I'm looking to replace one of my rifle scopes and was wondering what everyone top 10 best and the worst rifle scope brands are.
Printable View
I'm looking to replace one of my rifle scopes and was wondering what everyone top 10 best and the worst rifle scope brands are.
Going strictly by ones that I've actually owned, here's a few of each:
Best- Nightforce, Weaver, Burris
Worst- Barska, BSA, anything that I've bought on a package gun, and Barska. Did I mention Barska??
Middle - Leupold (vx1's), Swift, Millett, lower-end Bushnells, Tasco, Simmons
ive only owned 3 brands of scopes.
first and worst barska....it was on a AR-15 and first round fired the front glass fell out
second was a leupold...it was nice but had sort of a gold tint to the glass and was a little fuzzy around the edges at higher powers
third and best IMHO nightforce...i own two and will never buy anything but nightforce
Best and worst in what price range? For what purpose?
Optics are not truly linear. Best at 300 is very different than best at 3K.
You could probably say that the worst is always going to be the cheap crap barska/simmons/ bsa/most anything you find at wall mart. However there are great cheap scopes and there are very expensive scopes you could not pay me to use or are just not suitable for how I use it.
Best for bechrest? Best for kicking down doors? Best for shooting 1.5 miles? Best for cramming behind the seat of your old farm truck? Best for sniping at night?
Then of course..........bushnell for $27 at wall mart will be among the worst but bushnell elite tactical will be among the best. Night force will be among the best unless you plan on cramming it behind the seat and then cost alone makes it one of the worst.
Your question needs a purpose to produce a reasonable answer.
In my limited personal experience best value in a hunting/general purpose scope are the Leupold VX-2 and the Redfield Revolution (a bit cheaper, also made by Leupold). Sightron makes some very good benchrest capable scopes for under $1,000. I have 2 and will soon be getting a third. If money was no object they'd all be Nightforce.
It's hard to say what's the best without knowing it's intended use. The Vortex Gen II is an excellent scope for a fair price and makes a great longrange scope but I'd hate to have it mounted on a hunting rig. I like vortex pst and razors, both gen I and gen II. I don't think you could ever find a better scope than the Nightforce NXS line. Of course SBs are great but I can't afford them. For hunting and shooting out to 300 yards the Leupolds are great. I wouldn't buy another BSA.
Price is a very good indicator of value and performance. Cheap is always cheap.
However diminishing returns apply. You can double the price of a scope and only get a small ( eg 20% ) improvement in performance and reliabilty.
I actually have to disagree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Code4
A good scope might end up costing a grand but just because a scope cost a grand does not mean it's a good one.
I think most of us can agree that an exceptional level of quality at a given price determines value, not just quality at any price.
.
Have to agree on the diminishing returns statement.
I currently have a chance to buy a Vortex Viper HS-T 4-16 x 44 with MOA reticle. Glass seems to be very clear I can get it for $450 out the door. The only downside i can find is the eye relief seems to be VERY critical.
I would appreciate any thoughts on this scope.
FWIW it was purchased, mounted and taken off and traded in in a weeks time. Obviousley it didn't work for the Original purchaser
I have the 6-24x50 viper hs and it is a nice scope, decent glass and great tracking so far (only had it about a year) but the eye relief is VERY picky as you already noticed.
She does work good though and given the price and the no-bull warranty, If it looks like it may serve your application I wouldn't hesitate.
Despite it's picky eye relief: I would not hesitate to buy another one if shopping for a scope in that price range.
I really like German optics. Not cheap but great especially at first and last light.
Kahles
Zeiss
Swarovski
All make excellent hunting scopes. Nikon buck masters are good leupold vxii and vx3 are good as well. For target and tactical work vortex pst or swfa is good without breaking the bank nightforce and higher end vortex are good premier kahles or Schmidt and bender are better and march or us optics are better still. Your question is vague. The worst are barska counter sniper barska newer Simmons and tasco (some of their older scopes where really good) and BSA without knowing your budget or intended application it's hard to know what will work for you. I own leupold zeiss Swarovski burris swift vortex zeiss kahles nightforce and premier the kahles are my favorite but not everyone can or wants to drop 9-1500 on a scope I get that. The zeiss conquest line is my favorite sub 800 dollar scope.
For optical clarity and brightness (these are in order to what I see with my eyes working in sport optics EVERY single day) --Swaro, Kahles, Cabela's Instinct, Raazor, Zeiss, Leupold, Sightron, Nightforce, Viper, Burris.
Yes, I put NF that far down the list. The Instinct is the brightest and clearest scope I own and I have a really good sampling from the list above, even including the NF NXS.
Picky eye relief can be a symptom of magnification and budget design. Glass might seem clear but the eye relief issue can cause eye strain. Not a god thing. You will get fatigued during extended shooting sessions.
Another plug for Nightforce. However the Sightron SIII are one of the best values out there. The Sightron SII Big Sky is also a great optic for its class. I suggest that if you buy a used Sightron to check the serial number for manufacture date. The newer scopes are superior to their older optics in the SIII line.
i have owned 3 scopes in my young rifle shooting life at age 62 , one is a bushnell on my 17 hmr thats seemed satisfy me quit well , have a leupold vx3 and a hawke 30 sidewinder sf ,,,,,,, the leupold is 6 - 20 ,,,,the hawke is 4 - 16 that has an illuminated reticle , working with them on the bench getting them set up both seem nice , i have yet to shoot either,,,,,i talked to a few shooters on here and all liked there hawke scopes,,,give it a look,,,,happy shopping
That's a pretty loaded question- like a lot of others have said it really depends a lot on you eye and the intended purpose.
For example I have a buddy that shoots a very inexpensive scope on his 300WM, he's accurate and repeatable time after time.
Another buddy has a NF 8-32 BR that he swears by but I think is dull and blurry.
I had an older Tasco 3-9 on a 270 that was clear, bright and never lost 0, it was a great hunting scope.
I had a Weaver T36 that just never looked crisp to me.
I'm currently using a Vortex PST that is awesome.
I had a 6-24 Sightron that I wish I hadn't sold.
The March, Zeiss, Vortex, NF etc are usually good bets, everyone makes a lemon from time to time but at least with the better companies you know they'll stand behind it.
IMO, cheap optics are a waste of time and money. Same goes for mounts and rings. I usually spend nearly as much on a scope as I do for the rifle it will be used on. I've seen guys show up at the range with 700s, Savages, and Tikkas with $80 Simmons or Tasco scopes (or something even cheaper!) on them, and all I can do is shake my head. They'd be better off with Leupolds and Conquests mounted on a 770, an Axis, and a Ruger American.
I hope that's not a knock on the Axis or the Ruger because both mine shoot moa with a $150 Bushnell Trophy XLT and factory Hornady .308 150gr ammo. My rifles are "hunters." They don't need to be a $1500 rem700/leupold or tikka/conquest set-up to fill my families freezer year after year.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverRider
No, it's not really. I think folks pay more for aesthetic reasons and I understand that because I'm one of them. I actually scold myself at times for my own unwillingness to buy economy rifles, but I came into the game when blued steel and walnut was the standard and a part of my love for rifles is my appreciation for the traditional art of building them even if it's a mass production proposition. Mmmm...if that's not a clear description of my tastes and attitudes, then I'll state that one of my most accurate and treasured rifles is a Remington 788 in .222 Rem. I find it odd that so many find the 788 to be unattractive because it's not at all unattractive to me. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and we all look at value different characteristics of our hardware in the game of rifle shooting!
I WILL say that I think you'd be better served with better scopes though. I've never seen a Leupold, Burris, or Nikon fail but I've seen quite a few Tasco, Bushnell, Simmons, etc fail most suddenly. It happened to me way back when and naturally it happened during a hunt.
That's just my opinion though. Please yourself because that all that matters!
I truly believe a guy would be better off with a rusty old mosin nagant and a high end scope over an overdressed over-polished "super rifle" with junk glass. No question.
At the same time: some scopes offer better quality than others in the same price range and not all bushnells are created equal.
Lots of bad and a lots of good. Too many to list, but for a middle range I think the Vortex PST line is really nice.
Nightforce is up on top.
Worst is Speculative and a lot of times depends on the user as far as how bad it really is.
Mostly worse aer all the Chinese coke bottles probably like Barska although I have not tried them all obviously and dont want to.
IOR is also really nice although I did have one that fell apart but they replaced it. Expensive.
For me I think most important is if it tracks, and if it will hold zero and especially how clear the glass is at both ends and distortion at both ends.
I looked through a Swavorski 1-6x one time and it was so nice I had to immediately leave the store before I got out the CC.
I am trying out a Primary Arms 1-6X right now. The first one I had was fuzzy at 5-6x. We will see how this one goes, but generally a $250 1-6X might sound nice over a more expensive 1-4X mostly for the 6X end of it, but something like a Vortex PST 1-4X might have better image clarity at 4X than say a PA 1-6X at 6X etc.
I'm surprised Zeiss and Meopta haven't been mentioned.
Mike
I do not own a straight Meopta but they do make the Instinct scopes for Cabela's and the are excellent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Mike
Didn't read my post ?? I mentioned zeiss twice. Lol. I have never looked through a meopta but I've heard great things about them. Zeiss conquest are my favorite sub 800 dollar scope and can be had much cheaper a lot of times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Mike
Jamie, I respect your using optics every day. I no longer hunt deer and there are no PDs or Groundhogs here in Florida.:chargrined:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie
I noticed in your pecking order, you listed Cabelas. I suppose these are the high end models, because the low-mid are Chinese.
Although I have nearly 3 dozen scopes, none are of the the USO, NF price range.
I do have a 1970s Tasco 20X40 (all I could afford then) and it still amazes me with it's optical qualities.
I've got some Barska, NcStar, etc, I bought just to check them out and I wouldn't even use them as a hammer.
I have done a lot of A/B/C scope comparisons with several of my co-workers at different ranges, and sometimes a lower end scope will 'look' much better and be rated better than the Nikons, Burris, etc I own.
These 'reviews' are all on here......
FWIW
ron
No problem Ron. They are in fact the high end versions made by Meopta. The two I own run $649 and $749. If you get the chance to look through one I think you will be quite surprised, even with the $399 3-9 model compared to the $800+ Zeiss 3-9.
I also agree that the old Japan made Tasco's are excellent. I do not agree with most on the NF though. While they are dead crazy reliable the price tag is definitely not due to optical clarity. Don't get me wrong, nothing really wrong with the lens but they seem to be equal to most scopes in the $800 to $1K range, guess you pay the extra $500 to $1K for the durability.
Ive been doing some research and Im going with a Mepota MeoStar® R1 3-12x56 for that late afternoon shot on a Carolina HOG!!!!!
I am new to target shooting, I finally took my model 10 Precision .308 with a Burris Veracity 2-10X42 scope to the range and 3 shots, 12 clicks to the left, 4 clicks down and I was taking the center out of the target. The Burris is sharp, clear and adjusted perfectly.
Over the years I have played with numerous scopes that I could afford at the time. I started with Simmons, Leupold VX-1, Leupold VX-II, Sightron SII, Burris Elite and Timberline, Bushnell 3200 and 4200, Muller, Nikon Buckmaster, Leupold VX-2, Sightron SII Big Sky, Leupold VX-3, Vortex Viper, Leupold VX-R and Sightron SIII. After many years of buying and re-selling mid-range priced scopes, my muzzleloader, hunting and varmint rifles all wear Leupold VX-2 and Leupold VX-3's scopes with CDS dials. I also have one Sightron SII Big Sky and one Sightron SIII. For the money, the Sightron SII Big Sky and SIII are hard to beat. None of the scopes I've owned will hold resale value better than a Leupold or have a better lifetime warranty if, or when you need it. For many years, I would not own a Leupold because the VX-1, VX-II and VX-III were optical junk when compared to the competition. That changed for me with the introduction of the newer Leupold VX-2 and VX-3 models. And with the advent of accurate range finders, the Leupold CDS dial is usually spot on compared to trying to figure out busy mildot, ballistic plex, Nikon bubbles, varmint and BDC reticles. I don't like the looks of plastic scope caps, or branding labels all over my scope tube. I do like the light, compact, classic looks of a Leupold with alumina flip up lens caps sitting on top an accurate Savage rifle dressed in a nicely finished walnut or laminate wood stock. Of course, I am close to being classified as an "old f&*%". So to each their own.
Im not as concerned over the scopes i use for shooting as i am the ones i use for hunting.
I consider prairie dogs shooting, not hunting. Most of my scopes are older Leupolds some of which
have had at least an elevation knob installed at the factory. I dont require lots of power even at very long distances.
As a rule im not over 12x which tends to make the optics clearer. I have 3 older straight 12x vx3s which suit me just fine.
Also 3 older 3.5x10 vx3s and a few old 3x9vx2s. All have knobs for dialing. Optic clarity isnt an issue as much on lower power.
I own 1 8x25 leupold which sits on a 20 #300 Norma. That gun/scope sees most of the use for us when hunting.
I also own 1 8x32 nightforce nxs which sits on a custom actioned 338 big baer. We dont use our scopes for anything but shooting.
For hunting/ finding game, we use very large tripod mounted binnoculars mostly made by us using 2 spotting scopes.
We must count points in PA and we can do that even at a mile with decent conditions. So given as to what we do and how we do it,
the actual optic quality of the scope needent be best of the best. It just needs to show up for work (every) time its asked.
I have looked through a lot of low end glass in my day. I am getting a dedicated long range rig. Savage LRH in 300 win mag. I have decided to brake away from SFP scoped and going the FFP route. I am likely going to get the Burris XTR II with SCR on it. Likely mil/mil but possible moa, we shall see. The cope will likely be more than the cost of the gun if not about the same. I have looked at many in that 1000 give or take a few hundred range. SFP and FFP. I think if I got a sweet deal on an NXS I might switch back to SFP but right now that Burris XTR II is getting great reviews and has a lot of features for the money. The Bushnells LRHS are a very close second. Im done with cheap, now just moving into the lower middle. I dont have 4k to throw at a Tangent Theta or that would be the best. Nightforce ATACR F1's are also very good as are the Vortex Gen II's. There is a lot of weight on those but its a hell of a lot of scope too.
I'm pretty new to the world of optics but here's my two cents. I just did a lot of reading and purchased my first scope for my rifle. The two questions you need to ask yourself is what am I going to to be doing with this rifle and how much do I want to spend. for my purposes I went with the primary arms 4x14x. I really like this scope and it didn't break the bank. If I had a little more to spend I think I would have gone with the SWFA 3x15 everyone raves about them In the reviews and there not crazy expensive. Find your need, set your budget, do some reading and ask a lot of questions.
PA makes good scopes.
I wont even some that you guys metioned on my rimfires. for ME my list is based on ownership. I own many Vortex crossfire up to gen 2 razor 1-6, also own a US optics 1.5-6 (sr-6). I have shot behind many many higher end (3+K scopes) and I don't think ANYONE beats US optics $ for $. I personally ring steel with my Us optics at 650 yrds time to time with my 204 ruger AR. that being said OP need to tell us the purpose behind the optics.
Optics are NOT a place to cheap out, you WILL get mad at the gun or not enjoy the range time and it will sit. buy once cry once
U.S. Optics is my favorite. I have an SN4 1.5-6, and two SN3 3.3-22x FFP MOA/MOA. Awesome glass, but heavy scopes. The SN3s' have taken me out to 1760 yards multiple times and are by far the best tracking scopes I own. I have not owned any Nightforce, but I would not hesitate to use their optics. My low end rifles wear Leupys VX-Patrols.
Sounds to me like Russ used good logic for his first scope purchase.
No doubt if and when the time ever comes, he will use the same logic
when buying the next one.
It depends... if you're on a sub 1000 dollar budget... you have to do a bit of looking... for example my rigs are:
Savage 12FV in 223 with a Vortex 6.5-20x50AO. About a 600 buck scope
Savage 11FCNS in 308 with Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40. About 450 buck scope
Savage 11 lightweight hunter in 7-08 with Leupold VX3 2.5-8x36. About 400 buck scope
Rings and bases for the 223 and 308 are Warne. For the 7-08 are Talley aluminum. Don't skimp on rings and bases. Get the best, take your time installing them and locktite. A few extra minutes is worth every box of ammo and missed animal.
SRS
Up to $300, I use the SWFA fixed magnification scopes, which have an extremely unforgiving eye relief. I don't bother with anything cheaper. I know that sounds arrogant to people that buy cheaper scopes, but low light performance is important for hunting and clarity is important to me for shooting beyond 300 yards.
From $450-1,000 I think Vortex is nice. I haven't done any tracking tests on them though, because I am lazy and don't own a lead sled.
I own the cheap 4-16x original Centerpoint with exposed turrets now for almost 6 years,, shot 1000's of .308 and .223 with the scope. I have even used it in competition and shot several clean score's with it in FTR class,, 185 yards and 300 yards. It is not ideal at all because the cross hairs cover up the X ring and nearly the bull. It tracks perfect still,, yes I probably just got a good one! The scope is awesome for hunting. I hunt deer at night using a spot light and there is not need to use the illumination (I am an agent using deer damage permits). If you can't see the black cross hair,,, it's past legal shooting hours. The illum. does light up the internals of the scope pretty well, as stated before LOL. This scope has killed so many woodchucks and deer, and took abuse from my .308 FP falling over,, friend jabbed the brakes and rifle slammed hard into the back of our seats,, it's took a good beating, I'd put my life on the line with this scope.
On the other hand I own a NF NXS 8-32 NPR1,, which I can't say anything bad about either. Except it is only for long range hunting and a much much better competition target scope. You can easily see X ring at any range past 1000 yards and cross hair can be moved around inside of the X ring due to a much finer cross hair. When the weather permit's you can see 6mm bullet holes at 1000 yards on a white target.
I also am blessed with very good vision, so I think that really makes a difference why people say other brands are "brighter" or "clearer" than other's.
The only bad experience I've had was with a Tasco 10-40X. The cross hairs would stick when you were dialing in and finally they would adjust after you fired several rounds. You should not have to rap your scope with a mallet after you adjust it. I sent it back and it was better, but now it has a shifting cross hair and a loose objective lens.
Do your research on Meopta,,,,,you will be very impressed! I did,,,and Im buying another one soon!
https://www.google.com/search?source...+scope+reviews
You might find some useful information on Youtube - search for Sniper 101, parts 14, 21, 21
Bushnell Elite Tactical are some of the best...the DMR and XRS are as good as anything out there....
I too vote for Meopta.
My latest is a Meopro 4-12x50 with z plex reticle.
My buddy has a 6-18x50 on his Howa varmint 204r, and that is nice and clear.
Meopta have been making lenses for a very long time.
Would not be surprised that their lenses are used by the other top European makers.