Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

[BobinNC]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

I don't know if you should spend more on the glass or rifle, but the rifle is consuming most of the cash.....

308 LTR Project

Rem 700 LTR 308 new $838.
Farrell 0 MOA Base $89.00
Burris Signature 30mm Zee Rings $39.00
Timney Trigger w/Safety #512 $135.00
Seekins SRS Rail 2" H-S hole Spacing $45.00
Atlas Bipod $209.00
SWFA SS 3-9x42mm $609.00
New H-S Precision Stock PSV096 $310.00 (wanted a stock with a longer forend)

Less Parts Sold:

Sold H-S LTR Stock $250.00

Total Spent to Date, including optics: $2024.00

Planned Buys:

AZ Precision Tactical Bolt Handle $60.
Seekins DBM/Floorplate $299.00
Spare Mags-3= $180.00

Total Project: $2563.00

Bob

 

[chad3]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

At least as much, if you can't see it you can't shoot it, if you can see it and can't shoot it, you know you need to upgrade your stick. Mine is about equal. Maybe a lesser stick could still get the same performance, so could be more.
Chad

 

[Swamper]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Hey Chad,

You said "...If you can't see it you can't shoot it".
Just wondering what that means to you and so many guys here?

Is there, to your mind, any really valid reason to favor a scope with better optics over one with "good" optics and equal elevation and reticle movement accuracy? Is it worth an additional $500? $1000, $1900 for "better glass"???

I am sure all this depends on what size target you intend to perforate, but at longrange, are you or do you know anyone who is a "surgical shooter" under any/all conditions? How does the scope influence the "conditions". Does "good glass" enable better mirage visualization? Certainly doesn't mitigate or solve a mirage problem, in my experience.


It really amazes me to see the "best glass" scopes continually touted. How much do the damn things weigh?

I am more concerned about reducing weight so my TRG42 can stay under 15lbs. Don't need no brake. Don't need no bipod. Don't need a 48oz scope and a 1.25 pound set of rings and base.

Maybe you guys go afield with Gunga Din and Tenzing Norgay to hump your "sniping gear"; not me. Not only that, but I'm not sitting behind the scope on my belly continually.

Maybe there is a difference between precision field shooting and sniping, but since the first snipers were expert hunters and match target shots pressed into service during WWI, I think the overspecialization of gear and rifles that are 18-20lbs is ridiculous.

What do you say?

 

[BobinNC]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: chad3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At least as much, if you can't see it you can't shoot it, if you can see it and can't shoot it, you know you need to upgrade your stick. Mine is about equal. Maybe a lesser stick could still get the same performance, so could be more.
Chad </div></div>

Chad,

I'll not disagree with you, because truly "if you can't see your target you can't shoot it". But "seeing" is not the only function of a scope. A scope is an aiming device. You could have the "best" glass in the world, and be able to "see" your target, but if you can't "see" your dang reticle, then your scope is useless as an aiming device.

If for the moment lay aside issues like FFP and MIL/MIL turrets, there is not a great deal of difference in the glass (the seeing part), between a $1000. scope and a $3000. scope. Both will have glass that will allow you to "see" your target, out as far as your rifle can shoot. But the $3k scope is likely to be more rugged, have more precise adjustments (better turrets), and better reticle design and overall utility, than the $1k scope.

Not all of use here on the Hide, put our lives on the line(or the lives of others), or travel nationwide to compete in Tactical competitions. Sure we could all put a $3k scope to good use. And a Porsche Cayenne will get me to the 7-11 faster and safer than my Nissan 4x4.

I don't think anybody is dumb or foolish for spending $3k on a scope. I also don't think somebody spending $1k or less on a scope is dumb or cheap either. Both have their place, but I believe that a persons skill as a shooter should be measured by their results on target, not their equipment list.

Regards,

Bob

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

No rule of thumb, get what's adequate to your needs (i.e. it does not hamper your potential) and spend as much of the build money as you can spare on a good .22LR and an adequate reloading setup. Both will do far more for you, buck for buck, than any single additional feature or capability added to an already adequate rifle.

Many folks think that an exquisite implement is the only means to achieving any reasonable potential. The fact is, the grand majority of us, myself included, are simply incapable of demonstrating any significantly improved potential with a scalpel than we are with a perfectly conventional butter knife.

Buy whatever you want, but don't expect miracles.

Greg

 

[Downzero]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobinNC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chad,

I'll not disagree with you, because truly "if you can't see your target you can't shoot it". But "seeing" is not the only function of a scope. A scope is an aiming device. You could have the "best" glass in the world, and be able to "see" your target, but if you can't "see" your dang reticle, then your scope is useless as an aiming device.

If for the moment lay aside issues like FFP and MIL/MIL turrets, there is not a great deal of difference in the glass (the seeing part), between a $1000. scope and a $3000. scope. Both will have glass that will allow you to "see" your target, out as far as your rifle can shoot. But the $3k scope is likely to be more rugged, have more precise adjustments (better turrets), and better reticle design and overall utility, than the $1k scope.

Not all of use here on the Hide, put our lives on the line(or the lives of others), or travel nationwide to compete in Tactical competitions. Sure we could all put a $3k scope to good use. And a Porsche Cayenne will get me to the 7-11 faster and safer than my Nissan 4x4.

I don't think anybody is dumb or foolish for spending $3k on a scope. I also don't think somebody spending $1k or less on a scope is dumb or cheap either. Both have their place, but I believe that a persons skill as a shooter should be measured by their results on target, not their equipment list.

Regards,

Bob
</div></div>

I couldn't agree more. We have an awful lot of "gear queers" here on this site. We also have a sizable population of AMAZING shooters.

I don't have $2300 invested in my rifle and I beat an awful lot of people at my first and only F-class match, including a guy with a $2000 rifle and a $2000 scope on top.

Equipment will never make you a shooter. Buy whatever you prefer, put some glass on it, LOAD YOUR OWN AMMO AND GO SHOOT!

Nothing, no aiming device, no perfect glass, i mean NOTHING can improve your shooting like GOOD PRACTICE.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pengilly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What about bushnell 4200 elete 6 x 24 x 50??? Not a bad scope at all and only about $500 shims.I use one on my 308 it shoot very well, And it dials in yardage time after time. Expensive glass is not always easy to sell unless its a real deal. Do you reload? </div></div>

That's the scope I have, I paid something like $425 for it and I can hit the X ring at 600 yards with Varget and 155 grain SMKs.

If I, as a relatively new (to scoped rifles, anyway) shooter can ring the X ring at 600 yards with a $500 scope on a ~$1200 rifle, anyone can.

Get some ammo and get to the range. Equipment will not make up for a driver who doesn't know his weapon.

And I'll admit it because not too many people do around here. I'm not a 1/4 MOA shooter. I'm not even a 3/4 MOA shooter. I'm a 1 1/2 MOA shooter on a bad day and a 1 MOA shooter on my best day.

Practice is what makes you good. The rest is just details.

When you see someone truly amazing win a match, you don't ask him what kind of gun he used, you ask him how he got that good.

Just like nobody asks Michael Jordan what kind of shoes he wears or Tiger Woods what kind of club he swings, no amount of amazing equipment will turn you into a natural athlete.

Only practice will do that. That's why I have a $1200 rifle with a stock chamber. And 5-10 years from now when there's no rifling left in the barrel, I'll call up Krieger or Broughton or one of those outfits and I'll send my rifle in for all the workings.

Until then, nothing is stopping me from becoming amazing other than my own will (and $$$) to practice.

This is my rifle:


And it will shoot like a laser if you do your part.

 

[ScottyS]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Buy one scope. That means that on a budget, you spend more on the glass initially. Even a factory Remington or Savage will shoot good enough, but a second-rate optic will only give you a handicap, or at worst, time consuming problems.

I'm not a gear freak, and I'm very tight with the cash. I have no problem dropping money on good glass, and running with a mediocre rifle. A good shooter can make a mediocre rifle work, but without good reliable glass he can't even make a fantastic rifle do what he wants.....

Get a fixed Leupold 10x or 16x Mark4, or else wait for a variable Nightforce 2.5-10, both will be under $1000. Then get an off-the-shelf Remington 700, and you are set for around $2000 after all the little stuff.

 

[Witch_Doctor]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

FNG here for what its worth, but I just built my first real rifle under the same constraints. I wanted a good rifle, good optics, but I also wanted a suppressor for a total of around 3K. Here is what I did:

Remington 5R SS milspec $1,100.00

Nikon Monarch X 4-16x50 $800.00

Leupold MK IV base and rings $200.00

AAC Cyclone K $800.00

I was a bit over my budget after paying the stamp and taxes, but not by much. You can definitely work within a 2K budget.

here is what mine turned out like, I also sent it to GAP for Cerakote, oversized bolt knob, and shorten and threading the barrel. My thoughts were that if I sent it off, I would want done what I wanted once. So take away waht GAP did and the suppressor and i spent right at $2100.00

 

[gugubica]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">]...nobody asks Michael Jordan what kind of shoes he wears or Tiger Woods what kind of club he swings...</div></div>

Actually, everyone asks them that. There is a huge industry built around what so and so is using.

But your point is true. A good Remmy or Savage or even a Howa is going to be more than sufficiant out of the box. A Falcon is a hell of a lot of scope for the price, etc.

 

[hydro556]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

lots of ways to look at it. I end up with pretty equal amounts. It just depends upon how much you put into the rifle. High end scopes are going to be 2K plus either way.

1- stock Rem 700 SPS with Schmidt PMII($3K optic)

2- GAP full custom with Leupy MKIV ($1K optic)

I know which one I would expect to shoot consistently better. Especially once the range increased.

 

[deadly0311]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

im in the same boat as Hydro, i got an SPS tactical waiting on a Premier 5-25

 

[hydro556]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">im in the same boat as Hydro, i got an SPS tactical waiting on a Premier 5-25 </div></div>

Deadly

I didnt mean to imply I have those exact setups, just pointing out that there are plenty of $1K optics that get the job done. While I think the law of diminishing returns applies less to the rifles than the glass, it definitely applies to both.

 

[deadly0311]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

thats cool, i was just saying that i have the setup that you mentioned. Any leads on that DTA recon???? It should be getting close right?

 

[hydro556]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: deadly0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thats cool, i was just saying that i have the setup that you mentioned. Any leads on that DTA recon???? It should be getting close right? </div></div>

Gotcha.

My DT chassis and 308 conversion is due to my FFL Saturday. The 338 conversion and some accessories should be here next week. The 338 is what I am really waiting on. Cant wait for that one. Should have a RR by Sunday evening on the 308 though.

 

[TCA4570]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

I feel Greg is right.
Spend time, and money on major improvements!.
Reload and shoot more!
.22 you should already have.
It's called the squirrel rifle.

I would take a gun and load anyday over just a scope!

There are three types of days with any setup.
Ya never know which, till you start.

Under 1K total, minus bag

 

[MOOSEKNUCKLE]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

The only rifle I have that cost more than the scope is my 40X in .220 swift. It has a Leupy 6.5x20x50 and both shoot better than I do.

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Modern glass is some pretty awesome stuff, and like it or not, the Chinese have come a long way toward excellence, and play catch-up as well as the Japanese did.

Somewhere in this mix, a lot of excellent capabilities became more or less standard, largely in an effort to provide a marketing angle the lesser manufacturers could not match.

The point is, a lot of this capability is something many of us covet, but could also get by without and not suffer greatly.

I have little use for extra light gathering, and have learned how to deal with parallax issues that plague the lesser offerings on a regular basis.

I, too, covet the more costly capabilities, but unless I hit the Lotto, they are well and truly beyond my reach anyway, so I gotta get practical and figure out how to make the lesser stuff work for me.

Do they put me at a disadvantage? Probably? Do they make me work harder? Almost definitely. Do they limit my capability? Not so far. Like the guy says, knowing there's a trap is a big part of survival.

I'm a big proponent of going with the mundane until the mundane demonstrably limits my performance. Right up front, I'll tell you I'm far from being the best shooter I know. I have good custom implements as well as well tuned and maintained conventional equipment. I shoot each to very close to their potential, and the better guns shoot better for me.

But not a lot better, and the conventional stuff shoots well enough to beg the question about spending the extra for just a small degree of genuine improvement. This is a hard question and an important one. To answer it well, one must peel oneself away from one's ego and be ruthlessly pragmatic.

Each of us will have a different answer, and our pocketbooks will provide pivotal influence.

As I said earlier in this thread, the trade-off, for me, is between equipment and ammunition. A well managed shot, from any rifle, is not wasted. The more of that, the better.

Greg

 

[cvedrick]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Hey guys, I am new to this forum, but not to shooting and not to gun forums.

I believe the original question was wether to spend more on the scope or the rifle. The easy and smart alecky answer is "enough"

Seriously you do not have to spend thousands and thousands for good glass, not that I would mind finding a once in a lifetime deal on a USO, but I do not really need one.

My advise is to go to several long range sites and check out the articles where they do a thorough writeup on several scopes.

The main things to look for are clarity, positive adjustment of turrets that are easy to grab with and without gloves and the ability to go lock to lock and return to zero. A 30mm tube is nice and found on some of the more affordable scopes 35mm and larger tend to be double the price.

As far as combo's go, and you are like me, you can always upgrade later and or switch off your glass to another rifle.

It took me over a year to build my varmint AR (complete DPMS A2 lower with low flat top receiver and Shaw 24" heavy bull barrel) I got a SF SS 10X and mounted it with Leupold QD rings. That Rifle cost me around $750 or so to build and the glass with rings, sunshade, BC flip ups, state tax and shipping ran be around $450 or so. (By the by it is a sub MOA rifle with silver bear match and better with hand loads)

Some time later on the advice of a man I trust, I got a Remington Sendero in 300WM off of Gunbroker, $700 for rifle, shipping and transfer. Took that scope off of the AR and replaced the ARs glass with a Nikon 6x18x40 Buckmaster from Midway with weaver rings, went out to sight it in at the 25 yard line and had some nice guys give me a spare target because I had posted an 8.5x11 piece of copy paper with a 1" spot on it for a target, later ran it out to 100 and had no problems grouping within that distance. (Never told them that I would have felt mortally ashamed if I failed to hit a 1" target at 25yd. with a sand bagged scoped rifle)

Back to the sendero, during break in, within the first 20 shots cold wet bore, new gun, borrowed hand loads (buddies leade was 1/1000 more than mine and he had some loads on hand)cheap front rest on a bench once it was sighted in I was getting 1/2" or better groups @ 100 yards. Would have been better, but I grew up with old military triggers and had to force myself to forget the old "take up slack" drill. (That "glass breaking" trigger still suprises the heck out of me)

Latest gun/glass combo just came to me last week, it is mentioned in a thread I started the other day titled "this new rifle" in the gunsmithing area cause I am trying to find out about its builder, so I am not about to repeat the description, just to tell you that I am whiped out for spare cash for a while, but have what promises to be an accurate rifle.

I did put a cruddy old bipod on it temporarily just so I can park it on a flat surface without it falling over, I will probably take it off again once I play with it a bit (the range bag or backpack works much better) but The glass is way down on the rifle to scope ratio, I raided the scope off of my break barrel pellet rifle (Chi-com R9 copy) Here is a pic of it, literally, bought Randy's personal shooter in a deal.

http://www.adventuresinairguns.com/tuned...4974680704d8e2b

Anyhow, the scope he sold me was a Leapers 3x9x40 AO for about $70.00 holds zero just fine and is clear enough for shooting at moderate ranges.

Mounted it with wome WARNE split rings I happened to have in my parts drawer

I am not worried about it breaking, the butt kickingest magnum is nothing compared to the funky recoil a springer produces.

With luck I will get time to go out and break in the barrel this weekend. With more luck sometime before Christmas I will have enough spare cash to get a SS or a Nikon X series for it.

 

[paindoc]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

I agree with 1sicpuppi. Although I would qualify this buy saying buy as much as you can afford, but with enough left over to buy QUALITY ammo and PRACTICE.

 

[OilyOwl]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: libertyman777</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's the deal. Should I by all the scope I can afford and pick up a rifle in the $700-$800 range or should I try for more rifle (say up to $1500 or so) and get less expensive glass?

I'll have about $2100 - $2300 to spend.

Paul </div></div>

$2100 will grant a killer build to your whim,wearing very sound glass in stellar mounts.

 

[Mike_in_FL]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Being on the unfortunate end of selling things more times than I wanted, glass seems to hold it's value better. With your budget I would go Savage for the rifle. With the dealer I use the HS 10FCP is 829 and with the McMillan stock,1003. If you can pick up a used/new scope for 1 - 1.2k, great. You've already gotten a lot of suggestions for scopes. You have 300 left for rings and a base.

Why Savage?

I've owned 8 Rem. 700s at one time or another. Sure they're generally a little smoother than a Savage action but still need to be trued if rebarreled. The $250 .30/06 110 I had would put 5 rounds under an inch, not FGMM or the like, Winchester Supreme 165s with a Tasco 3X9. When the Savage barrel is gone, you can rebarrel it yourself. A barrel from very decent makers.

Savage was going under and as their own CEO states, they listened to their employees. Check the amount of posts about Savage QC vs. Remington on most forums recently. You're also getting an accutrigger to begin with. More aftermarket parts are coming out.

How much are you going to shoot?

Whether you reload or not, are you going to the range once a month? Putting 100 rounds down range at a time? If so, that's only 1,200 rounds per year and you're going to have a good barrel for a few years. Quadruple your range time in a year to think about a new barrel.

IMO, Remington lost the edge they used to have. The new trigger is a step backwards as is their QC. I don't want to buy a new rifle and take a chance that not only do I have to send it back, but I have to pick up some of the shipping for something that wasn't done right in the first place?

 

[turboranger]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Rifle then glass, there are marksmen out there that are able to accurately hit there target, animal, enemy, at a fair range. We have all become to dependent on magnifying optics. Train on iron sights then master the optics!

What would happen if you where out on the field or on a big game excursion and god forbid something oddball is wrong with your scope! I know some will say they would have a back up scope on the field, but some are on a budget.
master your rifle and then imagine what you could do with optics.

Note: I understand that most rifles do not have iron sights these days, so my statement maybe pointless to some. I'm merely sharing my view.

 

[AXEMAN]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

if i had it to do all over... id buy a nice scope. most likely a (insert S&B, USO, premier, nightforce) and then get a decent rifle, knowing that i would mod the heck out of the rifle (trigger, match barrel, stock) but would never have to buy another scope over the whole time i keep shooting.

if i didnt have that option id buy a decent scope that would still hold its value, (SS comes to mind but there are many others) and serve as a dependable back up to the above scope, plus get you shooting immediately for not as much money and allow you to save for the nicer glass and will sell at a decent return on your investment (keep the box and papers) when you get close to being able to afford the $cope

take that and everything else posted, mix well, do what works best for you

 

[kiterme]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

For a entry package you can't go wrong with the Rem 700 + triger job and a Springfield Gov't. Model 4-14x56. As others have said you can continue to refine the 700 over time as your skills get better.

 

[Hawk45]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kiterme</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For a entry package you can't go wrong with the Rem 700 + triger job and a Springfield Gov't. Model 4-14x56. As others have said you can continue to refine the 700 over time as your skills get better.</div></div>

Resurrecting an old one here aren't we... but a Springfield scope??.. if I recall they stopped making those about 5 years ago.

 

[rockmyglock]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?


Resurrecting an old one here aren't we... but a Springfield scope??.. if I recall they stopped making those about 5 years ago. [/quote]

They did. However, they will still warrant and repair one if you have it. Last time I sent them a Gov't Model Gen III to fix the eyepiece... it came back with a "hazy" reticle and gritty turrets. After sending it back and forth to the three times to resolve the issues that were not issues before sending them the scope in the first place...... I gave up.

Gave the SA to my nephew to put on his first deer rifle and called it quits on SA optics.

 

[Mike]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Glass. Hands down.

 

[samnev]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

A Remington SPS Tactical and a Nightforce 5.5-22X50/56 would be my choice in your price range. You can upgrade the SPS at a later date.

 

[Leaddog]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

Buying good glass once is the least expensive way to go if you plan on shooting a long time, even if it hurts a little at first. Your scope will follow you from rifle to rifle.

There are plenty of very good used deals out there right now for both rifles and scopes. You should be able to find something in your price range that makes you happy.

 

[bobbye]

Re: Which should I spend more on, rifle or glass?

You can buy a SA-700 for $300
a Rock bbl for $320
a Holland lug for $35
a HS stock for $275.
a timminy trig for $125
a smith to make every thing fit $450 (if you went to HS with him)
total $1455
that leaves $545 for scope base and rings.
You will have a 308-243-260 that will take you a long time to burn out. Plus there are still small things you can do to your gun like the bolt,but not so much money. You will have a gun which will shoot better than you can, and you caan shoot while you save up for a high class scope.