Rifle Scopes Your description of "Unusable Glass"?

[wigwamitus]

My first scope was a low end $189 "Aim Sports" 3-9x ... with an offset RDS ...

I got it as a "training scope".

I learned two things:

1 - Crappy Scopes are crappy
2 - Crappy scope mounts are REALLY crappy

The scope mount kept coming loose and I took it to a gun smith and he said "the screws are too short" ... and put in some longer screws and it worked better.

The "glass" was dim ... about like a real scope at twilight ... but this scope was dim during bright day time ... BUT ... it was NOT UNUSABLE ... it was usable ... but after that, I got a real scope and then another real scope and finally sold my training scope. It had done a good job of training me not to get "low quality" optics !!

 

[Discogodfather]

Is that the new Horus reticle?

Here is the new Horus reticle:

 

[Mike Casselton]

Almost any scope these days adjust for eyesight.

You're right, and I'm well aware of it and have continued to screw the ocular further and further out.
What you might not know is by doing that, it makes the images smaller. That's exactly what people don't need as their eyesight diminishes.
That's why us old fucks want more magnification.

 

[918v]

Unusable glass is anything worse than your worst scope.

 

[tnichols]

Unusable to me is an optic that doesn’t have the clarity/resolution to provide me (the 54 year old shooter) with feedback/information. If I’m unable to see splash/impact on painted steel at distance, I’m not interested. It’s basically a waste of time for me.

I have an older Leupold spotter (not a dig on Leupy) that rarely gets used because of what I mentioned above. Resolution at 25-30x is so poor a zit on painted steel at 800 from a 223 is a nothing more than a guess. It was a gift and and was in the $700 dollar price point.

Get behind some higher end glass and it’s like the whole world becomes crystal clear.

 

[Bender]

Pappa.... do know Papparock by chance?