tasco varmit scope???

Kelly & Beth · #1 10-14-2007, 07:10 PM

just wondering if anyone has put one of these on anything other that a 17hmr. I was thinking of getting a 6-24 for my 22-250 but I don't know how durable these scopes are I do know that they are a "cheap" scope.

Dick284 · #2 10-14-2007, 07:54 PM

Back away do not make eye contact.
need I say more

roger · #3 10-14-2007, 09:41 PM

ditto, there are better choices for a little more. never owned one but they just 'feel' cheap.

Lorne · #4 10-14-2007, 09:52 PM

I had one on a 17 HMR its not a very clear scope.I would pass if I was you

Kelly & Beth · #5 10-15-2007, 06:10 AM

thanks for the suggestions I was fairly leary on buying one in the first place.

Grizzly Adams · #6 10-15-2007, 07:47 PM

Tasco, popularly known as Trashco. I didn't even know they were still in business.
Grizz

Prdtrgttr · #7 10-15-2007, 08:00 PM

My buddy has one on his 223 Rem 700 SPS and it's been good for him. He went in knowing that it was going to be a cheap scope, but it holds true and seems to shoot just fine.

Grizzly Adams · #8 10-16-2007, 08:28 AM

The problem with a cheap scope, of dubious quality, is that you can't depend on it and it just might letyou down at that critical moment you have been planning all year for. It might work well for a lifetime, but just knowing that possibility existed, would make me spend a few more dollars.
Grizz

Jason Balesdent · #9 05-10-2008, 11:47 PM

If you care to look on the box the Tasco's come in now, on the sticker where the bar code is you will see the initials BPO on there. This stands for Buchnell Performance Optics. So, Tasco is now owned by bushnell. I put one of these scopes on my 6.5X55 for varmints (gophers at 3-400 yds) and after 200 rounds and purposefully kicking the crap out of the scope it has held zero perfectly. Granted it is not as clear on 24X as some other scopes, but its not a $1000 Leupold either. Don't know if I'd want to trust it on the hunt of a lifetime (putting my Bausch & Lomb back on for deer season) but good enough for gophers and coyotes.

kens · #10 05-11-2008, 05:34 AM

Absolutely nothing wrong with one of these in good light conditions especially on a light calibre rifle. Bushnell has owned them for several years. Jason said it well.

TrollGRG · #11 05-11-2008, 06:05 AM

I've had one on my 220 for about 6 years now and it has held true for the entire time. I would not hesitate to use it for any hunt.

It may not stand up as well as a B&L when you drive over it with a truck but I try not to do that.

I think that 15 or 20 years ago they got a bad rep but whether it was deserved or not then, it is a good scope now.

Dick284 · #12 05-11-2008, 07:04 AM

Ask Rugersingle how long his Tasco lasted for him.

ctd · #13 05-11-2008, 08:28 AM

So we have come to see those who have not used one don't like them. The guys who have used them seem to like them for what they paid.

Wow good review, I been looking at buying one of those scopes also now I just might.

Cheers.

redneck posse · #14 05-11-2008, 08:35 AM

had one on my 22 for about 3 years not a bad scope for gophers. wouldn't want to take it deer hunting on my 280 but works well on my 22.

MK2750 · #15 05-11-2008, 08:48 AM

I have a 3x9 on a 300 Savage thats worked perfect for 20 years. Picked up the upgraded 3x9 World Class about 10 years ago for my 30-06 and it fogs up at extreme temps. It came with a lifetime garrantee, but it only got the one chance on my rifle. It is clear to look through but must have leaked at one time.

I see your in Bentley. I live in Sylvan Lake-If you want it it's yours just shoot me a PM. Would proably be ok for fooling around as long as the temps stay above -20. It will never see another rifle of mine, but a person could send it back to the manufacturer and they would probably reseal it.

Sputnik · #16 05-11-2008, 06:10 PM

Just bought one and put it on my .17 this weekend.

Sighting in on Friday at the range it worked well, but that was off of my Lead Sled, so movement was not a factor for either the rifle or the target.

Saturday out to the gopher fields, magnification is good up to about 15x after that the clarity starts to suffer. The paralax adjustment will clear it up but is touchy at the top end of 24x to get a clear picture, you have to take your time and the field of view is very, very narrow. If the gopher moved 2 feet left or right (don't they always) I had to back off the zoom to re-acquire the target.

Rifle was being shot off a Harris bipod and very steady.

I may have to move to a different scope to get the clarity that I got used to with my Bushnell Elite that was on it.

But at $89.00 it was a cheap experiment. One I don't think I will repeat.
But you have to try to find out.

Good luck with your search.

trouble · #17 05-11-2008, 06:26 PM

its like this, there is always something better out there but does that mean its bad? or a piece of junk like some of you have termed it.

ask yourself do you want to spend hundreds of more dollars just to ensure you that you put a few more more meaningless varmints on the ground.

a few years ago when i was 10 and on a tight budget i put one on my .223 ive been putting gophers, birds, badgers, and occasionally foxes and coyotes down out to 375 yards lasered ever since. If i had to do it all over again i wouldnt buy anything other then what i got.

Sputnik · #18 05-11-2008, 06:42 PM

Trouble,

Yes it is worth a few hundred dollars to put a few more varmints on the ground.

As you grow older two things happen:

You get more disposable income.....

You start to realize you can't take it with you so you may as well have as much fun as you can with the time you have left.....

And if using a scope that does not make you happy takes away from that fun then my young friend the scope has to go.

Oh yes and one other thing, as you get older your eyes need better optics

!

By your thread you still have a number of year yet before this kicks in, and when it does, trust me, you will be much more aware of what optics do for you and what you will put up with.

This is not a slam at age, just someone who has been and is there now.

whitetailhntr · #19 05-11-2008, 07:33 PM

Optics are like anything else... you get what you pay for.buy the best you can AFFORD or save a little longer, it will be worth it in the end.

roger · #20 05-12-2008, 07:32 AM

your 1000% rite whitetailhunter
id rather go without...than to have substandard.
especially on a serious whitetail rig (or whatever your passion lies).

Dick284 · #21 05-12-2008, 07:56 AM

The crux of the matter is you can buy cheap and play the odds of a line of scopes with perhaps a 1 in 100 failure rate, or spend a few $$ more to get optics with failure rates of 1 in 1000, or 1 in 5000.
QC costs $$, and that is why the opinions on lower brand optics vary so much, if you luck out on the relable side of the odds, your a happy camper, if you draw the short straw your gonna have bad feelings.
Look at the optics that no one gripes about, and you'll see what $$ invested in QC will bring you (piece of mind)

You indeed for the most part get what you pay for.

matathonman · #22 05-12-2008, 08:11 AM

I put one one my .223 thinking I did'nt need to fork out a pile of money just to shoot dogs and gophers.The first scope the cross hairs turned when you turned the power up or down.Sent it away and in the mean time bought another cheaper one just to get by till the replacement came in (5 months later).It's became so blurry it was rediculous.Replacement is now on the gun with no problems so far through last winter.I don't have my hopes up though.It will calve!I know better than to waste money like that but did it anyway.Another lesson learned the hard way.For the same amount of money I forked out on those pieces of ---- I could've bought a way better scope and had no problems at all.

raised by wolves · #23 05-12-2008, 08:20 AM

Try a Bushnell Banner. Same price range but a little better clarity.

The worst thing for a rifle is a cheap scope. Try to save money, but avoid saving too much.

Jason Balesdent · #24 05-12-2008, 10:24 AM

This is why I kept my $500 B&L, the Tasco is good enough to get the crap kicked out of it hunting varmints, but I want the good glass for the good stuff.

Rusty P. Bucket · #25 05-12-2008, 10:37 AM

I got a Tasco on my HK SL8 a year ago as a cheapie to get me shooting until I could put on a Nightforce or a Leupold. I have a $100.00 bargain bin scope on a $2200.00 rifle.

But it works! I have dumped 2000 rounds through the gun and the scope held steady the entire time. When it finally craps out I will pitch it in the garbage and laugh like hell because I did get my money's worth out of it.

I think they are a great deal for the price, actually...but truth be told, I will be putting a better scope on my rifle next time.

North of 53 · #26 05-14-2008, 05:43 PM

I have a tasco on two 22's I use. I have a 2.5 -10 on one 22 and I put a 6-24 on a CZ I just got. They are ok but the 2.5-10 I find to be a better scope for me. After using both I would not go with the tasco if I felt I needed more than a 10 power scope. I like the mil dots because it lets me shoot out to 200 yards at gophers and have a better than 50% chance at hitting them at that range on a calmer day. I don't think I would use one on a deer rifle for many of the reasons others have posted on this.
One things you have to know about shooting is that no mater how good or bad your equipment is. How you bond with your gun can some times have a lot to do with how you shoot and how much you enjoy your shooting. JUst ask some guys why when the chips are down and they realy need to make a kill why they bring the gun they do hunting and many will just say because it just feels right for me.
In the end be sure you like and trust what you put on your gun, what ever it ends up being.

sbtennex · #27 05-14-2008, 08:59 PM

6 - 24 is a real poor range for a cheap scope read Tasco. For whacking rodents at all kinds of ranges you don't need a low end of 6X and the Tasco at 24 has about oh, maybe what a foot of FOV?

You also don't need a Swarovski on a gopher gun. I'll confess to owning and using an older 6-18 Tasco on a .17HMR and it's shootable enough 'cause the gun's so accurate. Not all that bright, but it does have the AO which I never use so it might as well be a 3 or 4 - 12 -seems I stick it on 9x and shoot that way. There are some good quality lower priced optics out there, but the Tasco 6-24 ain't one of 'em.

JohninAB · #28 05-14-2008, 09:14 PM

I have the Tasco on my 204. Has worked well for me so far. As said before when you get up to 24 power gets a bit blurry but otherwise no complaints.

Have a Bushnell Banner 4x32 on my 270, been on there for 32 years, never had a problem, not a blip with it. And that ain't no $800 Leopold.

Buy what you want and don't worry about all the naysayers etc on here because no matter what you get someone will nay say all over it.

MK2750 · #29 05-14-2008, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohninAB

I have the Tasco on my 204. Has worked well for me so far. As said before when you get up to 24 power gets a bit blurry but otherwise no complaints.

Have a Bushnell Banner 4x32 on my 270, been on there for 32 years, never had a problem, not a blip with it. And that ain't no $800 Leopold.

Buy what you want and don't worry about all the naysayers etc on here because no matter what you get someone will nay say all over it.

Thought for sure you'd get a rise on that offering.

We do appreciate the attempt