Rifle Scopes How much to spend on glass

[Dthomas3523]

Just as easily as people can claim that people are just justifying their expensive purchase, I can say posts like this are justifying being poor, stupid, broke, and jealous.

I’ve used optics that cost $500 and I’ve used optics that costs $5k. I wish I could run the $500 as hard and just spend the $4500 on n ammo and training.

Case in point, I could be running a $6k hendsoldt. But I I prefer the reticles and features of the zcomp which is $3600.

I’d love for a $1k optic to have all the features and craftsmanship as the zcomp. But, I’ve tried most off all them and there ain’t one out there.

If I like the TT reticles and 50m parallax, I’d say the same for them.

There’s a difference in just buying expensive shit (hendsoldt) for sake of owning it, and buying something that is worth the money to you.

 

[BigRed308]

For what it is worth, I went with a Gen i Razor for my first precision rifle scope. I was strongly considering the PST gen ii-the go to recommendation for new shooters. However, I did second guess my decision to purchase an older generation scope. But I gained elevation adjustment so I justified it with myself. With that being said, if the scope checks all the boxes you need and you like the scope overall-Why does it matter if its the best scope out there? Will you ever get to the point where the scope holds you back? I know this perspective completely bypasses reliability, but that would be a box that I would have to have checked. So in my mind, the Gen ii has been tested and spoke highly off by lots of shooters. If that scope checks your boxes then get one boxed up and shipped your way. The same thing goes for cost, if its in your budget then go for it. If it is above, decide if you can reasonably save for it. We are all going to dream about scopes and rifles that we don't have.

But keep in mind, its just my opinion. Hence why I bolded the first statement. I am sure I will get slack for this, but as a casual shooter, it is just my viewpoint.

 

[Dthomas3523]

For what it is worth, I went with a Gen i Razor for my first precision rifle scope. I was strongly considering the PST gen ii-the go to recommendation for new shooters. However, I did second guess my decision to purchase an older generation scope. But I gained elevation adjustment so I justified it with myself. With that being said, if the scope checks all the boxes you need and you like the scope overall-Why does it matter if its the best scope out there? Will you ever get to the point where the scope holds you back? I know this perspective completely bypasses reliability, but that would be a box that I would have to have checked. So in my mind, the Gen ii has been tested and spoke highly off by lots of shooters. If that scope checks your boxes then get one boxed up and shipped your way.

But keep in mind, its just my opinion. Hence why I bolded the first statement. I am sure I will get slack for this, but as a casual shooter, it is just my viewpoint.

Nothing wrong with this at all. But you’re not out there telling people it’s just as good as something at a different price and quality level.

Shoot whatever you want and whatever works for you. But don’t lie to yourself about what you have (not directed at you).

 

[Boostinmarc4]

This statement is wrong.

Cheap shit does not provide the same mechanical reliability as non cheap shit.

For every example you can name which someone did well with a cheap optic, I can name 100 where they didn’t.

It’s not because everyone wants to spend their money.

If I could get $3500 performance for $1k I would.

Take a Ford Focus and hold the pedal down, see how far and how fast you can go before it burns up. Now go take a Ferrari and do the same thing.

I am not arguing that there is no advantage, but per your example most people are not race car drivers and are not running their scopes to max revs and back down every shot. That said Vortex and Athlon both offer unlimited lifetime warranties, and you can call and talk to a live person with both companies. I'm in no way saying there is not an advantage to a top end optic but I would say it's a smaller difference than you want to admit. That's not to say it is not worth it but it's also not a big enough difference to belittle someone who cannot afford it. I love my Minox and cannot wait for my ZCo but they are not going to make me shoot better than the guy with a razor gen ii just because of my 10% better clearer questionably more reliable scope...

 

[pitdog85]

Just as easily as people can claim that people are just justifying their expensive purchase, I can say posts like this are justifying being poor, stupid, broke, and jealous.

I’ve used optics that cost $500 and I’ve used optics that costs $5k. I wish I could run the $500 as hard and just spend the $4500 on n ammo and training.

Case in point, I could be running a $6k hendsoldt. But I I prefer the reticles and features of the zcomp which is $3600.

I’d love for a $1k optic to have all the features and craftsmanship as the zcomp. But, I’ve tried most off all them and there ain’t one out there.

If I like the TT reticles and 50m parallax, I’d say the same for them.

There’s a difference in just buying expensive shit (hendsoldt) for sake of owning it, and buying something that is worth the money to you.

John Armstrong will still wipe the floor with you with his swfa scope.

 

[lawofsavage]

John Armstrong will still wipe the floor with you with his swfa scope.

So, because Jerry Miculek could wipe the floor with my ass with an m&p, I shouldn’t ever buy a more expensive handgun than that?

Man, I bet you’re fun at parties.

This shit is getting ridiculous, no one judges you negatively if you choose not to spend the money for high end optics. It’s the exact opposite actually, people respect it that you’re getting out there and actually doing something even when you can’t have the best equipment. But, it’s annoying as fuck to listen to whining and bitching about what gear you think other people should use and why I shouldn’t have bought a minox or s&b just because someone did well with an swfa and you think I Shouldn’t Spend any more money than that. It’s America for fuck sake, it’s okay to work hard and enjoy nice shit because it’s nice.

 

[Boostinmarc4]

So, because Jerry Miculek could wipe the floor with my ass with an m&p, I shouldn’t ever buy a more expensive handgun than that?

Man, I bet you’re fun at parties.

This shit is getting ridiculous, no one judges you negatively if you choose not to spend the money for high end optics. It’s the exact opposite actually, people respect it that you’re getting out there and actually doing something even when you can’t have the best equipment. But, it’s annoying as fuck to listen to whining and bitching about what gear you think other people should use and why I shouldn’t have bought a minox or s&b just because someone did well with an swfa and you think I Shouldn’t Spend any more money than that. It’s America for fuck sake, it’s okay to work hard and enjoy nice shit because it’s nice.

Jerry Miculek could do unspeakable things to you with a hi-point...

That said good on you for your awesome scope...

 

[lawofsavage]

Jerry Miculek could do unspeakable things to you with a hi-point...

That said good on you for your awesome scope...

You seem like one of those guys who intentionally goes to matches with the shittiest gear he can get away with and people still think he’s serious about competing hoping someone will give him free shit or their spot at the prize table, takes the free shit gladly then still non stop runs their cock holster how everything is too expensive and the top shooters bought their way to the podium blah blah blah after people went out of their way to help you

 

[acudaowner]

I skimpped on the rifle so i could get better glass , figured as a newer shooter I settled on a 308 rpr to learn and shoot up I wanted a barrett or ai which would have been a waist of money for me at that time . The rpr was 1050 at the time other guns more like 4-6k , I spent 3k on glass . Mostly the glass is something to grow into rather than grow out of . I only last week had the chance to shoot at 1000 yards . I still have a long way to go and a lot more to learn and tons of scope yet to use . Now if i could only avoid the shiny squirrels i see in the forums every other day .

 

[Boostinmarc4]

Maybe or maybe I don't actively feel the need to call other ppl's gear crap. You can say all you want to me but do you actually feel good telling the OP his stuff is not as good as yours? Does that make you feel better about you?

 

[Singleshot]

???

 

[bodywerks]

Sometimes you're paying for more than the glass. a Super solid, rugged, accurate, repeatable erector system that tracks at a correction factor of 1.000. Honestly, that's harder to achieve than great, clear glass. My Kahles, IMO, has so-so glass compared to some of the big hitters in the glass department(Swarovski, S&B for example), but it is a super solid rig that I know will track reliably, every time.

 

[MakeSawdust]

These discussions get on my nerves. A good shooter can take an XTRii, put it on an accurate rifle, and win. If I had an impact action in a foundation stock with a bartlien chambered by the best smith in the country with a z comp or a TT I probably wouldn't win a match. I might place a couple places higher than I normally do with my Savage and XTRII, but I know it wouldn't make me win. I need a shitload more trigger time and training for that. I also understand that cheap shit breaks more often than expensive shit. If you have the means and want to run the expensive shit, then by all means run it. I've seen expensive shit break too. The reality is that match fees and travel and ammo to be a serious comp shooter are way more expensive than a rifle or a scope. Even a damn good one. The other reality is that most of us do this for FUN. Life isn't fun when you are broke and working 16 hrs seven days a week to afford to keep up with the rich guys on Sniper's Hide. Live within your means and have fun in life. Don't belittle people who have less than you and don't get jealous of the people that have more. Chances are, if they have more, it is because they worked for it and made smart decisions that lead to that. If you want to make more money, work toward it. If you would rather put your time, effort, and money into something other than shooting, then do it. It's America. Everyone isn't going to be interested in the same things, and some people like to dabble, which I find extremely annoying, but it is there right to piddle around and do their hobbies half assed if they want. It's also okay if they want to have five kids and a job that allows them to spend time with their family while they shoot cheap shitty equipment. For most of us shooting isn't a job where the case can be made that you NEED good equipment. It is just fun. Our level of success is typically tied to how much effort we put into it, whether in the form of practice and training or in the form of working to purchase better equipment. Those who are most successful tend to put a lot of effort toward both, but in doing so typically have to steal that effort from other aspects of life. Our society has become very specialized and less well rounded. In order to be exceptional at one thing in comparison to your peers often involves some sacrifice in other aspects of life. For some it is worth the sacrifice, to others it is not. Such is life. It is each person's right to choose what they would like to excel at and what they would just like to dabble in. We have more choices now than ever which apparently just means more shit to argue about. Isn't it great?

 

[Rekkr870]

Y'all wild.

You don't have to spend 4k on an optic for it to reliably track or hit targets at 1000 meters. That being said, a 4k optic will definitely have some features that a 2k optic will not have. We have the opportunity to buy quality optics for a decent price (generally 1.5k and up).

"Just as good" is also relative. Just as good in what? Tracking? Features? Glass?

Diminishing returns and all of that. Spend your money on what lets you sleep better at night. Just go shoot and get off the internet for a bit. It's not that serious.

 

[patriot07]

It's not that serious.

This is very good advice. People on here often take stuff way, way too seriously. Maybe it's because they're too financially invested and aren't able to lighten up? Not sure.


I've looked through most scopes in the TT and below price range at this point. I think for shooting 1,500 yards and in, you probably aren't going to get any more hits with a TT/ZCO/etc. than you would with a Razor Gen 2 or a Delta Stryker. The Razor and Delta are both fantastic scopes with good glass, good reticles, reliable tracking, and solid designs. Are the higher end scopes a little more pleasant to use with slightly better glass and more refined turret feel and other improvements? Sure. Are you going to hit more targets? Probably not. I don't believe it has anything to do with being able to run them harder before they fail. Awhile back some dude torqued his rings on a TT to 20 in-lbs and it couldn't handle it. I've got a buddy with an SWFA HD 5-20 that's been to he11 and back and still runs like a champ. The TT is a better scope and I'd never argue that it wasn't, but don't pretend that it's more reliable just because it costs more. Each scope has different features that make it valuable to users. There are plenty of reliable scopes with good glass in the medium price ranges, but there are also perfectly valid reasons that people pay $4k-$5k for the high end stuff. To each their own - nothing wrong with either approach.

 

[Dthomas3523]

This is very good advice. People on here often take stuff way, way too seriously. Maybe it's because they're too financially invested and aren't able to lighten up? Not sure.


I've looked through most scopes in the TT and below price range at this point. I think for shooting 1,500 yards and in, you probably aren't going to get any more hits with a TT/ZCO/etc. than you would with a Razor Gen 2 or a Delta Stryker. The Razor and Delta are both fantastic scopes with good glass, good reticles, reliable tracking, and solid designs. Are the higher end scopes a little more pleasant to use with slightly better glass and more refined turret feel and other improvements? Sure. Are you going to hit more targets? Probably not. I don't believe it has anything to do with being able to run them harder before they fail. Awhile back some dude torqued his rings on a TT to 20 in-lbs and it couldn't handle it. I've got a buddy with an SWFA HD 5-20 that's been to he11 and back and still runs like a champ. The TT is a better scope and I'd never argue that it wasn't, but don't pretend that it's more reliable just because it costs more. Each scope has different features that make it valuable to users. There are plenty of reliable scopes with good glass in the medium price ranges, but there are also perfectly valid reasons that people pay $4k-$5k for the high end stuff. To each their own - nothing wrong with either approach.

That’s all well and good. And I’ll be the first to tell someone that if you can only afford to either buy 2 razor gen 2 or one zcomp, buy the 2 razors. Hands down.

But, this shit of either poor, broke, stupid, or jealous guys talking shit because they don’t have an expensive optic is just retarded.

Shoot your cheap shit, shoot your expensive shit. Don’t care. You can’t buy skills and you also can buy a pile of shit scope.

As long as you stay in the middle ground unless you can afford better, you’re fine.

Also.......this isn’t directed at you, but don’t say “so and so won an ELR even with cheap optic.”

They are laying prone on the dirt taking like 10 shots. Not beating the optic around barricades and such. Zero comparison.

When someone wins a PRS match or the series with an Athlon Argos......come find me. Otherwise, spend 12-1800 minimum and get yourself some quality.

 

[Boostinmarc4]

Just for clarification, I hope I didn't come across jealous. I am happy with the stuff I've got I just dont want others to get put down for what they have or can afford...

 

[Dthomas3523]

Just for clarification, I hope I didn't come across jealous. I am happy with the stuff I've got I just dont want others to get put down for what they have or can afford...

Honestly don’t remember if you did or didn’t. I’m making general statements. There’s a growing number of members here that are giving advice that a $400 optic will do the same as a $1500 optic and anything more than $400 is a waste of money.

 

[K.B.808]

I can add in what was passed on to me...

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...or-not-when-purchasing-quality-glass.6897756/

 

[Joshuaray83]

Contact Allen at aaoptics

Welcome to A&A Optics Inc - Certified Vortex Dealer

these are refurbished, and carry the same lifetime warranty. Everyone I bought from them come in like new condition.

Wow, they have really good prices. I've been looking to buy a used PST and these seem to be cheaper than what I can find here.

 

[pitdog85]

That’s all well and good. And I’ll be the first to tell someone that if you can only afford to either buy 2 razor gen 2 or one zcomp, buy the 2 razors. Hands down.

But, this shit of either poor, broke, stupid, or jealous guys talking shit because they don’t have an expensive optic is just retarded.

Shoot your cheap shit, shoot your expensive shit. Don’t care. You can’t buy skills and you also can buy a pile of shit scope.

As long as you stay in the middle ground unless you can afford better, you’re fine.

Also.......this isn’t directed at you, but don’t say “so and so won an ELR even with cheap optic.”

They are laying prone on the dirt taking like 10 shots. Not beating the optic around barricades and such. Zero comparison.

When someone wins a PRS match or the series with an Athlon Argos......come find me. Otherwise, spend 12-1800 minimum and get yourself some quality.

Actually you douche he went 3 from 3 and he most likely would wipe the floor with you with your gay PRS shit too.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Actually you douche he went 3 from 3 and he most likely would wipe the floor with you with your gay PRS shit too.

So......his glass held up for 3 shots.

Fucking awesome. Must be better than Schmidt.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Again, good for anyone using whatever priced glass.

But keep it in perspective. Some dude somewhere (don’t care who it is, no one will remember him, me, or you), made 3 shots from prone with some cheap glass.

Cool story bro. His skill level doesn’t dictate the quality of the optic.

 

[BigRed308]

Wow, they have really good prices. I've been looking to buy a used PST and these seem to be cheaper than what I can find here.

Contact @Rsos2313 first at Mahoning Valley Milling. I just ordered a NIB PST Gen ii for a price that made me question if it was used.

 

[BigRed308]

I just want to reiterate the idea that someone will always have something better that we want. The shooter next to us will always have clearer glass or better tracking in his scope or a smoother bolt or smaller SD and ES in his load data. No matter what, there is always something and someone better than us.

 

[steve123]

Scopes I have

3-15 swfa’s
Bushnell lrhs
nightforce nxs 5.5-20
Burris veracity
Burris mtac 4.5-14
Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5-16

I like most of these scopes, the real question is how much $$$ do I have to spend to buy a new scope that will make me say damn that’s a fine piece of glass?

My eyes might be bad but to me I can’t tell much difference between the nxs and the Bushnells

Also the eye box on the swfa seems to be easier for me to get behind than the rest.

Bottom line I’m looking a mil/mil ffp scope with glass that’s a lot better than what I have with a very forgiving eye box.

If anybody has any recommendations please I’m all ears. Thanks for the help.

Just gonna make some comments but some of this has been covered already.

I was pretty much like you but when I had the same questions it was 10 years ago, so many of the scopes available now didn't exist.

I went through most of the different brands of scopes starting with SFP and finalizing on FFP. 20 -30 scopes, maybe more??? As of today I've at least looked through a large cast of the scopes out there, as well as handling them.

Starting at $250 and the most I've spent on a scope was $3850.

On this journey I learned what features I liked the most, what poor glass was and what great glass was, etc, etc, on and on, concerning many aspects of rifle scopes.

But to me it's the whole of the scope that matters most, not just glass, not just this or that. What makes a certain scope stand out vs the others that are similar??? Obviously we all have different ideas about the this's and that's, so I'll leave it at that.

Don't assume x brand, or y brand, or any brand for that matter, will be perfect. regardless of price one can still find fault. Also there is variance among examples, the same scope brand, model, and shipment, can differ.

There's a new brand that is mentioned in this very thread, a friend bought one and is about ready to send it back the second time for repair. Otherwise I have to admit it's a wonderful scope in just about every way??!!

So far the best glass I've looked through in a rifle scope was a Swaro X5 but it's SFP and has things about it I wouldn't want. TT and the old Premier were right up there. Others might disagree.

Right now to me one of the best bargains I see are the used S&B 5-25 PM2's. It's still a WOW scope in many ways including glass! I haven't been able to talk myself into selling mine to upgrade and I don't see the more expensive scopes being a "big" improvement on it. If you aren't picky about reticles look into this brand. Seems like you could get into one for $2000 maybe a little less.

If money were no object for me I'd get a TT with their new reticle, man that's a lot of money - eek.

The less expensive scopes will disappoint, sorry. They cannot compete in fit, finish, feel, glass, etc, to the WOW scopes, or at least not all at the same time. Like pitbuls SWFA example, that guys might track well but it still falls short in most ways when compared.

 

[Joshuaray83]

Edit: wrong quote

 

[Joshuaray83]

Contact @Rsos2313 first at Mahoning Valley Milling. I just ordered a NIB PST Gen ii for a price that made me question if it was used.

I'll have to get with them. I have a tight budget, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

 

[AllWorkAndNoPlay]

Nightforce for 2k = happiness

 

[BigRed308]

Nightforce for 2k = happiness

Which model?

 

[AllWorkAndNoPlay]

Which model?

OP listed this one: https://www.sportoptics.com/nightforce-nxs-5-5-22-50-scopes.aspx

 

[Boostinmarc4]

Right now to me one of the best bargains I see are the used S&B 5-25 PM2's. It's still a WOW scope in many ways including glass! I haven't been able to talk myself into selling mine to upgrade and I don't see the more expensive scopes being a "big" improvement on it. If you aren't picky about reticles look into this brand. Seems like you could get into one for $2000 maybe a little less.

If money were no object for me I'd get a TT with their new reticle, man that's a lot of money - eek.

The less expensive scopes will disappoint, sorry. They cannot compete in fit, finish, feel, glass, etc, to the WOW scopes, or at least not all at the same time. Like pitbuls SWFA example, that guys might track well but it still falls short in most ways when compared.

I totally agree with most of this. Certainly you can get awesome scopes used for a great price.

When dealing with a budget though compromises have to be made, and some things are more important than others. I believe tracking is most important then reticle then glass. With that math some "value" scopes will be more usable than others. $1500-$2000 will buy you a scope that tracks and has a lifetime warranty but it will be tough to spend less than that even used that will be repeatable and reliable. With that said there are some things you won't get and the fit finish wont be the same but it will be functionally gtg. Also not all scopes at those price are created equal but there is a lot of reviews to find out which are better than others.

 

[pineoak]

Scopes are the best example of "diminishing returns"

The LRHS I had was excellent glass. Kahles, NF, RazorG2, S&B aren't going to be THAT much better IMO.

What you're paying more for is reticle, elevation, etc.

I feel the RG2 is pretty close to being the cliff of where diminishing returns drops off

The LRHS is fairly lose to the RG2.

In terms of glass, about 10-15% diff IMO

Less than 10% going up from the Razor

 

[Steel head]

I’d surely regret not spending at least 1-1.5 grand now that I’ve seen the light.

I’d spend more if I could.

 

[RobbinsHGray]

Or: I got a scope for my wife once. It was a good trade.

 

[Almonz]

Buy the best you can for what you can realistically afford. It's not worth burying yourself financially over glass. If you have a true need for tier 1 stuff then by all means save up the cash and get something in that genre, but be realistic with what you are actually doing. I have seen people with S&Bs who shoot like once a year and then it's a safe queen. Not saying this is the norm with S&B owners, but my point is if you don't need something of that caliber why dump the coin on one? Just my .02

 

[flyer]

Years ago I bought a scope to put on my first truly accurate rifle. Budget was a consideration so I got an $800 Minox ZA5 (I think) 6-30x56. It's SFP, no illuminated reticle, less internal adjustment than I would prefer, no zero stop and MOA with a BDC reticle.

I had to mount it on a 20 MOA base to compensate for the limited internal adjustment but since then it has been working. The image gets soft above about 24x but it's usable at 1,000 yards.

It wasn't a great choice but it never really left me regretting the purchase.

I'm trying to go to scopes with more of the bells and whistles and equal or better glass these days but you won't really waste money on a quality value model scope if you're starting out and can hand it down to another rifle if you decide to upgrade.

I think it's a lot easier to lose money on a $3,000 scope if you jump in blind, buy the wrong one and then have to flip a used scope in to what you really want.

 

[Rthur]

If you are close or have the chance attend a match look through
as many scopes as you can.
On zero day you're likely to find almost all of the scopes mentioned in this post.
Most guys are happy to let you jump behind their rigs and give a look.
Reticle choice may influence your "prefered" choice as well.
Minimum parallax could be as well, especially if you compete in NRL22.
I've always looked at scopes as an investment.
On the top tier you'll almost always get 80ish% or better of your money back.

R

 

[jd5521]

 

[Dthomas3523]

Get a credit card, and get a zcomp, theta, Schmidt, or hendsoldt.

Keep it for a while, claim to shoot matches, and then sell it somehow without it being scratched on and dinged up.

 

[pineoak]

Get a credit card, and get a zcomp, theta, Schmidt, or hendsoldt.

Keep it for a while, claim to shoot matches, and then sell it somehow without it being scratched on and dinged up.

That is funny!!! I still remember the "Ah, sh!t" moment I had when the turret of my brand new AMG clipped the bottom of a hole in a barricade on the clock. No scratch or damage, but a moment I will never forget.

Also reminds me of a guy that literally kicked over his new AI AXMC with an older S&B when he tried to jump over it waiting his turn on a stage. We ALL felt his pain that day. He said it wasn't a big deal, but still... bolt guns are NOT ARs

Ultimately, I would put $$ on glass over rifle, but never push the budget enough that you didn't have enough $ left over to shoot and compete anytime I wanted as much as I wanted if schedule allows for it.

I'd rather shoot a cheap .308 with a thick barrel and an old PST running $0.35 rounds anytime I wanted even competing with bulk ammo and having a great time- than have an amazing scope/rifle/gear but be at work all the time unable to use them (all you drs & dentists out there know the feeling...) or not have enough left over to shoot as often as I had time for. Just my opinion.

Reminds me of surfers I knew back in the day that were borderline homeless and just spent their days surfing. They didn't worry about their retirements or saving for a downpayment on a house, they just surfed and hung out with sunbathers. I wonder if they did it right. They're probably homeless with 6 kids by 4 women now, but they certainly enjoyed their youth.

 

[geek65]

I am based in the UK so prices are different. However, I have number of scope of different rifles:

Hawke on rimfire rifles (x2)

Sightron SIII 8-32 x 56 with LRMOA reticle (£1000) - on my Ruger PR

S&B PM II 12-50 x 56 (P4 Fin reticle) (£2500)- on my AI AT

Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10 x 32 Gen 1 (£550), the Gen 2 is £926

Whilst the S&B is a fantastic scope, I have shot the Sightron out to 1000 yards and not felt compromised in any way by the scope.

If you can stretch the budget ( I am unaware of costs within the US) , I would have no hesitation in recommending Sightron or Vortex for the money.