Thread: What scope to get?

Originally Posted by GravelBen

What model Bushnell is it? Might be better than a VX1 anyway.

I think it's a banner dusk-dawn, and the Tasco is a World Class. Also have an antique Weaver 2.5 custom on my 22 which is surprisingly good.

Don't want to spend more than $400.

Maybe it's better to use what I have and save a bit more.
Most of my shooting was when I was young, and none of us had scopes. Still seemed to hit plenty, but didn't have glasses back then.

Weaver Super Slam Rifle Scope - 2-10x42mm EBX Reticle w/Capped Turrets 49.1-9.9' 4.13" Matte - Rifle Scopes - Optics | Natchez Shooters Supplies
there you go.

Leopold 2-7x33 would be my first pick. Fits your budget, the lower 2x power is awesome, as to is the fov and extra long eye relief that Leopold have. Plus a bullet proof design that is 100% backed up by Leopold.

I have three of these, one is 13 years old and was used daily for about 10 years goat hunting...

Kj

Originally Posted by Maca49

Better to spend your money on a new pair of glasses!

Nah after a few hundred and a little gst at the eye quack and telling me there is nothing they can do I prefer to spend the rest on scopes lol

+2 on a leupold vx2 or vx1 in 2-7x33.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vortex diamondback 3-9X40 | Trade Me

Burris Fullfield 2s are good scopes for a reasonable price. They will be a million times better than your Tasco.
If you don't shoot more than 100 yards, I would probably go for a lower magnification on the bottom end, would help greatly for fast close shots.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

Burris Fullfield 2s are good scopes for a reasonable price. They will be a million times better than your Tasco.
If you don't shoot more than 100 yards, I would probably go for a lower magnification on the bottom end, would help greatly for fast close shots.

I rate them as well , I've compared Burris full field to my vortex diamond back, in low light the Burris won hands down with out a doubt !

A vx3 or similar as quoted above wont put more meat on the table it doesnt matter what scope you have its more about the nut behind the but! but thats beside the point. Obviously within reason if you spend a bit more than 2-300$ that will get you something reasonable for sure as well a good set of mounts

a vx1 wouldnt be an improvement over the bushnell you have unless you buy an elite with rainguard

I have a redfield 2-7x32 for sale if anyones interested, just upgraded to another bushnell

Burris fullfields are nice scopes although common are good value they do a 2-7 version I believe also

Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35mm Riflescope | Trade Me

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Burris Fullfield II 2-7x35mm Riflescope | Trade Me

That would do the job nicely.

As far as I can gather any decentish scope on low power will gather much more light than the eye can use and hence make the +/- 10% light transmission of a very good scope vs an ok scope negligable(exit pupil theory). Top end of the mag range is where this makes a big difference. I have noticed than in low light conditions my cheapo Nikon wound down to 3x will appear brighter than viewing through the naked eye. Such is the theory anyway.

Havnt looked through high quality scopes at low power, but the good scopes I have looked through were miles better wound up over 6-7x

Bushnell Legend Ultra HD - 4.5-14X44.

I have one in my CZ .22lr, I have shot both of my rifles with one after the other and this scope REALLY impressed me. Maybe shame to say but a bit better than my Vortex's in some low light conditions.

Mac