and trijicon.

About the leupold freedom vx 3-9x40RF (mounted on a 10-22), it is overall a very nice scope, good glass, and I like the reticle. The only issue for me is it seems out of focus at closer ranges, even in the lower powers. Parallax is set at 60 yards, but I don't know if that's part of the problem or not. It may take a trip to Oregon to see if they can fix it.

[Tom-ADC]

Mueller APV

[wpod]

Mueller APV

That's what I have on my 10/22

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[The War Wagon]

Don’t rule out the 3x9. Everyone’s eyesight varies I know but I have a vortex and a Nikon both 3x9x40 on both of the 10/22 rifles I have and I can see the holes in my paper at 150yds.

Actually, I just sold my Leupold Mark AR that I'd owned for years (went with a 1x6, as it was on a SPR AR). Based on your description, that would probably be the IDEAL optic.

[AtomicOrange]

AtomicOrange, thank for the heads up on Clearidge. I had no idea this brand even existed. I will look into it more.

Yep. Japanese glass direct to consumers from a company in MI. I have one on a modified 10/22 and like it so far. Has AO to manage parallax, which does sometimes bother me at shorter distances with non-adjustable scopes.

[3006]

The turrets work fine
I have about 4 of the Tasco target scopes and paid quite a bit more then 30 bucks.
I use them on everything from a 1022 to Winchester model 70 varmint master in 243.
One is on a Winchester model 52 target rifle and its about as accurate as any 22 LR ever made.
No the Tasco is not the best ever made but if your just getting into it try one if you don't like it send it back.

[American Muslim Gun Owner]

Thank you everyone for all the helpful feedback. While I did not go with what you guys recommended, the features and tips you guys mentioned helped me a lot in my search.

I decided to try out the Bushnell AR 223 4.5-18x40. Of course, they decide to run a 29% rebate after I buy mine. Lol!

I chose this scope because of the low price combined with the consistent good reviews on every website, high magnification, simple-ish reticle, exposed turrets and the adjustable sidefocus. I feel it being heavier than its counterparts only helps with it being a bench rifle scope.

I received the scope over the weekend. Initial impressions are:
- Scope is most definitely heavy and robust
- Glass seems reasonably clear out to 100 yards
- Reticle doesn't appear to be too thick
- Turret clicks feel pretty positive and are sufficiently audible for me
- Parallax can be adjusted to under 15 yards

I then checked the total travel adjustments, and this where I feel that Bushnell's website team needs to pay more attention to details. The website says that the scope has a total adjustment of 50 moa for elevation, and 80 moa for windage (in case you decide to hit the range during a hurricane, I guess). When I went through the complete travel, I came out with 440 clicks for both elevation and windage, which calculates to 110 moa. A win for those who need more adjustment, but I can't help wonder if they intentionally underrate their scopes due to quality control issues.

Bushnell offers several versions of the AR 4.5-18x40 listed for different calibers but, based on the listed specs, I suspect they are all one and the same.

[Jimi Jah]

That's a AR 223/5.56 scope, not set up for rimfire .22. 18 power for a .22 seems excessive.

[AR22]

Kinda late

I personally like the Nikon line quite a bit. I may look at the Luepold option mentioned though. Kinda would like a better optic than the Simmons I have on my Marlin 922M in .22 Magnum right now.

[American Muslim Gun Owner]

That's a AR 223/5.56 scope, not set up for rimfire .22. 18 power for a .22 seems excessive.

My rationale behind the higher magnification is to be able to see the bullet holes and make necessary adjustments without having to wait for the ceasefire. Plus, my eye sight is pretty weak.

Kinda late

I personally like the Nikon line quite a bit. I may look at the Luepold option mentioned though. Kinda would like a better optic than the Simmons I have on my Marlin 922M in .22 Magnum right now.

I was considering the Nikons as well, especially since I have come across some many place closing them out. But what concerned me was warranty coverage as they are pulling out of the firearms market. Granted I'm not buying a super expensive scope going on a recoil-heavy rifle, but its nice to know something is covered if needed.

I do like the Leupold suggestion as well and may get one in the future for a lightweight setup.

[3006]

My rationale behind the higher magnification is to be able to see the bullet holes and make necessary adjustments without having to wait for the ceasefire. Plus, my eye sight is pretty weak.





I was considering the Nikons as well, especially since I have come across some many place closing them out. But what concerned me was warranty coverage as they are pulling out of the firearms market. Granted I'm not buying a super expensive scope going on a recoil-heavy rifle, but its nice to know something is covered if needed.

I do like the Leupold suggestion as well and may get one in the future for a lightweight setup.

One thing that helps with seeing the bullet holes is use white paper I print my own targets and prefer a 1inch square box (bench rest type) Target printed on plan white paper, you can put five of them per page easily shooting past a hundred yards I just use one or 2 per page.

[smle-man]

Everyone will probably laugh (or groan) but this $50 scope is really pretty nice for rimfire shooting.

Bushnell A17 with 'target' turrets. 3.5x-10x

https://www.cdnnsports.com/bushnell-a17-3-5-10x36mm-matte-rimfire-scope.html?___SID=U#.XlRf1TJKjIU

I have one on my Dad's Marlin 783 .22 magnum and regularly shoot it to 200yds with no issues and sometimes venture to 300. The scope is clear and has adjustable parallax for close to far. The elevation and windage adjustments are repeatable. I only use it on the range so for a hunting application I can't say how well it is moisture sealed but I am very happy. I just ordered another for my MAS 45 (Mauser KKW knock-off) .22LR.

[drunktank]

I'd stay clear of 7x and 9x as some people here have suggested. I had a hard enough time spotting holes with my .270 running a 9x and you mentioned having bad eyes. YMMV

I've been running a Mueller APT 4-12 on my 10/22 for quite some time now. Works great and the glass is about as clear as my old (better quality) Nikons but more positive clicks in the turrets. I hear the APV model has finer crosshairs so you may want to look into that.

[Jimi Jah]

I see .223 holes easily at 100 yards with the Leupold Freedom 3x9 32 mm. Clearer glass does make all the difference. 12 oz helps on a lightweight rifle too.

My $80 Bug Buster, not so good. I put that on the 350 Legend, bigger holes are easier to see.

[American Muslim Gun Owner]

One thing that helps with seeing the bullet holes is use white paper I print my own targets and prefer a 1inch square box (bench rest type) Target printed on plan white paper, you can put five of them per page easily shooting past a hundred yards I just use one or 2 per page.

Solid advice, thanks! I'll print some out and try them to see how well they work for me.

Everyone will probably laugh (or groan) but this $50 scope is really pretty nice for rimfire shooting.

Bushnell A17 with 'target' turrets. 3.5x-10x

https://www.cdnnsports.com/bushnell-a17-3-5-10x36mm-matte-rimfire-scope.html?___SID=U#.XlRf1TJKjIU

I have one on my Dad's Marlin 783 .22 magnum and regularly shoot it to 200yds with no issues and sometimes venture to 300. The scope is clear and has adjustable parallax for close to far. The elevation and windage adjustments are repeatable. I only use it on the range so for a hunting application I can't say how well it is moisture sealed but I am very happy. I just ordered another for my MAS 45 (Mauser KKW knock-off) .22LR.

Thank you for that helpful feedback and review. I sure won't laugh if it works.

I'd stay clear of 7x and 9x as some people here have suggested. I had a hard enough time spotting holes with my .270 running a 9x and you mentioned having bad eyes. YMMV

I've been running a Mueller APT 4-12 on my 10/22 for quite some time now. Works great and the glass is about as clear as my old (better quality) Nikons but more positive clicks in the turrets. I hear the APV model has finer crosshairs so you may want to look into that.

I see .223 holes easily at 100 yards with the Leupold Freedom 3x9 32 mm. Clearer glass does make all the difference. 12 oz helps on a lightweight rifle too.

My $80 Bug Buster, not so good. I put that on the 350 Legend, bigger holes are easier to see.

Thank you guys for that feedback. If I may ask, around what magnification do you guys typically run when shooting out to 100 yards?