Rifle Scopes .22 LR Trainer Scope - $700 Budget

6point5CM

6point5CM

Jedi
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 16, 2017
213
73
40
Seattle / Montana
#1
Hide Team,

I'm looking to put a new scope on my 10/22 that will also see time on one of my prairie dog guns from time to time. I currently have a Burris Veracity 5-25 but do not like the turrets or reticle. If I had the SCR reticle, I could live with the turrets. My budget is around $700. I'm military, so can get several brands at a bit of a discount. I'm currently looking at the following, but do not have time behind any of them, or a way to really test them. My match rifle wears a PMII, and my hunting rifle wears an ATACR and the new Conquest V6, and while I love all of those scopes, not really what I need for a .22LR at this point in time.

Requirements:

-MIL Reticle and MIL Turrets
-FFP
-Enough elevation for 250yds min of .22LR with a 20MOA rail
-Repeatable
-15x Magnification (Minimum Top End)
-Exposed Turrets
-Side Parralax

Nice to Haves (but doubtful at this price point):

-10 MIL per revolution
-Zero Stop
-Locking Turrets


Don't Care:

-Illumination
-30mm vs 34mm


Current Considerations (no particular order):

Athlon Ares BTR 4.5-27x50
Athlon Helos BTR 6-24x50
Sightron SIII 6-24x50
Weaver Tactical 4-20x50
Burris XTRII 3-15x50
Vortex Viper HS LR 6-24x50
SWFA 3-15x50

What else should be in this list I haven't looked at? Something out there used than can eek into the $700 range I'm unaware of? Not real familiar with the Burris offerings, but perhaps they have one I should be considering? I appreciate any info, recommendatins, or feedback as I don't get to play with most of these at matches, just the higher end stuff.

 
#2
I have a SWFA SS 3-15 with MilQuad reticle on my Annie 64 MPR...couldn't be happier. Tracks like a champ per the tall target test I did. It isn't perfect but I bought mine with a bubble level and butler creek caps here on the PX for $575 used.
 
#3
I'm using the swfa 3-15 On my 455 trainer, I've been very happy with mine. Tracking has been great and the 6m-infinity parralax seems well suited to .22lr applications. It's also simple enough to add shims to provide zero stop on this model.
 
#4
Friends have the HS 6-24, the Ares 4.5-27x50, the Helos 6-24. I have the SWFA 3-15x42, the Ares 2.5-15x50 and a Bushnell LRHS 3-12.

The Ares 4.5-27 is way ahead of the rest to me, or at least I like it more, why? Because there's not much difference between the twice as expensive LRHS and the Ares in build quality and I prefer the 6x ratio, actually my LRHS is for sale currently, I like the features on the Ares 2.5-15x50 more, like the 10Y focus. The APLR3 reticle is the best tree reticle out there, it's my favorite, even over the H59! If you hold for wind there's no annoying numbers to get in the way and every mil line is numbered. The glass is above the rest of the scopes I mentioned except the LRHS, which is very very close but of course 27x resolves better so in the big picture wins out.

The HS 6-24 has had continued problems, friend is frustrated because it's about to go back for the 2cnd time. I think he learned his lesson buying a scope with 1/2 moa elevation clicks, among other things.

IMO, the SWFA is okay at best and that's all. The reticle is on the thick side too me and the glass is mediocre. I've sold or traded 2 of the 3 I've owned. If it didn't have the 6m focus for indoor air rifle it'd be up for sale too. It's getting very dated and ceases to impress if comparing to the newer scopes. I went to the Athlon Talos BTR 4-14x44 as the SWFA's substitute at half the price.

I use S&B's and a Cronus BTR on my high end rifles, the friend that owns the Ares runs a Swaro X5 on his 6.5-4s. Speaking from past conversations between us, it's hard to believe how well the Ares compares considering it's a fifth the price. One sure has to pay a lot for a bit more refinement!



 
  • Like
Reactions: rymart
#6
I have a Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 EMDR. It's been a solid scope and I'm pretty happy with it, but when I look through my buddy's Sightron SIII 6-24x50 there's no question he's got the nicer glass.
 
#10
Thanks for all the feedback. Sounds like people don't feel hindered by 15x on the top end? I thought that as well, but then wondered if the targets are generally smaller, and guys need a touch more zoom. But, I guess at the end of the day most will be 200 and in, so 15 at that distance is probably plenty?
 
#11
missed said:
I have the Burris XTR2 3-15 on my 22 and am really happy with it.
Click to expand...

Ditto.

That XTRII is really a nice piece. We've bee sticking a lot of them on the TacSol rifles that we sell.

To put it into perspective i take the viewing distance and divide it by the power. So a target at 200 yards on 15x should look like it does at 13ish yards.


These are the two most popular 3-15s we see going out the door.
http://www.sportoptics.com/burris-xtr-ii-3-15x-50-201031.aspx
http://www.sportoptics.com/burris-xtr-ii-3-15x-50-201034.aspx
 
#13
NewsShooter said:
Athlon Ares, I have one and so far it's great.
Click to expand...

I'm going to 2nd or 3rd it here. I haver a 4.5-27x50 coming in the mail for a build. It might sit on my sako quad for a little while until the build is done, then be replaced with the 2.5-15x50. I've looked threw one at the range and was very impressed, glass was on par with vortex pst 2, IMHO. The 10 Y parallax will be the ticket for the rimfire.
 
#18
I shoot NRA Longrange Smallbore at our local range. 50m, 100m, 150m, and 200m with a Athlon Argos 8-34x56 mounted on a CZ 455 VPT and 25moa DIP rail.. No problems with repeatablilty and turret accuracy. Unless you have to spend $700+, the Argos is half the price and will do what you need.

EDIT: Also have the same scope on a 10/22 but with an EGW 20moa rail. With a 0 cant at 200m the holdover was 4mils (maxed turret elevation) running Wolf Match
 
Last edited:
#19
i know you said $700 but with your Mil discount throw in a couple hundred more and get a GEN2 PST...its everything your asking for...i have one on my CZ455 and can see impacts in wet dirt at 300yds.
i had a SWFA 3-15...pretty nice glass but not enough power(for me)and the reticle was to thick...also had an argos 6-24...ok glass up to about 18x but not so great past that and not so great after i spent a day behind it at a match.
 
#20
I am in the exact same boat with your specs. I have a T5xi and my requirement match point on.

I would probably jump on the Burris XTR II but I hate that it's min parallax is 50 yds. I even looked at a Shepherd BRS 4-16x44 but can't find any feedback about the scopes so I am a little hesitant to go that direction. My other thought was a Athlon Midas Tac 4-16x44 but those just came out and waiting to hear more about them.
 
#21
The non-illuminated Burris XTR II 3-15 with the mil/mil SCR is pretty darn close to your price range.

It checks the box on every item in your must have list, and has two out of three items on your nice to haves list. Missing only the locking turret.

It's a damn solid scope.
 
#22
steve123 said:
I have the SWFA 3-15x42, the Ares 2.5-15x50 and a Bushnell LRHS 3-12.

The Ares 4.5-27 is way ahead of the rest to me, or at least I like it more, why? Because there's not much difference between the twice as expensive LRHS and the Ares in build quality and I prefer the 6x ratio, actually my LRHS is for sale currently, I like the features on the Ares 2.5-15x50 more, like the 10Y focus.
Click to expand...

serious question - are you or do you know someone who is connected to Athlon?

I ask because I realize that you are a fan of Athlon but I have no idea what you're smoking if you think the Ares is better either optically or mechanically than the LHRS. I own all of the scopes you list above ( LTRS 4.5-18 not LHRS 3-12 but essentially the same) and on 8x the Bushnell blew the Ares away. it wasn't even close. I'm serious.

now I admit that the Ares MILR reticle is pretty nice but elsewise, the Bushnell is in a different league...
 
#23
I quit smoking that stuff about 1981, lol.

There's so much more to rifle scopes than glass but read below.

Yes I am affiliated with Athlon, the reason their scopes have those combined features is because of me, and yes I am biased, but mostly because I like the products.

As usual I stand by what I state. I'm honest and say what I mean, I don't care if people believe me or not!!!!! Your Ares may not have glass like mine did, why??? there is a unit to unit variance and that's what I've personally experienced with 4 different brands of rifle scopes. My Ares 2.5-15 didn't have as good of glass as my friends Ares 4.5-27, yes that 's right, and I've mentioned this more than once here on the Hide. Even still to me the LRHS was only slightly better. I'm thinking the exact opposite as you, I don't understand how you could think the glass in the LRHS is that much different than the Ares, it's not like the LRHS is up there with S&B, or March, which I have to compare with??? My LRHS scopes had very good glass but S&B certainly blows it away, especially on 12x which I spent a lot of time comparing.

Heck the eyebox on my LRHS on 12x was tighter than my Ares was which was annoying. But there's more...For instance my LRHS had more lash in the turrets and the lines didn't line up perfectly but they did on my Ares 2.5-15. 50y minimum parallax was the main reason I sold both of my LRHS scopes as well as mine had the 50 splines fitting into the 100 spline cog thing going on. I think Bushnell changed that later on???

I had a review on Scout Hide explaining/rating the SWFA 3-15, the Ares 2.5-15 and the LRHS, with a quip about S&B for another reference. It's probably lost but maybe someone can find it.

Anyway I won't be buying any more LRHS scopes, I will be buying a Ares 4.5-27 at my earliest opportunity and the reason are not because of bias but because I value close focus, high magnification and that awesome .2 mil reticle!
 
#24
I agree with Steve about sample variation. I've never been around any Athlon scopes, but among many other scopes I have seen sample variation. Some have incredible image quality while others are meh. I have a very good example of an xtr ii 4-20. It's so good that it was better than my friend's Razor gen 2 when shooting them side by side at 1100 yds. We both agreed on it. I have since looked through several other xtr ii 4-20 models and realize that mine is not indicative what you typically get. Most are very good, but not Razor gen 2 good. It's also possible that the Razor we were comparing to is not as good as some of the other razor gen 2 scopes out there. It is the only one I've compared side by side to my xtr ii. After that comparison the razor 2 was sent to Vortex to be checked out, and they said it was within spec. The only thing they could figure is that I got really lucky with the xtr ii. My point is that sample variation is very common and can sometimes cause pretty extreme differences. I think this is why we see such varied opinions on everything except the very top tier scopes.
 
#25
With that budget that I would also consider Tract Toric 3-15x50 (or the 3-15x42), only requirement that it does meet is that it's SFP.

I am about to sell my Weaver 4-20x50 (800380), which is LNIB. I had purchased it several years ago with the intent on using it for my 260 Remington build but I ended up buying the 6-30x56 while on sale. The 4-20x50 is brand new with no marks and is:

-MIL Reticle and MIL Turrets
-FFP
-Enough elevation for 250yds min of .22LR with a 20MOA rail
-Repeatable
-Exposed Turrets
-Side Parralax (35 yards-infinity)

If you are interested in it I would let it go for $500, let me know.
 
Last edited:
#27
steve123 said:
I quit smoking that stuff about 1981, lol.

There's so much more to rifle scopes than glass but read below.

Yes I am affiliated with Athlon, the reason their scopes have those combined features is because of me, and yes I am biased, but mostly because I like the products.

As usual I stand by what I state. I'm honest and say what I mean, I don't care if people believe me or not!!!!! Your Ares may not have glass like mine did, why??? there is a unit to unit variance and that's what I've personally experienced with 4 different brands of rifle scopes. My Ares 2.5-15 didn't have as good of glass as my friends Ares 4.5-27, yes that 's right, and I've mentioned this more than once here on the Hide. Even still to me the LRHS was only slightly better. I'm thinking the exact opposite as you, I don't understand how you could think the glass in the LRHS is that much different than the Ares, it's not like the LRHS is up there with S&B, or March, which I have to compare with??? My LRHS scopes had very good glass but S&B certainly blows it away, especially on 12x which I spent a lot of time comparing.

Heck the eyebox on my LRHS on 12x was tighter than my Ares was which was annoying. But there's more...For instance my LRHS had more lash in the turrets and the lines didn't line up perfectly but they did on my Ares 2.5-15. 50y minimum parallax was the main reason I sold both of my LRHS scopes as well as mine had the 50 splines fitting into the 100 spline cog thing going on. I think Bushnell changed that later on???

I had a review on Scout Hide explaining/rating the SWFA 3-15, the Ares 2.5-15 and the LRHS, with a quip about S&B for another reference. It's probably lost but maybe someone can find it.

Anyway I won't be buying any more LRHS scopes, I will be buying a Ares 4.5-27 at my earliest opportunity and the reason are not because of bias but because I value close focus, high magnification and that awesome .2 mil reticle!
Click to expand...

first of all, I apologize for the rude comment about smoking something. I was trying to be funny the way I joke with my friends but after reading it, it didn't come across that way.

I don't have an LRHS but I do have an LRTS and been told that they share the same glass so that's what my comments are based off of. the very quick comparison that I did of the 4 scopes that you saw elsewhere and commented on was only in regard to one aspect of image quality - resolution. other aspects of IQ like color, contrast, CA, etc. are outside of the test I did. I was simply trying to replicate what a hunter would see using the different scopes in similar circumstances.

based on this comparison, I rated the scopes similar to what you have though I rated the LRTS a full step ahead of the other three. of those remaining, I think the 2-10x32 PST2 edged out the Ares 2.5-15x50 and the SWFA 3-15x42 SFP coming in last in resolution.

I do like the reticle of the Ares above all of them with the PST2 next, and then Bushnell G3, while the SWFA MQDM reticle is a horse of a completely different color.

I didn't even mention the turrets of these scopes because while they are all different, I don't have enough experience to know if one is actually superior to the others under field conditions.

for instance - while the Ares had the least resistance to turning and felt "softer", it was louder than all the others except for the PST. additionally, it was the most accurate and easiest to turn one click at a time, and not skip ahead 2 or 3 clicks, than all the others. only the SWFA was as easy to click and count as the Ares but this being essentially a BDC scope on a DMR-style carbine for me, I'm not concerned with dialing this scope.

anyway, if I gave the impression I am down on the Ares, I am not. I am really impressed with it and think that people who rely on price or "spec sheet" to tell them which is a better scope, need to use them in specific circumstances before they can judge. I don't believe the Ares would make a particularly good woods-hunting scope but the image is probably good enough, the reticle fantastic, and the turrets surprisingly effective for something like precision rifle comps. I actually wish I had gotten the 4.5-27 instead of the 2.5-15...
 
  • Like
Reactions: steve123
#28
I won a Leupold VX-3i LRP 4.5-14x50 with MIL turrets, MIL TMR reticle and FFP. I listed it in the sale section, but now that I think about it, it may fit the bill nicely. For those shooting the .22 matches, is 14 enough magnification for the top end? I was concerned but I guess most things are in the 200-300 yard range, and I shoot PRS matches on 12-15x 99% of the time anyway at much longer distances. Any real world experience?
 
#29
ra2bach said:
first of all, I apologize for the rude comment about smoking something. I was trying to be funny the way I joke with my friends but after reading it, it didn't come across that way.

I don't have an LRHS but I do have an LRTS and been told that they share the same glass so that's what my comments are based off of. the very quick comparison that I did of the 4 scopes that you saw elsewhere and commented on was only in regard to one aspect of image quality - resolution. other aspects of IQ like color, contrast, CA, etc. are outside of the test I did. I was simply trying to replicate what a hunter would see using the different scopes in similar circumstances.

based on this comparison, I rated the scopes similar to what you have though I rated the LRTS a full step ahead of the other three. of those remaining, I think the 2-10x32 PST2 edged out the Ares 2.5-15x50 and the SWFA 3-15x42 SFP coming in last in resolution.

I do like the reticle of the Ares above all of them with the PST2 next, and then Bushnell G3, while the SWFA MQDM reticle is a horse of a completely different color.

I didn't even mention the turrets of these scopes because while they are all different, I don't have enough experience to know if one is actually superior to the others under field conditions.

for instance - while the Ares had the least resistance to turning and felt "softer", it was louder than all the others except for the PST. additionally, it was the most accurate and easiest to turn one click at a time, and not skip ahead 2 or 3 clicks, than all the others. only the SWFA was as easy to click and count as the Ares but this being essentially a BDC scope on a DMR-style carbine for me, I'm not concerned with dialing this scope.

anyway, if I gave the impression I am down on the Ares, I am not. I am really impressed with it and think that people who rely on price or "spec sheet" to tell them which is a better scope, need to use them in specific circumstances before they can judge. I don't believe the Ares would make a particularly good woods-hunting scope but the image is probably good enough, the reticle fantastic, and the turrets surprisingly effective for something like precision rifle comps. I actually wish I had gotten the 4.5-27 instead of the 2.5-15...
Click to expand...

No problem.

We all have our reasons, our preferences and our favorites.

How dull that would be if we all saw things the same way, aye?!
 
#30
6point5CM said:
I won a Leupold VX-3i LRP 4.5-14x50 with MIL turrets, MIL TMR reticle and FFP. I listed it in the sale section, but now that I think about it, it may fit the bill nicely. For those shooting the .22 matches, is 14 enough magnification for the top end? I was concerned but I guess most things are in the 200-300 yard range, and I shoot PRS matches on 12-15x 99% of the time anyway at much longer distances. Any real world experience?
Click to expand...

I emailed Leupold's CS a few months back asking if the LRP 4.5-14x's parallax adjustment could be set to a 25 yard minimum through the custom shop. They said it could, but the maximum parallax range would be reduced to 150 or so yards, which is short even for rimfire use. It's unfortunate because the 4.5-14x is light and compact enough to fit perfectly on a rimfire.
 
#31
Considering how much elevation we need to shoot 22RF out to 250-300yds, I'd say a mil scope would be easier to keep track of, and any scope with fewer than 10 mils/revolution of the elevation knob would handicap the shooter, especially if it doesn't have a zero stop. I've got 20 or 25 MOA rails on my 22RF repeater bolt rifles, and find that it takes from 6.7 to 7.2mils to reach 200yds, with a 50yd zero on the rifle. All the 22RF matches I've shot to date maxed out at 225yds, so I'm not needing to use more than a single revolution; but even if we started going out to 300+yds, the Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 scopes I'm using have zero stops, so there's really no excuse to get lost where elevation is concerned.

The Ares 4.5-27x50 would be ideal, but its MAP is $850...with its very good glass, reticle, tracking, zero stop & illumination, it'd make a very good choice.
 
#36
Consider the Falcon Optics M18+. It ticks most of your boxes and is only $350.

https://swfa.com/falcon-4-18x44-m18--30mm-riflescope-115713.html

I recently got one for a CZ 527. I've only used it twice but am very happy so far. I did a bit of research before buying and didn't see anything bad written about this scope. The consensus seems to be that there is nothing comparable available in that price range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
NRL/PRS Scope choice
Replies
10
Views
1K
Toast
Toast
M
SIII 8-32 for 22 trainer?
Replies
0
Views
116
molar
M
slickalaus12
Old Burris Veracity?
Replies
2
Views
313
Earnhardt
E
T
How to reset a scopes turrets?
Replies
7
Views
425
Aftermath
Aftermath
muad
Rifle Scopes Leupold MK4HD 6-24x52 PR3-MIL input please
Replies
6
Views
585
muad
muad
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts