Rifle Scope Optics - Price Vs Quality

[Sputnik]

There are a lot of variables in scopes, size, reticle, tube construction, finishes, lens coatings and gas/non-gas filled etc.

But what I would like to concentrate on is the optics.

I fully understand that you have to pay for good quality and typically the higher the price the better the product.

But (with everything else equal in construction of the scope) at what price point do optics reach ther optimum and beyond that there is no improvement?

What I'm asking is does a $4000 rifle scope offer that much better an optic than a $1500 rifle scope.

Just for the record I have owned bushnell and leupold scopes in the $600 - $1000 range, but looking through other manufacturers scopes in the same or higher price ranges I see no visual difference, other than the number of zeros in the cost.

Anybody got a theory on this, or am I missing something? I am getting older so mabye it's my eyes and not the scope.

[Solothurn]

I do not think the human eye is precise enough to really tell the difference between any of the higher end optics makers.
I personally own Leupold MK4s as my cheapest scope, alot of Nightforce on the rifles I use the most, an S&B, just because I got a deal on it and 2 U.S.Optics.
The range difference in price is $1500.oo for the MK4, $1800 to $2000.00 for the NFs, $2600.00 for the S&B and $5800.00 for 1 of my U.S. Optics
Clarity and light transmission is very good in all, the poorest are the MK4s.
Each scope however has its own pros and cons.
The NF has the best reticles and repeatability in my opinion hands down, but could use more elevation travel, their scope caps suck.
The S&B is front focal, so the reticle changes size as the magnification increases, this is great for ranging, but I find at low power the reticle is hard to see and at max power overpowering.
The U.S. Optics has a TON of elevation available, but is stinkin huge as a scope, weighs a ton, but on my 50, having a scope 42 power magnification and over 200MOA to comeup means being able to get waaaaaay out there.
Each maker specializes in some part of the market, all of the scope I have listed are more into the tactical type optics so are niche market.
Zeiiss and Swarovski also make great hunting scopes, they are lighter than many others and offer very good clarity, fog resistance etc, but are not nearly as tough as the tactical scopes are, as most hunters typically tend to take better care of their kit, operational kit is subjected to alot more abuse on a daily basis.

"What I'm asking is does a $4000 rifle scope offer that much better an optic than a $1500 rifle scope"
Not 2.5 times better optical quality as the price would indicate. There is more to the equation than just the optics.

[huntinstuff]

I think that your income decides what scope you will be buying........

You can have the best scope in the world on your rifle but if you can't hold still or have a poor trigger pull, you may as well stick the rifle and scope up your arse for all the good it will do ya.

I'd rather be nice and still with a Bushnell Sportview than a shaky trigger jerker with a Swarovski.

I had a Swarovski 4x one time.....fantastic clear scope. It was the most expensive scope I have ever owned. And yes, it was much different than a 4x Bushnell.........

I have a few Leupolds and each one is a great scope. I think tho that the Leupold VX series are about the upper end of $ that I am willing to part with.

And Sputnik, Im with ya on the eyes thing...........I think that the glass in the scope slowly deteriorates making things a bit blurry after awhile......lol

[stinkynuts]

Well my general toughts when i am buying are how much am i going to send just to show off to my pals once you get in 8 to 1200 doller range on scopes thats lots i think things to get much better if at all paying more this is if youre buying a 3-9 by 40 or 50 now if you are going for some real high power job i di think money counts but hey i just soot deer in the 2-400 yard range i am far from being a sniper or cop etc so for deer etc i stick with the leupolds in the 8 -1200 doller range i hope i was some help to you again these are just my own thoughts thoe and this works for me i dont know whether or not this will work for your self goog luck thoe

[Sputnik]

Thanks for the thoughts so far guys.

Alberta Tactical, I hear you on the operational usage, you definately need something a little tougher for drag bag use than for those of us from the gentlemen hunter crowd , but then some of the game you are after with those machines have a tendancy to shoot back if you miss.

If I miss it's usually a heavy sigh, a damn or two under my breath and onto the next stalk. I'm not packing gear and hauling @ss over hill and dale with AK fire at my back!

But thanks for all the answers guys your all correct with the "depends what you want to do" view of the optics, I know you can't hold them all up to the light as equals as there are a lot of variables and uses for each type.

Maybe I will have a look at the tactical side though, I have developed a fondness for mildot reticles and NF has come up in a few conversations as a good scope line.

Keep it coming.

[raised by wolves]

Bang for Buck, and as an all round hunter, I vote the Leupold VX2, 3-9X40. Excellent clarity. Well proven and successful m odel. Good variety of finishes and reticles. I own and love the VX3 and the Mark 4, but the VX2 is a nice package. I now own 4 VX2 models due to the price and quality. Just bought the VX2 3-9X33 Ultralight for my mountain rifle.

[Solothurn]

Originally Posted by raised by wolves

Bang for Buck, and as an all round hunter, I vote the Leupold VX2, 3-9X40. Excellent clarity. Well proven and successful m odel. Good variety of finishes and reticles. I own and love the VX3 and the Mark 4, but the VX2 is a nice package. I now own 4 VX2 models due to the price and quality. Just bought the VX2 3-9X33 Ultralight for my mountain rifle.

The VX2s are a great hunting scope for most applications. Realizing that 95% of hunting, shots are under 200 yards they are plenty good for most.
For the few of us who shoot long range animals ( I say shoot as I really don't consider sitting on a hill and killing game at 700 to 1500 yards hunting) the criteria for the scopes capability goes up significantly.
The great thing about the Leupold VX line is that they are serviced locally.
I have a U.S, Optics $5800.00 scope that has been in warranty repair down south going on 9 months, a S&B my buddy had was 7 months to be returned.
So it would appear that spending big $$ on uber high end scopes is no guarantee they are better.

I wish that I could truly and honestly promote the values of a Leupold scope against any other. As I scope all of my big game rifles with none other, and that's just because of predudices against anything else because they just are the best scope around for the money. But my coyote gun, which I depend on for the longest shots at the smallest targets is a measly Stevens 200 (higly modified I should add) is scoped with a Bushnell Trophy Hunter. That cheap combination of rifle and scope consistently scores 1/2" groups at 300 yds. No, I do not promote Bushnell scopes for hard hitting, recoil mashers, but mine is doing great for the milder .223 Bottom line is the scope needs to match the rifle and the job.

[Sputnik]

Thanks for the info guys.

I'm with ABTacRifle, I like long distance, deliberate shooting from a solid rest. I don't mind carrying a 10+ lb rifle when hunting, because I know anything I shoot at is not even going to know I am there (most times) and I have the patience to wait for the best possible conditions for the shot. I also use a laser and bipod.

I don't claim sniper skills so I'm not into extreme distances here, out to about 400 yards is the limit I put on myself for deer sized game with my last heavy barrel in .308.

I love potting gophers with my .17 HMR because it provides the same challenge anywhere past 150 yards and I get to try it all day without running out of targets!

My next gun will be a .243 heavy barrel and I will be getting into reloading so I can tune the ammo to both the gun and my satisfaction. Light & fast for gophers and a little slower and heavier bullets for deer. And after what I have seen here the Leupold VX-L or VX-7 line with a Varmint reticle seems to fit the bill. But that does not let out any of the others mentioned.

But then I'm still shopping for the rifle so who knows what will come on the market by time I'm ready for it.

Again keep it coming.

$5800.00 for a scope?. I'm in the wrong business, and I never thaught I'd say that about the patch at $128.00/hour.

[sbtennex]

All I know for sure is that my Schmidt & Bender is in a class of it's own, 30mm tube to boot. Handles glare so much better than anything else I own, and I have a couple of Zeiss's. For a reasonable price tag I still say the Mueller Tac-II is a great buy at $450. Terrific optics, way nicer than a VXII (I own them too), light, bright and consistent. .300 Mag can't shift it and mine's a light rifle. And yes, generally speaking high priced optics have superior glass. IMO, however, both Burris and Leupold high end stuff has gotten a tad out of hand for price. Don't think they are what a Zeiss, Swarovski, Kahles, S&B are in roughly the same price range.