BARSKA SCOPE

[joeb33050]

I bought a Barska Varmint 6-24X42mm AO Mil Dot on EBAY a few weeks ago, for $59.99 delivered and with a promise that the seller would pay the shipping if I wanted tpo send it back. The package came from
Candace Tsao
Micro World Corp.
1721 Wright Ave.
La Verne CA 91750
This scope has a quick-focus coarse-thread easy-to-focus rear focus adjustment.
I've used it twice now on an M10 308 WIN at 24X, at 100 yards, and it works just fine. The click adjustments seem to work fine, everything is OK. It's not the brightest or anything-est scope I've ever used, but it does the job and very well.
Some say that with scopes, you get what you pay for. Not true. I've had a Simmons 8-32X $80 scope and a BSA 6-24X ~$40 second hand scope, and they work.
I can understand paying $400 for a Weaver 36X target scope, but the $700-and up Leupold, Night Force etc scopes just can't be worth it.
joe b.

[Uncle Jack]

I think that equates to:

If you are satisfied with a Toyota, you probably don't need a Maseratti.

uj

[Blue Avenger]

looking through scopes at the store is comparable to looking at steak in sealed white boxes. you can not see what they really are. once you get them out side and start looking a distant object you can see what your buying. the binoculars that came in my cereal box work great for the price also.

you ever see a 42X night force you may not like the price but you will see the difference.


We all have our budgets we have to live with. I don't get to buy high end scopes either. :(

[sharpshooter]

You are still going to get what you pay for. Consider that the $60.00 to your door scope, cost less than 6 dollars to manufacture. Just what type of materials and skilled workmanship will you get for that kinda money?

[dolomite_supafly]

You do get what you pay for, for the most part. You are paying for a lot more than just the glass inside of the scope even though that is the msot expesive part. They use inferior materials to cut costs on every part of the scope.

The reason why the Leupold, NF, USO and others cost so much is the quality materials used. Because they use this highest quality materials they are less likely to fail and really when you think about it you rarely hear of them failing, even in the roughest enviroments. By using inferior materials the cheaper scopes can be made far cheaper than those that will last a lifetime and as such will often fail prematurely.

I do believe there is a need for less expensive scopes because not everyone can afford the high scopes. By making cheaper scopes more people can afford to get into shooting which is a great thing. For most people the lower end scopes are great for plinking or the once a year hunt.

When overseas I saw a few different brands of scopes over and over again. These are the ones that have been proven over and over again. Leupold, Aimpoint, Trijicon were the main players with a few others thrown in here and there. Personally, I would never trust any of the lower end scopes like Barska, Tasco, BSA, Simmons or any of the millions of knock offs out there for anything other than the occasion trip to the range or maybe a hunt. For those whose survivability depends on the scope that sets on their firearm, lower end scopes should now even be considered.

I do not own any high end optics, mostly because I can't justify the cost for my uses. I do have some nice mid priced scopes that work very well and one I even considered taking back with me overseas in case I needed something with a little more reach than a red dot.

Dolomite

Here's the 2008 Scope Rating Scale from the folks over at SWFA, based on a variety of factors shown in the linked post, with optical quality being at the top:

Link (http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8185)

2008 Riflescope Rating Scale

10 - Swarovski Z6, Zeiss Victory
9 - Kahles C - CL & CSX, Schmidt & Bender
8 - Kahles KX, U.S. Optics, Swarovski PH & American, X.O.T.I.C., Zeiss Classic
7 - Bushnell Elite 6500, Leupold VX-7, Nightforce, IOR Valdada
6 - Bushnell Elite 4200, Nikon Monarch & Monarch X, Zeiss Conquest
5 - Leupold Mark 4 VX III & VX-L, Nikon Monarch Gold & Titanium, Sightron SIII
4 - Burris Black Diamond Signature Select XTR & Euro Diamond, Meopta, Pentax Lightseeker, Super Sniper, Trijicon Accupoint, Weaver Grand Slam
3 - Bushnell Elite 3200, Leatherwood, Leupold VX-II, Millet, Nikon Buckmaster, Sightron SI & SII, Simmons Aetec, Vortex
2 - Burris Fullfield II & Timberline, Leupold Rifleman & VX-I, Mueller, Nikon ProStaff, Simmons, Swift
1 - Barska, BSA, Tasco
0 - ATN, Leapers, NcStar

[rjtfroggy]

Dolimite I agree with you 100% and I am in the process of replacing most of my scopes.I am a retired firefighter on disability which equates to fixed income so it is a slow process, but I have found the SWFA brand namely SS to be more than adequate for my needs.I think at their prices you get a lot of scope for the price and they come with a lifetime warranty.
Currently I use the 20x but my next will be a 3-9 and then maybe the new 4.8-20 when it comes out for my 7mm model 110fp. The 6x coming out this spring looks like something I might put on my muzzle loader but here again I have to justify it because the ML doesn't get used enough.
I have looked through the IOR's and some of the high dollar tacticals from various makers but for my needs the SS scopes fit the bill very nicely. IMO for $300 you can't go wrong and they do compare to the $7-800 dollar scopes.

[Savage_Jake]

I have a $300 Millet TRS-1 4-16x50 and a $300 Nikon Buckmaster 6-18x40. They are both mil-dot scopes and for the money, they are hard to beat. I talked my wife into buying me a Nikon Monarch when we get taxes back.

[dolomite_supafly]

Dolimite I agree with you 100% and I am in the process of replacing most of my scopes.I am a retired firefighter on disability which equates to fixed income so it is a slow process, but I have found the SWFA brand namely SS to be more than adequate for my needs.I think at their prices you get a lot of scope for the price and they come with a lifetime warranty.
Currently I use the 20x but my next will be a 3-9 and then maybe the new 4.8-20 when it comes out for my 7mm model 110fp. The 6x coming out this spring looks like something I might put on my muzzle loader but here again I have to justify it because the ML doesn't get used enough.
I have looked through the IOR's and some of the high dollar tacticals from various makers but for my needs the SS scopes fit the bill very nicely. IMO for $300 you can't go wrong and they do compare to the $7-800 dollar scopes.


Look at Wonder Optics, Falcon, Hawke and Vortex also. All these are moderately priced and bring a lot of value to the table when you consider the the price.

Dolomite

[Hunter]

Guess it all depends on what you are using it for. I use Nikon Monarchs on my hunting weapons, I figure it I spend that much time in the woods, or stocking my prey, I want a scope that can take everything I dish out and must be clear and very good at low light. Nikon Monarchs I thing are hard to bet for the price. I actually bought a Ziess Conquest to try out as a recommendation from a friend and ended up returning it and exchanging for another Nikon Monarch. I light the Monarch seems much better to me and I found them clearer when zoomed up. I just mounted a 4x16 42mm Monarch on a Savage 116 FLHSS with low mount Millet SS bases and black Millet Angle-Loc rings. It just barely clears the bell and bolt...works perfect.

[Shooter59937]

I would have to say for the money I am very impressed with Vortex. There Warranty is as good as it gets.

[pa hog]

+1 on the Vortex I'd have to buy a Crossfire over the Barska