Never have been able to tell the difference in them. I have friends that only use Leo scopes or the other high dollar ones. I have only used BSA. Barska, NcStar scopes . Never had to re zero and and always start them out at 50 yds record settings of turrets and work my way out in 50 yd. increments. All results have been reproducible on all of them. Don't know if I've just been very lucky or other then name there is not much of a difference in the cheaper scope then the high dollar ones. Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Cheap Optics
- Thread starter rezmedic54
- Start date
Re: Cheap Optics
Do you mainly shoot paper or do you go out in the field? Becasue with my experience when you take a lower end scope out into the field, where it will be hit by the elements, it might not hold up. Where as a top end scope should do its job anywhere.
Do you mainly shoot paper or do you go out in the field? Becasue with my experience when you take a lower end scope out into the field, where it will be hit by the elements, it might not hold up. Where as a top end scope should do its job anywhere.
Re: Cheap Optics
I bought a couple BSA scopes and the biggest flaw I thought they had was low light and bright light. As soon as the sun went down they were worthless, they did not preform to well in twilight hours. Also if I even looked in the general direction of the sun they would white out with flare. So they we worthless in that category as well. So for me using them for hunting meant they were not much good as the two things are very important for hunting.
One of them seemed to hold zero okay, the other not so much. Neither of mine had accurate consistent adjustments either. They were those kind of scopes that take 15 to 20 rounds to zero instead of just 2. What in PITA there were because of that.
I bought a couple BSA scopes and the biggest flaw I thought they had was low light and bright light. As soon as the sun went down they were worthless, they did not preform to well in twilight hours. Also if I even looked in the general direction of the sun they would white out with flare. So they we worthless in that category as well. So for me using them for hunting meant they were not much good as the two things are very important for hunting.
One of them seemed to hold zero okay, the other not so much. Neither of mine had accurate consistent adjustments either. They were those kind of scopes that take 15 to 20 rounds to zero instead of just 2. What in PITA there were because of that.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky?</div></div>Sorry to ruin what appears to be a lucky streak, but it's neither luck nor voodoo:
Either you haven't used the scopes enough, or you are using them well-within their performance envelope. If all one does is mount it, sight-in at 100 yards on a pleasant day, shoot a light caliber, and leave it in a padded case, then most cheap scopes will be fine until they are not fine anymore. This interval can be minutes, or years, depending on a host of external factors that have nothing to do with the poor quality of the scope.
I still wouldn't buy one: life's too short for blended malts, cheap bourbon, bad cigars, inaccurate rifles, and - I would now add - crappy scopes.
To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky?</div></div>Sorry to ruin what appears to be a lucky streak, but it's neither luck nor voodoo:
Either you haven't used the scopes enough, or you are using them well-within their performance envelope. If all one does is mount it, sight-in at 100 yards on a pleasant day, shoot a light caliber, and leave it in a padded case, then most cheap scopes will be fine until they are not fine anymore. This interval can be minutes, or years, depending on a host of external factors that have nothing to do with the poor quality of the scope.
I still wouldn't buy one: life's too short for blended malts, cheap bourbon, bad cigars, inaccurate rifles, and - I would now add - crappy scopes.
To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
</div></div>
Because you can't make a really good scope for cheap, but just because a scope is expensive, doesn't make it great.
This is our challenge today in this world of lookalikes, knockoffs and glitzy marketing hype.
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
Because you can't make a really good scope for cheap, but just because a scope is expensive, doesn't make it great.
This is our challenge today in this world of lookalikes, knockoffs and glitzy marketing hype.
John
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
</div></div>
That is a very good point right there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To me, the more interesting question is how and why one can get still get a crappy scope after spending $2,500 on it.
That is a very good point right there.
Re: Cheap Optics
I can attest to the 15-20 rounds to zero. I bought a Barska Swat it September. Mounted on my remy 700 30.06. It took 18 rounds to zero.
Now granted I didn't have the best of equiptment to zero but when I took my Leupold off my AR and put it on the same rifle I was zero'ed in a quarter what it took on the Barska. I would swap back to the Leupold but it just doesn't allow me to get out far enough because its a basic reticle so I can't really do any math with it to get it on target past a couple 100 yards.
My Barska obviously isn't a 1000 meter optic but it does let me get out enough to hit stuff at 500 meters but I'll soon be ditching it for better quality because its just not what I was wanting out of it.
I can attest to the 15-20 rounds to zero. I bought a Barska Swat it September. Mounted on my remy 700 30.06. It took 18 rounds to zero.
Now granted I didn't have the best of equiptment to zero but when I took my Leupold off my AR and put it on the same rifle I was zero'ed in a quarter what it took on the Barska. I would swap back to the Leupold but it just doesn't allow me to get out far enough because its a basic reticle so I can't really do any math with it to get it on target past a couple 100 yards.
My Barska obviously isn't a 1000 meter optic but it does let me get out enough to hit stuff at 500 meters but I'll soon be ditching it for better quality because its just not what I was wanting out of it.
Re: Cheap Optics
Everytime I shoot at TVP, there is a guy who uses a TASCO on his 308. We shoot out to 1185yds so you know hes CRANKIN' on the elevation knob all day.
That scope has made me really ask why there is a "high dolar" scope market. Other than everyone wanting to one up each other. ALL season his TASCO has performed without fail. The regularity of hits by him really impresses me. He has his dope for each target mapped out and it's consistant from match to match. I'm not gonna run out an trade my MK4's (alot of people here say are junk anyway) for a TASCO but it still is impressive.
Everytime I shoot at TVP, there is a guy who uses a TASCO on his 308. We shoot out to 1185yds so you know hes CRANKIN' on the elevation knob all day.
That scope has made me really ask why there is a "high dolar" scope market. Other than everyone wanting to one up each other. ALL season his TASCO has performed without fail. The regularity of hits by him really impresses me. He has his dope for each target mapped out and it's consistant from match to match. I'm not gonna run out an trade my MK4's (alot of people here say are junk anyway) for a TASCO but it still is impressive.
Re: Cheap Optics
What's say you and I take a trip to Vegas and hit the tables with those odds. I have both and I have basically resorted myself to spending the money now to buy the higher end stuff as I don't care to have to turn around and replace due to mechanical failure, etc. or need to upgrade regularly. In terms of performance, the higher end scopes definitely show their worth when being put through the paces. I wouldn't go to the woods anymore when seriously hunting without good optics. I want to be able to tell the difference between a nice buck and a couple of shadows in the twilight. If you aren't shooting anything with serious recoil or that you are not depending on, then go cheap. If just annoys me when I pay for something and it doesn't work perfectly. There are exceptions of course. I have had to send a Zeiss Conquest back. The difference is that Zeiss didn't bat an eye and sent me out a new scope quickly. I don't think I would have gotten the same service from the lower end guys.
But hey, if its working for you, go with the lower end scopes.
What's say you and I take a trip to Vegas and hit the tables with those odds. I have both and I have basically resorted myself to spending the money now to buy the higher end stuff as I don't care to have to turn around and replace due to mechanical failure, etc. or need to upgrade regularly. In terms of performance, the higher end scopes definitely show their worth when being put through the paces. I wouldn't go to the woods anymore when seriously hunting without good optics. I want to be able to tell the difference between a nice buck and a couple of shadows in the twilight. If you aren't shooting anything with serious recoil or that you are not depending on, then go cheap. If just annoys me when I pay for something and it doesn't work perfectly. There are exceptions of course. I have had to send a Zeiss Conquest back. The difference is that Zeiss didn't bat an eye and sent me out a new scope quickly. I don't think I would have gotten the same service from the lower end guys.
But hey, if its working for you, go with the lower end scopes.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: prplhaz72</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Tasco is not by chance a Tasco super sniper is it? </div></div>
Nope
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: prplhaz72</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Tasco is not by chance a Tasco super sniper is it? </div></div>
Nope
Re: Cheap Optics
i was ( and to some extent ) sharing the same opinion as you. however, i am now under the opinion that if you can spend the $ get something more reputable. if you don't have the $, save up so you can. i replaced 3 bsa "target" scopes so far for a total of probably $350.00+ between the original price of the scope, the ammo (and time) needed to re zero, gas money to to the range, shipping costs, yadda yadda.
i should have put that $ towards a nikon or something of that sort, as the bsa was on a .22lr. plus the obvious clearer, brighter, more accurrate / durable knob adjustments makes shooting more pleasant than wondering if your scope is going to crap out the next shot. plus your not wondering what that gray stuff is doing all over the place.
alot of these guys are, or where, operators. with that in mind, if YOU are heading out to the battlefield, would you want something that is battletested to take abuse or something that is off the walmart shelf? i have a 69.00 centerpoint scope on my .22 mag for small game that i swear by. however drop me off in afghanistan, or a $1500.00 elk hunt, and there's now way i'd depend on it to function flawlessly.
i have a barska on my .308 that is really nice, so i ordered another to put on my .22 to match. putting the scopes side by side, you can see that one seems good and the other not so much. (more shippping costs down the tube)
you pay the bigger $ for consistancy in quality.
are all cheap scopes junk? no. is there a place for cheap scopes? yes. but when it comes down to getting the most out of doing some serious shooting, in the long run, cheap scopes usually cost MORE than mid-priced, and in some cases, high priced scopes. took me years and years with $ down the tubes to figure this out, but there you have it.
if your interested in a cheap scope, i'll sell you my bsa 8-32x platinum, new and still sealed in the box, $50.00, you pay shipping....
the higher priced scopes aren't really about fashion, but of function.
i was ( and to some extent ) sharing the same opinion as you. however, i am now under the opinion that if you can spend the $ get something more reputable. if you don't have the $, save up so you can. i replaced 3 bsa "target" scopes so far for a total of probably $350.00+ between the original price of the scope, the ammo (and time) needed to re zero, gas money to to the range, shipping costs, yadda yadda.
i should have put that $ towards a nikon or something of that sort, as the bsa was on a .22lr. plus the obvious clearer, brighter, more accurrate / durable knob adjustments makes shooting more pleasant than wondering if your scope is going to crap out the next shot. plus your not wondering what that gray stuff is doing all over the place.
alot of these guys are, or where, operators. with that in mind, if YOU are heading out to the battlefield, would you want something that is battletested to take abuse or something that is off the walmart shelf? i have a 69.00 centerpoint scope on my .22 mag for small game that i swear by. however drop me off in afghanistan, or a $1500.00 elk hunt, and there's now way i'd depend on it to function flawlessly.
i have a barska on my .308 that is really nice, so i ordered another to put on my .22 to match. putting the scopes side by side, you can see that one seems good and the other not so much. (more shippping costs down the tube)
you pay the bigger $ for consistancy in quality.
are all cheap scopes junk? no. is there a place for cheap scopes? yes. but when it comes down to getting the most out of doing some serious shooting, in the long run, cheap scopes usually cost MORE than mid-priced, and in some cases, high priced scopes. took me years and years with $ down the tubes to figure this out, but there you have it.
if your interested in a cheap scope, i'll sell you my bsa 8-32x platinum, new and still sealed in the box, $50.00, you pay shipping....
the higher priced scopes aren't really about fashion, but of function.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: macman2564</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Really lucky!!! </div></div>
Yeah!....I wasn't so lucky...I've since learned my lesson.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: macman2564</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Really lucky!!! </div></div>
Yeah!....I wasn't so lucky...I've since learned my lesson.
Re: Cheap Optics
After handing some NCstart, Bushnell elite, Burris FFII, Burris XTR, Leupold VX-III, and Nikon Monarch scopes I was able to see a definite difference in the scopes as you go from <$100 up to <$1000. I have not had the oppurtunity, or need, to handle any higher end stuff like S&B, NF, Leupold MKIV so I can't compare them.
I have recently been able to compare my XTR-14 and USO 1-4x and honestly, I like my XTR much better. It's lighter weight, nicer reticle, no noticeable difference in clarity, and FOV was wider on my XTR. I'm no optics expert but this is my opinion.
Optics are definitely a good investment since they'll outlast your rifle and save you from wasting ammo trying to get on target.
After handing some NCstart, Bushnell elite, Burris FFII, Burris XTR, Leupold VX-III, and Nikon Monarch scopes I was able to see a definite difference in the scopes as you go from <$100 up to <$1000. I have not had the oppurtunity, or need, to handle any higher end stuff like S&B, NF, Leupold MKIV so I can't compare them.
I have recently been able to compare my XTR-14 and USO 1-4x and honestly, I like my XTR much better. It's lighter weight, nicer reticle, no noticeable difference in clarity, and FOV was wider on my XTR. I'm no optics expert but this is my opinion.
Optics are definitely a good investment since they'll outlast your rifle and save you from wasting ammo trying to get on target.
Re: Cheap Optics
I've had great experience with weaver scopes. I have a weaver classic v series 6-24x42 scope on my 300 wsm hunting rifle. That rifle has a few gouges been dropped a few times from backpacking for whitetail deer, and it's still clear and held zero. I have my grandfathers 1903a3 with a 20 year old weaver scope on top of it and it still works perfectly. Weaver has a side focus model I , might be worth looking into.
I've had great experience with weaver scopes. I have a weaver classic v series 6-24x42 scope on my 300 wsm hunting rifle. That rifle has a few gouges been dropped a few times from backpacking for whitetail deer, and it's still clear and held zero. I have my grandfathers 1903a3 with a 20 year old weaver scope on top of it and it still works perfectly. Weaver has a side focus model I , might be worth looking into.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never have been able to tell the difference in them. I have friends that only use Leo scopes or the other high dollar ones. I have only used BSA. Barska, NcStar scopes . Never had to re zero and and always start them out at 50 yds record settings of turrets and work my way out in 50 yd. increments. All results have been reproducible on all of them. Don't know if I've just been very lucky or other then name there is not much of a difference in the cheaper scope then the high dollar ones. Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky? </div></div>
Go right now and buy a lottery ticket.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never have been able to tell the difference in them. I have friends that only use Leo scopes or the other high dollar ones. I have only used BSA. Barska, NcStar scopes . Never had to re zero and and always start them out at 50 yds record settings of turrets and work my way out in 50 yd. increments. All results have been reproducible on all of them. Don't know if I've just been very lucky or other then name there is not much of a difference in the cheaper scope then the high dollar ones. Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky? </div></div>
Go right now and buy a lottery ticket.
Re: Cheap Optics
All the scope are mounted on .308 or larger rifles. They have been or at least some have been dropped bounced around in the back of my truck and God only knows what else. I do have a new scope on order still not a $1000.00 one but ain't cheap. Will see how it works oh and by the way most of the scopes are 4 years old and older. Like I said guess just lucky so far. Thanks for all the replies.
All the scope are mounted on .308 or larger rifles. They have been or at least some have been dropped bounced around in the back of my truck and God only knows what else. I do have a new scope on order still not a $1000.00 one but ain't cheap. Will see how it works oh and by the way most of the scopes are 4 years old and older. Like I said guess just lucky so far. Thanks for all the replies.
Re: Cheap Optics
I like tasco, Simmons, Falcon and just order Mueller's new 8-32x44 Side Focus. All of them are on or will be on 22s. One of them don't track but can hold over and hit stuff at 100y and 200y. My S&B and Leupy MK IV are for another time.
I like tasco, Simmons, Falcon and just order Mueller's new 8-32x44 Side Focus. All of them are on or will be on 22s. One of them don't track but can hold over and hit stuff at 100y and 200y. My S&B and Leupy MK IV are for another time.
Re: Cheap Optics
Bottom line is sometimes you get a really well made inexpensive scope and maybe it does everything you need it to. I had a Tasco like that, once. But other times those inexpensive scopes don't hold their zero, or, most often, they hold them for a while and then stop holding them.
In the end, buying a cheap scope is sort of like buying a Yugo. Or going out with a crazy girl. We've all done it, and it might seem perfectly fine, but then one day you wake up and your n*ts are on fire.
Bottom line is sometimes you get a really well made inexpensive scope and maybe it does everything you need it to. I had a Tasco like that, once. But other times those inexpensive scopes don't hold their zero, or, most often, they hold them for a while and then stop holding them.
In the end, buying a cheap scope is sort of like buying a Yugo. Or going out with a crazy girl. We've all done it, and it might seem perfectly fine, but then one day you wake up and your n*ts are on fire.
Re: Cheap Optics
It also depends are how serious you are about shooting or into this "hobby" for lack of a better word.
If you're a casual shooter, plinker, hunter,or armchair gun collector almost any optic will work ok.
If you are serious, go to matches to win,go on expensive hunting trips, or are a professional then only top glass will satisfy you.Cheap stuff may "work" but it's simply not appropriate in those cases...
It also depends are how serious you are about shooting or into this "hobby" for lack of a better word.
If you're a casual shooter, plinker, hunter,or armchair gun collector almost any optic will work ok.
If you are serious, go to matches to win,go on expensive hunting trips, or are a professional then only top glass will satisfy you.Cheap stuff may "work" but it's simply not appropriate in those cases...
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: exhogflyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It also depends are how serious you are about shooting or into this "hobby" for lack of a better word.
If you're a casual shooter, plinker, hunter,or armchair gun collector almost any optic will work ok.
If you are serious, go to matches to win,go on expensive hunting trips, or are a professional then only top glass will satisfy you.<span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="font-weight: bold">Cheap stuff may "work"</span></span> but it's simply not appropriate in those cases... </div></div>
...and it may not. Unfortunately for me, I had more of the ones that did <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> work. Dial in 2 MOA of elevation and the POI never moved. Some of the cheap chinese junk inhibits your abilty to see the target; you're better off with irons if you won't invest in a better scope. The lower tier models of the Vortex, and Sightron, the Bushnell Elite series are some examples of <1K models available. As hussien further wrecks our economy, you might even see the occasional Alpha-level scope being sold at a desperation price.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: exhogflyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It also depends are how serious you are about shooting or into this "hobby" for lack of a better word.
If you're a casual shooter, plinker, hunter,or armchair gun collector almost any optic will work ok.
If you are serious, go to matches to win,go on expensive hunting trips, or are a professional then only top glass will satisfy you.<span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="font-weight: bold">Cheap stuff may "work"</span></span> but it's simply not appropriate in those cases... </div></div>
...and it may not. Unfortunately for me, I had more of the ones that did <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> work. Dial in 2 MOA of elevation and the POI never moved. Some of the cheap chinese junk inhibits your abilty to see the target; you're better off with irons if you won't invest in a better scope. The lower tier models of the Vortex, and Sightron, the Bushnell Elite series are some examples of <1K models available. As hussien further wrecks our economy, you might even see the occasional Alpha-level scope being sold at a desperation price.
Re: Cheap Optics
For a long time, I felt the same way. I have a Tasco that is clear, bright, repeatable and has a pretty wide magnification range. I am told there were some made in Japan while others are made in China and that the Japanese models are pretty good. I don't know about that, I'll take it for what it's worth. I also have a Simmons that everyone really rags on. They are made by Meade, who just happens to make the 16" Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope I paid many thousands of $$ for. It's hard to beat those Meades!, so I figured their rifle scopes should be on par. I swore I would never pay $1k+ for a little scope many fractions the size, power, performance etc. of my 16" telescope, but one day I stumbled upon a really advantageous trade deal on a USO and decided to see what the all hubbub was. I figured at the least, I could fleece someone else and get my money back for an overpriced piece of glass when I settled for myself that there really wasn't that much difference. That's pretty much all it took. While I still think the Simmons is a "good" scope, until I compared them side by side, I didn't realize just how much better a "great" scope would be. The clarity of the USO was such that objects appear so much more discernible/legible/crisp on lower power settings than the Simmons/Tasco even at higher power settings. What I mean by that is the image is more defined and looks like it is being magnified more than a higher mag. on the other scopes. I still have my Simmons on my .22 for squirrels in the yard and crows in the garden, but my "precision" rifles sport 3 NSXs and 2 USOs. The point is, until you actually see the difference, you'll never "see" the difference.
For a long time, I felt the same way. I have a Tasco that is clear, bright, repeatable and has a pretty wide magnification range. I am told there were some made in Japan while others are made in China and that the Japanese models are pretty good. I don't know about that, I'll take it for what it's worth. I also have a Simmons that everyone really rags on. They are made by Meade, who just happens to make the 16" Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope I paid many thousands of $$ for. It's hard to beat those Meades!, so I figured their rifle scopes should be on par. I swore I would never pay $1k+ for a little scope many fractions the size, power, performance etc. of my 16" telescope, but one day I stumbled upon a really advantageous trade deal on a USO and decided to see what the all hubbub was. I figured at the least, I could fleece someone else and get my money back for an overpriced piece of glass when I settled for myself that there really wasn't that much difference. That's pretty much all it took. While I still think the Simmons is a "good" scope, until I compared them side by side, I didn't realize just how much better a "great" scope would be. The clarity of the USO was such that objects appear so much more discernible/legible/crisp on lower power settings than the Simmons/Tasco even at higher power settings. What I mean by that is the image is more defined and looks like it is being magnified more than a higher mag. on the other scopes. I still have my Simmons on my .22 for squirrels in the yard and crows in the garden, but my "precision" rifles sport 3 NSXs and 2 USOs. The point is, until you actually see the difference, you'll never "see" the difference.
Re: Cheap Optics
Wrote this earlier answering a simular question....
Here is my .02....after reading this mornings paper, worth .01...
1. As America spent itself into oblivion, China grew to become the Worlds largest lender. China is the fastest growing major economy in the world. It now has the world's third largest nominal GDP -- 30 trillion yuan ($4.4 trillion). It is a member of the World Trade Organization and is the world's third largest trading power behind the US and Germany. In short, China now spends more money on new tooling than all the other countries combined...combined. Some would not like to think so, but some of the best tooling and materials in the world now reside in China. And, whereas some would not like to think so, Chinca's ability to deliver relatively inexpensive highest end optical products is only disputed in rifle threads, and only in a poor light (at the high end) in threads like SH. So be it.
Based on what you have written, you, sir, need not a spend a single penny more than a new Millet scope will cost you. Their newest tactical line 6-25X56 is nothing short of a remarkable bargain and as close to high end glass dumping as the law allows. U.S. Optics? Leupold? NightForce? Great, great scopes and quickly becoming a requirement for about .0005% of all shooters. All the others, including you? Spend $700 and be astonished.
A note: As to the arguement of "it all breaks down to the quality of the glass itself", quite correct.....who do you think buys more of the worlds highest quality glass production than, yep....all other nations combined? And who do you think is bringing on line not one but SIX new glass facilities with the aid of all the top glass makers?
Do I like it? Hell no. But this is where we find ourselves.
No cookie for Rollin'
Wrote this earlier answering a simular question....
Here is my .02....after reading this mornings paper, worth .01...
1. As America spent itself into oblivion, China grew to become the Worlds largest lender. China is the fastest growing major economy in the world. It now has the world's third largest nominal GDP -- 30 trillion yuan ($4.4 trillion). It is a member of the World Trade Organization and is the world's third largest trading power behind the US and Germany. In short, China now spends more money on new tooling than all the other countries combined...combined. Some would not like to think so, but some of the best tooling and materials in the world now reside in China. And, whereas some would not like to think so, Chinca's ability to deliver relatively inexpensive highest end optical products is only disputed in rifle threads, and only in a poor light (at the high end) in threads like SH. So be it.
Based on what you have written, you, sir, need not a spend a single penny more than a new Millet scope will cost you. Their newest tactical line 6-25X56 is nothing short of a remarkable bargain and as close to high end glass dumping as the law allows. U.S. Optics? Leupold? NightForce? Great, great scopes and quickly becoming a requirement for about .0005% of all shooters. All the others, including you? Spend $700 and be astonished.
A note: As to the arguement of "it all breaks down to the quality of the glass itself", quite correct.....who do you think buys more of the worlds highest quality glass production than, yep....all other nations combined? And who do you think is bringing on line not one but SIX new glass facilities with the aid of all the top glass makers?
Do I like it? Hell no. But this is where we find ourselves.
No cookie for Rollin'
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">alot of these guys are, or where, operators. with that in mind, if YOU are heading out to the battlefield, would you want something that is battletested to take abuse or something that is off the walmart shelf? i have a 69.00 centerpoint scope on my .22 mag for small game that i swear by. however drop me off in afghanistan, or a $1500.00 elk hunt, and there's now way i'd depend on it to function flawlessly.
</div></div>
Not flaming anyone, just a point that should be made. Every time we discuss the subject of scope quality, this is brought up. I specifically asked those about to be deployed about taking their own weapons. Pretty unanimous: No, you cannot "take your own." Had a guy who was with a large contractor tell he couldn't take his own either.
The bottom line is this argument about "if my life depended on it, I'd take the best equipment" just doesn't wash. Military folks are almost all going to take what Uncle Sam issues you, period.
Competition? Hunting? of course. Buy what you need/want/afford. But the bottom line is hardly anybody gets to take the "best" equipment to war. We get to take stuff from the lowest bidder.
ETA To the OP: I also have had good luck with less than top-shelf optics. But I really would love to have one. My budget just won't allow it. Carry on.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">alot of these guys are, or where, operators. with that in mind, if YOU are heading out to the battlefield, would you want something that is battletested to take abuse or something that is off the walmart shelf? i have a 69.00 centerpoint scope on my .22 mag for small game that i swear by. however drop me off in afghanistan, or a $1500.00 elk hunt, and there's now way i'd depend on it to function flawlessly.
</div></div>
Not flaming anyone, just a point that should be made. Every time we discuss the subject of scope quality, this is brought up. I specifically asked those about to be deployed about taking their own weapons. Pretty unanimous: No, you cannot "take your own." Had a guy who was with a large contractor tell he couldn't take his own either.
The bottom line is this argument about "if my life depended on it, I'd take the best equipment" just doesn't wash. Military folks are almost all going to take what Uncle Sam issues you, period.
Competition? Hunting? of course. Buy what you need/want/afford. But the bottom line is hardly anybody gets to take the "best" equipment to war. We get to take stuff from the lowest bidder.
ETA To the OP: I also have had good luck with less than top-shelf optics. But I really would love to have one. My budget just won't allow it. Carry on.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PeteCamp</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I specifically asked those about to be deployed about taking their own weapons. Pretty unanimous: No, you cannot "take your own." Had a guy who was with a large contractor tell he couldn't take his own either.</div></div>
You asked about taking there own WEAPONS. Not OPTICS. There was nothing anywhere to prevent me from slapping an NC Star on the carry handle of my M16 if I wanted to. Thankfully the Marine Corps saw fit to issue an ACOG when we deployed to Africa.
If I was forward deploying as a contractor and the company did not want to equip me with an acceptable level of optics, then I would consider equipping myself. Many times its not a problem of getting the gear into the Theater, it's getting it back out.
Now on the topic of "cheap" optics. I have two "top tier" optics on my rifles. One is a USO SN-3. The other is a Aimpoint Comp M2. Amazingly these are on my WORK rifles. The rest of my "fun" guns have lower end optics because no one dies if the tracking fails. I would love to drop another USO on my HBAR parts mutt, but it ain't going to happen now. The Tasco 6-24x Varmint scope that is on it will suffice for awhile. My AR10 will get the Falcon that used to be on my work 700 until I can drop a USO or Hendsolt on it.
If you can only afford cheap optics, get a cheap optic and go shoot. Just don't attempt to convince those who use the top end that cheap optics are just as good, or that there is no reason to spend that much.
Two nights ago I did a range estimation exercise. We burned too much daylight and the sun had set before we had a chance to setup. In the dusky light the wheat was separated from the chaff. Several could not complete the exercise because they didn't have enough light. Even at 17x and the reticle turned off I could see better with my SN-3 than I could with my bare eye. It really was amazing. Now my partner was running a 50mm Mk4 and he also could still range the targets, but I believe he had to use the illumination to be able to differentiate target from reticle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PeteCamp</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I specifically asked those about to be deployed about taking their own weapons. Pretty unanimous: No, you cannot "take your own." Had a guy who was with a large contractor tell he couldn't take his own either.</div></div>
You asked about taking there own WEAPONS. Not OPTICS. There was nothing anywhere to prevent me from slapping an NC Star on the carry handle of my M16 if I wanted to. Thankfully the Marine Corps saw fit to issue an ACOG when we deployed to Africa.
If I was forward deploying as a contractor and the company did not want to equip me with an acceptable level of optics, then I would consider equipping myself. Many times its not a problem of getting the gear into the Theater, it's getting it back out.
Now on the topic of "cheap" optics. I have two "top tier" optics on my rifles. One is a USO SN-3. The other is a Aimpoint Comp M2. Amazingly these are on my WORK rifles. The rest of my "fun" guns have lower end optics because no one dies if the tracking fails. I would love to drop another USO on my HBAR parts mutt, but it ain't going to happen now. The Tasco 6-24x Varmint scope that is on it will suffice for awhile. My AR10 will get the Falcon that used to be on my work 700 until I can drop a USO or Hendsolt on it.
If you can only afford cheap optics, get a cheap optic and go shoot. Just don't attempt to convince those who use the top end that cheap optics are just as good, or that there is no reason to spend that much.
Two nights ago I did a range estimation exercise. We burned too much daylight and the sun had set before we had a chance to setup. In the dusky light the wheat was separated from the chaff. Several could not complete the exercise because they didn't have enough light. Even at 17x and the reticle turned off I could see better with my SN-3 than I could with my bare eye. It really was amazing. Now my partner was running a 50mm Mk4 and he also could still range the targets, but I believe he had to use the illumination to be able to differentiate target from reticle.
Re: Cheap Optics
Rolling Thunder...
could you please elaborate on where you get these facts about Chinese glass/ scope manufacturing? This flies in the face of everything I have heard about "quality" from China.NOT saying you are wrong but I'd like to know the source of your info..
I am in the auto repair business and I can assure there is NO evidence of ANYTHING quality coming from China.Cheap? Sure..plentiful? Yes...but most times you can almost TELL where it's made without looking at the box.And let's not even talk about Chinese tools and equipment...go look in ANY Harbor Freight store and it's obvious where that crap is made.
Of course, scopes may be the exception but I doubt it...
Rolling Thunder...
could you please elaborate on where you get these facts about Chinese glass/ scope manufacturing? This flies in the face of everything I have heard about "quality" from China.NOT saying you are wrong but I'd like to know the source of your info..
I am in the auto repair business and I can assure there is NO evidence of ANYTHING quality coming from China.Cheap? Sure..plentiful? Yes...but most times you can almost TELL where it's made without looking at the box.And let's not even talk about Chinese tools and equipment...go look in ANY Harbor Freight store and it's obvious where that crap is made.
Of course, scopes may be the exception but I doubt it...
Re: Cheap Optics
I would have to agree with Rolling Thunder if what friends in different segments of industry are telling me is true. No, I do not have hard facts in front of me. But I would compare what China is going through right now to Japan from the late 50's to the 80's (do you remember the term "Jap crap"?). The Japanese went from making cheap junk to some of the best products in the world. Not across the board but definitely in some market segments.
China is different because nothing is ever the same, but similar in the case of a country coming to grips with it's customers needs and it's own capabilities, while trying to balance investment, profit and growth.
The Chinese have typically given us what they could get away with. Several companies have leaned hard on them and they show the propensity to respond if held to a standard. To a large degree, we created this monster. We have a huge appetite for stuff that looks good. We have not invested in quality in this country, we've mortgaged that for image, and the Chinese were happy to profit from it.
I predict in the next 10 years, in some sectors, the Chinese will rival all but the best in the world and then we'll (and possibly they
) will have to look elsewhere for cheap stuff that looks like the good stuff.
John
I would have to agree with Rolling Thunder if what friends in different segments of industry are telling me is true. No, I do not have hard facts in front of me. But I would compare what China is going through right now to Japan from the late 50's to the 80's (do you remember the term "Jap crap"?). The Japanese went from making cheap junk to some of the best products in the world. Not across the board but definitely in some market segments.
China is different because nothing is ever the same, but similar in the case of a country coming to grips with it's customers needs and it's own capabilities, while trying to balance investment, profit and growth.
The Chinese have typically given us what they could get away with. Several companies have leaned hard on them and they show the propensity to respond if held to a standard. To a large degree, we created this monster. We have a huge appetite for stuff that looks good. We have not invested in quality in this country, we've mortgaged that for image, and the Chinese were happy to profit from it.
I predict in the next 10 years, in some sectors, the Chinese will rival all but the best in the world and then we'll (and possibly they
John
Re: Cheap Optics
LoneWolf...Granted the question was about weapons. The question here is about scopes. Isn't a sniper issued a weapon as well? Do snipers pull issued scopes off their weapons and replace them with the optic of their choice? What if the personal optic fails and Marines are killed as a result? I have a hard time believing any commander would allow that. I've done some family notifications and I can't fathom trying to explain that to them.
In any event, the vast majority of military folks use what is issued. And surely those issued weapons with scopes are not free to just change them out as they like? Correct?
Carry on.
ETA jrob300....some of the finest camera lenses in the world are engineered in Japan and assembled in China. The purists cringe.
LoneWolf...Granted the question was about weapons. The question here is about scopes. Isn't a sniper issued a weapon as well? Do snipers pull issued scopes off their weapons and replace them with the optic of their choice? What if the personal optic fails and Marines are killed as a result? I have a hard time believing any commander would allow that. I've done some family notifications and I can't fathom trying to explain that to them.
In any event, the vast majority of military folks use what is issued. And surely those issued weapons with scopes are not free to just change them out as they like? Correct?
Carry on.
ETA jrob300....some of the finest camera lenses in the world are engineered in Japan and assembled in China. The purists cringe.
Re: Cheap Optics
I've broken a couple of Bushnell Banners, a couple of BSAs, and a Simmons. I've since turned in my opinion on some cheap glass being great for the opinion that you generally get what you pay for.
That being said, I have a wife and two kids to feed on my salary, so my most expensive scope is a Leupy Mk4.
I've broken a couple of Bushnell Banners, a couple of BSAs, and a Simmons. I've since turned in my opinion on some cheap glass being great for the opinion that you generally get what you pay for.
That being said, I have a wife and two kids to feed on my salary, so my most expensive scope is a Leupy Mk4.
Re: Cheap Optics
My father put a Tasco Silver Antler (super cheap) on top of a 45-70 HandiRifle. I spent lunch zeroing it for him, and I discovered that the adjustment directions on the turret were reversed!
Later that day, a friend of mine used the rifle to shoot at a really nice 9-point, but the buck was at a further range than the range that we zeroed.
When he changed the magnification, the zero of the weapon changed. YES, we should have checked this after our zero, but I was very suprised to find this out. Of course, a 45-70 isn't the flattest shooting thing in the world either, but that shouldn't have mattered with a shot under 100 yards.
As you've guessed, he shot over the deer's back. We've nicknamed the deer "Barnes" with a nod to Platoon ("only guy who can kill Barnes is Barnes...").
Moral of the story: Tasco Silver Antler may be too cheap.
My father put a Tasco Silver Antler (super cheap) on top of a 45-70 HandiRifle. I spent lunch zeroing it for him, and I discovered that the adjustment directions on the turret were reversed!
Later that day, a friend of mine used the rifle to shoot at a really nice 9-point, but the buck was at a further range than the range that we zeroed.
When he changed the magnification, the zero of the weapon changed. YES, we should have checked this after our zero, but I was very suprised to find this out. Of course, a 45-70 isn't the flattest shooting thing in the world either, but that shouldn't have mattered with a shot under 100 yards.
As you've guessed, he shot over the deer's back. We've nicknamed the deer "Barnes" with a nod to Platoon ("only guy who can kill Barnes is Barnes...").
Moral of the story: Tasco Silver Antler may be too cheap.
Re: Cheap Optics
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never have been able to tell the difference in them. I have friends that only use Leo scopes or the other high dollar ones. I have only used BSA. Barska, NcStar scopes . Never had to re zero and and always start them out at 50 yds record settings of turrets and work my way out in 50 yd. increments. All results have been reproducible on all of them. Don't know if I've just been very lucky or other then name there is not much of a difference in the cheaper scope then the high dollar ones. Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky? </div></div>
I think you have been really lucky thus far. Here is a post I made ranking all the scopes I have now or have had in the past : http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...332#Post1379332
The BSA are ranked at the bottom due to optical clarity, it's inability to track correctly, zero will shift when you changed the power setting especially as you transition from clockwise turn to a counterclockwise turn on your power ring adjustment and vise versa (if you don't believe me then try looking through the scope with a bore sighter attached and then do the test--you will see the shift in zero).
Save up for better optics (Sightron SIII series, Nikons, Weavers, Bushnell Elite 6500 for SF and more adjustment, 4200 for SF and lower cost, 3200 10x tactical for best value)
Hope this helps
Gene
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezmedic54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Never have been able to tell the difference in them. I have friends that only use Leo scopes or the other high dollar ones. I have only used BSA. Barska, NcStar scopes . Never had to re zero and and always start them out at 50 yds record settings of turrets and work my way out in 50 yd. increments. All results have been reproducible on all of them. Don't know if I've just been very lucky or other then name there is not much of a difference in the cheaper scope then the high dollar ones. Anyone have or have had the same results or am I just really lucky? </div></div>
I think you have been really lucky thus far. Here is a post I made ranking all the scopes I have now or have had in the past : http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...332#Post1379332
The BSA are ranked at the bottom due to optical clarity, it's inability to track correctly, zero will shift when you changed the power setting especially as you transition from clockwise turn to a counterclockwise turn on your power ring adjustment and vise versa (if you don't believe me then try looking through the scope with a bore sighter attached and then do the test--you will see the shift in zero).
Save up for better optics (Sightron SIII series, Nikons, Weavers, Bushnell Elite 6500 for SF and more adjustment, 4200 for SF and lower cost, 3200 10x tactical for best value)
Hope this helps
Gene
Similar threads
Night Vision
Bare minimum Thermal scope and mono recommendation
