I hate to start ANOTHER 'scope comparison', but I must.......

Ok, I'm sure you folks are sick of my ramblings about different scopes, but this last one 'might' be kinda interesting to someone getting started.

Usual disclaimer: I own 41 scopes, my boss/buddy (whom I buy scopes/guns/ammo for) now has 8. Not boasting (some might (!!) make good hammers), just want to establish a baseline. Once our scopes are sighted in, they are not cranked up and down and the target range is 200 yards max. All the scopes tested are brand new.
This is NOT about shooting the box, low light performance, etc, it's just a SUBJECTIVE look at optical performance.

Being retired, I spend a LOT of time reviewing scopes and always take every opinion as just that. I have been dying to order a Sightron SIII (6-24X50) model.
If you've followed my rants in the past, you might remember that I was very, very underwhelmed my our new Leupold 4.5-14X50 LR/T which is mounted on a new Barrett M107A1 in 50 BMG. He has had a few lower end scopes mounted on his M12 BVSS (22-250), and other varmint rifles. I told him we need better glass on the Savage since it's used by a lot of our guests and is recoil friendly. It's last scope was a Weaver Kaspa, which 'worked' but it is just cheap looking/feeling.

I've also been upgrading my rechambered Axis HB rifles. 223 AI, 22-250 AI, 243 AI with better glass........

So today, we pulled an assortment of guns from the safe, put them on a large picnic table and put a few targets at 90 yards.
(6mmbr.com has some great, free optical test targets). The weather was 80 degrees, clear, no wind.
Test method: Scopes were set on equal power, in relation to each other, both low and high. Then, the tree line at 1000 yards was checked. All scopes were focused as necessary.
3 sets of eyes, of different ages, were used. ha ha The other guys (not being a scope 'nut' like me, were unaware of prices until the end).....

In order on the table.......

#1.....Leupold 4.5-14X50 LR/T 30mm tube
#2.....Simmonds Whitetail Classic 6.5-20X50 1" tube
#3.....Sightron SIII 6-24X50 30mm tube
#4.....Viper Vortex 6.5-20X50 30mm tube
#5.....Weaver Kaspa 4-16X44 1" tube

Observations and OUR conclusions:

Scope #3 was the best.
Scope #4 and #1 were ONLY just the smallest bit behind
Scope #5 was OK, but still ugly/cheap looking, small eyebox
Scope #2....... This scope was nothing short of amazing!! The only reason it wasn't right near the top, was the front focus! I guess the other guys (like me) have become spoiled by side focus. Even the Kaspa has this feature.

The Simmons was purchased on-sale from Midway for $99 with free shipping. I was SO impressed with it, I ordered 2 more.

MY conclusions:

I was just about to order a Sightron SIII. I just installed another Viper Vortex (fourth one) on the 22-250 AI today. Since the SIII is 2X the price of the Viper, I no longer want one. It's beautiful, but not that much better. Besides I can shoot my buddies any time I want. ha ha
Both the Simmons and the Vortex are made in the Philippines.
The Sightron is made in Japan.
The Kaspa is made in China (and looks it)

Looking at the reviews on Midways site, the Simmons is highly rated (whatever that's worth). It's an amazing value. Would I put it on the 50 BMG? No.

I hopes this helps someone looking for new glass.

ron

Good to know. I like the "comparison" threads if they have first hand opinions.

You should do a reliability and repeatability test of the turrets of each scope.

Yeah I could, but why?
Here in the Sunshine State, we have no Prairie Dogs, no Groundhogs, no varmints of any type, except for a few Armored Dildoes, and Possums. These are nocturnal and I like to go to bed early.
Yes, we have some Coyotes and skunks. I work part time on a 1000 acre 'play' farm. Once the scopes are zeroed in to our main 130 yd range, the guns shoot flat enough that we never have to touch the scopes. Even with the 50 BMG. So, it's not on my list of priorities.
My 'wish list' is to have a nice, clear scope with a generous eyebox that all of our guests can shoot easily. A LOT of the guests are new shooters and I won't even let them look through the Barrett. This is the main reason I dislike the Kaspa. Yes, I own 2, but I've been shooting for decades and know what a correct sight picture looks like.
That's why I love the M12. No recoil and it has never failed to ignite a reactive target. It now wears the SIII, an absolutely AWESOME scope. Yes, I have more than my share of Chinese turds in my collection. Yet another reason I am so high on glass from the Philippines, and a few Japanese scopes. One that comes to mind from the 'Land of the Rising Sun', is a Fujinon 3.5-10X50 that is so bright, it almost hurts to look through it. I spent a lot of time in Japan as an Engineer and have great respect for their work ethic. Really makes the USA look sad. I am a patriot and ex-military and it pains me to say that, but it is what it is.............
I have a lot of experience shooting AND spotting and I can see when a noobie is having trouble getting their head the correct distance from the eye lens. We shoot a lot of 'reactive' targets and the Barrett is used on a 1" thick piece of certified AR500 steel angled down to prevent splash back. The 50 BMG doesn't even scratch the steel, but it sure does make it dance.....

have fun.

ron
Safety first.

Results appear exactly as predicted ....except simmons. Good to know from first hand.

n4ue where in Florida are you? I would be willing to add a Redfield Revolutions 4x12x40 on my 111 .270 to your list of reviewed scopes. If you are talking about a a crisp piece of glass out to the edges it has a that in my opinion. My biggest drawback with it is the short IMO eye relief. It is just barely doable with my Dnz Game reaper mount on my .270. I am thinking about putting it on my sons ruger american compact .243 because of the shorter length of pull and going searching for something else for me.

Well I at least if spending the money on a scope with turrets like to use them and I actually use them exclusively when shooting anywhere past my initial zero range which is usually 200 yards. I shoot out to 1000 yards quite often on steel, rocks or what have you and an absolute quality I must have along with clarity is repeatable tracking. I have had lots of trouble with Vortex optics in the past because of poor tracking and will never own another one but I am always interested in similarly featured and priced options like the Sightron. I run all leupold on my serious long range rifles and Nikons on most everything else. I figured since you were into reviewing scopes you would do a review of all the functions and features of the optic not just clarity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stomp442

Well I at least if spending the money on a scope with turrets like to use them and I actually use them exclusively when shooting anywhere past my initial zero range which is usually 200 yards. I shoot out to 1000 yards quite often on steel, rocks or what have you and an absolute quality I must have along with clarity is repeatable tracking. I have had lots of trouble with Vortex optics in the past because of poor tracking and will never own another one but I am always interested in similarly featured and priced options like the Sightron. I run all leupold on my serious long range rifles and Nikons on most everything else. I figured since you were into reviewing scopes you would do a review of all the functions and features of the optic not just clarity.

---

If cranking up and down is your bag, just do it. It is NOT at all that important to me. Optical quality is #1 for me.
I have some low end Leupolds and a few Nikons and Redfields. Just like the Weaver Kaspa, the lower end models are either made in China or assembled in the USA with Chinese parts.
Last year, I bought a new Nikon Monarch 4-16X42 SF. I guess I was expecting too much.
Four of my co-workers thought the $70 Wal Mart Center Point was EQUAL.
I sent the Nikon back the next day and won't own another.
Ever see just HOW MANY refurbed Nikons are available from Natchez?
I shot/sighted in the SIII today on the farm's M12 BVSS (22-250). I also shot/sighted in another new Viper on my Axis HB 22-250 AI. **** if I could see any difference at 100 yards. I LOVE the SIII, but just can't justify one, yet.
All I'll probable ever order are more Vortex Vipers and maybe an HS or PST..... or an SIII, same price. I KNOW I'd never buy another Leupold MK4 LR/T.....

ron

Bushnell elite tactical, Sightron SIII, SWFA SS, Nightforce.
Without positive tracking: A scope is useless to me regardless of glass.
Have allot of others that work but every new one I get that is not one of those........I regret, sooner or later.

DJD, I haven't tried the Bushy Elite, but the others you mention are great.
I just don't understand why MY 'subjective' review was criticized. I plainly stated, that I was NOT testing the tracking, shooting the box, etc. As a former Navy Gunner's Mate, I DO understand the importance of that quality. I just don't do it or care. My choice...... I was just VERY disappointed in the Leupy MK4 compared to the SIII, at 1/2 the price.
Again, IMHO, on MY range, it doesn't matter! Geezzzz Just checking glass for our novice shooters, that want to hit an exploding target. They don't know (or give a darn about 'tracking').

Funny about the SWFA scopes. I was around when they first came on the marker because they were rejected by the US Military, when it was disclosed they were made by Tasco. Now, they may or may not, be made by the same company that is tied to Tasco, but I could care less........
I have an older Tasco from the mid 70s that I bought new. It's a 20X40mm fixed power. My shooting buddies / groundhog hunters back in Mass. laughed at it because it was "Made In Japan"...... I took it out of storage 2 years ago when checking my scopes that are 'spares'. It just amazed me with it's optical clarity. I guess I was SO used to the Chinese optics, I had forgotten what good glass looked like. Best $79 I ever spent. It was installed on a Rem 700 Varmint Special in 243 Win that is still one of my best factory rifles, (with some simple upgrades).....
Now that I have the SIII, I am even more convinced that the Japanese glass is excellent. The Philippine scopes are VERY close...... Again, IMHO......
BTW, before I retired from IBM, I spent many, many weeks in Japan working with companies like Canon, Minolta, Panasonic, etc.
Their QC , made ours look vastly inferior. We stepped up to ISO 9001. We HAD to.....
But, make no mistake, the Chinese are catching up and are capable of making ANYTHING of high quality, IF the buyer is willing to pay.

ron

I completely understand you comparison, it's purpose and I for one appreciate it for what it is. I certainly did not mean to imply criticism.
Just a random (hopefully relevant) opinion.
So far........japan makes all my favorite glass, Philippines are not bad but are second in all my comparisons . While I know it's possible for china to make great stuff like apple products, bushnell's latest range finders and there kalashnikov rifles have always bean a favorite but so far not one Chinese scope has measured up.
I paid $85 for my first Non-tasco made in japan 10x42 swfa, that one scope was enough to get me hooked and make a believer out of me.

Optics are just like everything else in life. You get what you pay for 99.9% of the time.
I've always tried to put the best optics that I can afford on every firearm that I own. I do have a few cheap scopes on rimfire's,but all of my centerfire rifles get quality optics,it just doesn't make sense to put cheap optics on something that you need to be precise and accurate every time you're behind the trigger.

For most average hunter's/shooter's that only use their firearms a couple times a year,they can usually get away with cheaper quality optics,but if you use them all the time you'll find out fast that there's a reason quality optics cost so much.They're built to work,and take the constant abuse of cranking the turret knobs up and down.

I recently purchased a Primary Arms 4-14x42 FFP Mil-dot scope for one of my AR-15's. It's a cheap Chinese scope,but it does have excellent clarity. It seems to track decent,but the clicks are a little mushy-not crisp like a quality scope. For $230,it was a good deal,and maybe it will continue working well but I knew going into this scope that it's not as well built as my $1000-$2000 scopes,and I don't expect it to perform as one.

It's hard to beat the price and performance of the Sightron SIII scopes,I own 5 of them,and plan on buying more.