Rifle Scopes Buying my first higher end scope.

[Fig]

That’s fine if you don’t think you need a $2,500+ optic with a specific reticle for the way you shoot. Bully for you.
I do, period.
I need a massive field of view on low power to see the targets in transition and move to them fast without messing with my zoom.
I need a fantastic parallax that’ll run across a wide field without adjustment, because I’m not going to have time to fool with that either.
I need awesome clarity for late in the day when there’s less light, no paint left on the targets, and they’re invisible to the naked eye.
I need X24+ power because there are stages out to 1,500 yards where I do use it. I may stay on 9-14X 95% of the time but on the really far stages I like being able to make the target bigger than a speck.

In short, I find myself maxing out on all the features of a top end scope, and wanting more. I’m just not willing to go double for just a little better (TT).
It all relative, but if you want to compete with the best marksmen on the planet you need good gear, and yea, it’s really expensive.

I kill deer with a SS, .30-06, A-bolt with a Burris Signature Series bought new by me 25+ years ago. I paid more than a grand for that scope that long ago.
To me $2,500 is middle of the road. Perspective.

 

[Jakediesel06]

This is probably out of my price range. Just can’t help but think of a wait for a sale with cash back or something might be able to make it happen but what are the thoughts on the new eotech vudu.

http://www.eotechinc.com/precision-rifle-scopes/vudu-5-25x50-ffp

 

[W54/XM-388]

This is probably out of my price range. Just can’t help but think of a wait for a sale with cash back or something might be able to make it happen but what are the thoughts on the new eotech vudu.

http://www.eotechinc.com/precision-rifle-scopes/vudu-5-25x50-ffp

Interesting looking scope.
But without a good rebate / discount, I'd look at a lightly used higher end brand model.

 

[PowellSixO]

I own both the Gen 2 PST 5-25x50 FFP MRAD EBR-2C, and Burris XTR II 5-25x50 FFP MRAD SCR-MIL. Both are great scopes in their price range. It would be really hard for me to pick a winner between the two. They are very similar in size, feel of the turrets, appearance, perceived durability, and function. I would say I do prefer the reticle on the PST over the XTR. Glass clarity is very comparable as well. If I had to choose one over the other, I think I'd have to choose the PST only because I prefer the recticle. But that's my personal prefference. I don't think you can go wrong with either choice. I'd say wait and find a used one, and which ever one you can get the best deal on, snatch it up. My 2 cents.

Here are pictures of the two, on similar rifles for a better idea of what they look like on a rifle. Hope this helps.

 

[PowellSixO]

Side by side. I can take a better picture tonight.

 

[VegasHKShooter]

See, that's my point. $1k is certainly LESS. But it's still a lot of money by any reasonable, objective measurement.
You can't justify buying a Porsche just because a Ferrari is more. This site leans so heavily towards the ridiculously expensive it's in danger of toppling over. And I wonder a bit if that expensive lean is bad for the sport. I know if I was interested in LRP, I'd be a bit set-back by the talk here about $4 and $5k optics.

Again, that's just my personal, certain-to-lose, vendetta. My professional opinion, since I actually get paid to spend time here, is buy the scope that makes the most sense for you. Preferably a Burris. Or a Steiner.

(the above thoughts are probably influneced by spending the day writing descriptions of $300-ish 3-9x hunting scopes).

There is SOOOO much truth in this statement. I am super guilty of loosing perspective. I work with it and live these guns EVERY DAY, so I think I get numb to the cost. I VIVIDLY remember when I wanted a NF 2.5-10 so bad, but all I could swing was a Vortex 2.5-10. I rolled with what I could at the time. Now, years later, it’s NF ATACR’s and S&B PMII’s. It’s all about perspective. I think so many of us loose that over time. We get numb to it and forget. For a new guy/gal, it’s unnerving to think about spending $2000 on ONE SCOPE.

I hope all of us remember what it was like when we started out. Try to help a new person out with what he/she can afford and live with. If they like it, they’ll stay and upgrade. If they never start, due to sticker shock, we can’t help them upgrade later.

 

[Wildfire1550]

What about the bushie deal from GA precision, at $750 seems like a deal

 

[benzy2]

That’s fine if you don’t think you need a $2,500+ optic with a specific reticle for the way you shoot. Bully for you.
I do, period.
I need a massive field of view on low power to see the targets in transition and move to them fast without messing with my zoom.
I need a fantastic parallax that’ll run across a wide field without adjustment, because I’m not going to have time to fool with that either.
I need awesome clarity for late in the day when there’s less light, no paint left on the targets, and they’re invisible to the naked eye.
I need X24+ power because there are stages out to 1,500 yards where I do use it. I may stay on 9-14X 95% of the time but on the really far stages I like being able to make the target bigger than a speck.

In short, I find myself maxing out on all the features of a top end scope, and wanting more. I’m just not willing to go double for just a little better (TT).
It all relative, but if you want to compete with the best marksmen on the planet you need good gear, and yea, it’s really expensive.

I kill deer with a SS, .30-06, A-bolt with a Burris Signature Series bought new by me 25+ years ago. I paid more than a grand for that scope that long ago.
To me $2,500 is middle of the road. Perspective.

That’s all fine but you’re vastly missing his perspective in your answer. There will always be a place for the top tier in anything. It certainly doesn’t mean he is going to notice the difference, or at least appreciate it for a long long time. Nobody starts racing by jumping in an F1 car. Worrying about keeping pace with the national champions when looking to buy your first quality scope is also not realistic. He’s bumped into the acceptable category with the choices/budget he has. I’d rather spend $1000 to get into the game, shoot that a year or two, understand what I don’t like about that scope, and then find a better replacement based on my experience. Look at the wide range in focal plane, reticles, turrets, etc in his choices.

I’d go with the one you felt most reliable to start. Get the one you have most faith will track properly. Then go shoot the shit out it and figure out what isn’t to your liking. Upgrade then if you feel the need based on what you’ve done. If you feel like the guy stating he needs every drop of every feature, then you can start saving for the $5k+ options. If you end up thinking it’s good enough for your dedication, that works too. Spending the extra up front isn’t bad and can save a lot of headaches, but spending too much when you don’t know what you want can get you in trouble as well.

 

[Fig]

I wasn’t responding directly to the op, but to those who think $2.5K is more money than you need to spend/it’s pointless to pay for a top end scope.

I agree with you. Carry on.

 

[Vodoun daVinci]

I'm going thru this search for "My" scope as well and started at the bottom intending to work my way up as needed. Luckily I have access to friends and Range Buddies who have some pretty nice stuff and are willing to let me compare Apples to Apples. While I'm a newbie shooting cheap glass right now I'm learning some things that apply here:

The Scope market is huge right now...lots of good stuff, cheap stuff, high end stuff and it's easy to get lost in yer search and default to the "more is better/better is expensive" mindset and simplify your search parameters to buying the most expensive scope you can financially handle with the expectation that it will naturally be X times better than a less expensive scope. While this is *generally* true ( you get what you pay for- better costs more) some brands are just more expensive because they have their brand nailed down.

A Schmidt and Bender scope is a prime example - they are arguably one of those brands that are The Standard of Excellence and make great stuff. Is an S&B in the same configuration 3X better than a similarly configured Vortex? If the reticle suits you and the S&B has something you really need/want that the Vortex does not have then buying the S&B is a no brainer. But to expect it to be 3X "as good" like being 3X clearer, tracking 3X as well, being 3X more durable then you will likely not get the value of the transaction. I have access to some really nice stuff thru range buddies but spending that kind of money would not have made me a better shot at this stage of the game (for me) with the gun I'm shooting.

I'm exceeding expectations (shooting as well as Range Buddies with 20X the experience and kit/scopes costing multiple times as much as I have invested) and I'd like to believe this is luck but it a not *all* luck.

I guess my point is that there are diminishing returns - to get better glass and features, you pay more money. Unfortunately it costs 2X, 3X, or 5X sometimes to get a 10% improvement is clarity, tracking, etc. If one needs that then they'll have to pony up but I still think starting at the bottom and working up is a better way to go. Unless money is no object....if I had enough money that $4K in a scope was insignificant I'd probably have started way higher on the food chain.

VooDoo

 

[benzy2]

I wasn’t responding directly to the op, but to those who think $2.5K is more money than you need to spend/it’s pointless to pay for a top end scope.

I agree with you. Carry on.

Ah, sorry for the misunderstanding on my part. I do agree with you that there is a group who will take advantage of the performance increase. Relative to other hobbies, a $5k scope bought once every few years isn’t all that expensive. I mean it is, but not compared to the need for speed, or boats or a lot of other money intensive hobbies.

 

[steve123]

For most guys it's normal to start with a lower end scope, or I should say an affordable option, I know I did.

12 years ago...my scope evolution starts.

Heck, I started with a SWFA fixed power moa turret/mildot reticle/$250 and learned on it and found what I did and didn't like. For me a fixed power scope didn't offer what I wanted which was versatility. That was the last fixed power scope I bought.

Used various Leupold variables, etc, and quickly found out mil/moa/SFP wasn't the best idea. Back then there wasn't really an affordable FFP option.

Shortly after that point I went to the Horus 8-26x50 Predators/$700 which didn't track correctly but had an excellent holdover reticle and decent glass. I won my first long range match with this scope using holdovers only.

From there bought my first +$1000 scope, a USO, which was a disappointing scope in certain ways but it tracked perfectly. Still learning what I liked and didn't like....

When the Bushnell HDMR 3.5-21x50 came out it was a great scope for me! It lacked features like ZS, illume and close focus but those scopes were reliable and tracked well. I sold most of my other scopes and bought 3 and used those for years. Then my local club starting having night matches, darn, now I needed a scope with illume...

Not listed are a bunch of FFP scopes I've tried, it's hard to remember all of them, I sold most of them because they fell short for one reason or another.

I finally bit the bullet and bought a S&B 5-25/H59 DT. There's no perfect scope but this has worked great for my needs. It's a very versatile scope, I've shot Field Target air rifle matches, had it on 22rf's, the tactical rifles, and shot ELR with it too, it's equally good at any type of shooting you'd want to use a scope for. I think I bought my first one 6 years ago.

I used to get aggravated because I wanted certain features in an inexpensive scope, like illume, close focus, good glass, and a good tree reticle in mil/mil FFP! Then Athlon Optics came to exist. Man that was a real blessing for me!! I have the S&B's on the expensive rifles and Athlon's on the rest, that way I can take advantage of most of the features that the S&B's offer in a inexpensive scope to enjoy on the other rifles.

Buy what you will, doubtful it'll be the last scope you ever try, and we're lucky to have all the options we have nowadays vs way back then.

 

[Rondogg]

I am sure that 2017 results are the same, if not better.

 

[Jakediesel06]

Has anyone heard of Riton optics. Have any thoughts on them?

https://www.ritonoptics.com/rifle-scopes-optics/riflescopes/rt-s-mod-7-5-25x56ir/

 

[MisanthropicOne]

Has anyone heard of Riton optics. Have any thoughts on them?

https://www.ritonoptics.com/rifle-scopes-optics/riflescopes/rt-s-mod-7-5-25x56ir/

I have recently had the opportunity to play with a few of the Riton optics, I put the scope you reference on a 6.5 Creedmoor LR-308 build. I would say that it is a lot of scope for the money, and if you can get the Riton Military/LEO discount it's definitely a contender, with some noted drawbacks.

The glass was very clear and on par with mid to high level Japanese glass I have tested, Image quality was good even at higher magnifications, where a lot of mid range scopes show degradation. It zero'd and tracked well between 100 and 775 yards and then back again. Eye relief and field of view were excellent, focus and depth of feel were good, if not on par with some of the higher end glass.

There were a few things I wasn't as impressed with. While feel and construction seem solid, the turrets were just "ok". Clicks were smooth and the turrets were easy to read, and the push/pull turret functioned as advertised. The parallax adjustment and magnification adjustment however were both very stiff on the scope. They were smooth, but it took a lot of force to make adjustments on them. They may loosen up over time, but out of the box they required a fair amount of torque to adjust.

The reticle is probably my biggest dislike. They have a very simple reticle, which was great 20 years ago, but with all the amazing options out there today I would prefer something more in line with Horus or TReMoR3 Reticle line with more flexibility. This is purely preference, but with the FFP the basic Reticle begins to look pretty clunky at high magnification.

Lastly the company is fairly new, and there's just not a lot out there about them. They could be the next Vortex or that lifetime warranty could be worthless if the company closes in a few years. I took a chance and bought several of their products because they are a local veteran owned company and with my Military discount it was hard to pass up. Once I have a chance to do more extensive testing I will post some scientific details in the appropriate forum section.

 

[dave300]

I have recently had the opportunity to play with a few of the Riton optics, I put the scope you reference on a 6.5 Creedmoor LR-308 build. I would say that it is a lot of scope for the money, and if you can get the Riton Military/LEO discount it's definitely a contender, with some noted drawbacks.

The glass was very clear and on par with mid to high level Japanese glass I have tested, Image quality was good even at higher magnifications, where a lot of mid range scopes show degradation. It zero'd and tracked well between 100 and 775 yards and then back again. Eye relief and field of view were excellent, focus and depth of feel were good, if not on par with some of the higher end glass.

There were a few things I wasn't as impressed with. While feel and construction seem solid, the turrets were just "ok". Clicks were smooth and the turrets were easy to read, and the push/pull turret functioned as advertised. The parallax adjustment and magnification adjustment however were both very stiff on the scope. They were smooth, but it took a lot of force to make adjustments on them. They may loosen up over time, but out of the box they required a fair amount of torque to adjust.

The reticle is probably my biggest dislike. They have a very simple reticle, which was great 20 years ago, but with all the amazing options out there today I would prefer something more in line with Horus or TReMoR3 Reticle line with more flexibility. This is purely preference, but with the FFP the basic Reticle begins to look pretty clunky at high magnification.

Lastly the company is fairly new, and there's just not a lot out there about them. They could be the next Vortex or that lifetime warranty could be worthless if the company closes in a few years. I took a chance and bought several of their products because they are a local veteran owned company and with my Military discount it was hard to pass up. Once I have a chance to do more extensive testing I will post some scientific details in the appropriate forum section.

Any further updates, thanks for the input, Dave