The 50/50 rule of scope/rifle cost

Hey,

So I have always heard the "spend the same amount on your scope as you do on your rifle" adage, and I understand the quality of good optics. That being said, is there a point at which a high-end optic/mount combo are too good for the given rifle? Right now my two main big game rigs are:

Savage 11FCNS in .308win with a Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x50 mounted using Warne bases and Maxima rings.

Savage 114 Deluxe in .270win with a Leupold VX-2 3-9x40 mounted using Weaver Grand Slam steel bases and Warne Maxima rings.

Are these rifles over-scoped (quality wise) for deer and elk hunting? Is this a classic case of spending too much money for optics and mounts when something cheaper would do? Both of these rigs are equally matched (within 50 bucks) of the 50/50 rule. Do you think this still applies?

--SRS

It depends on what you're doing and what you're comfortable with doing. Biggest thing is having gear you're confident you can make the shot with. I shoot a lot of long range precision match type events, so I'm starting to get into the higher end optics that cost 1 1/2 to 2 times the amount of the rifle. You get different advantages though for what I do with better glass, better reticle, better tracking, and more functions overall.

For hunting at general ranges out to say 200-300yds a solid 3-9 is about as good as your're going to get. I started with a SWFA SS fixed 10X for shooting out to 1000yds. I ended up upgrading to a version of the same scope with a better reticle for calculating hold offs in a fixed 12X format. That scope only cost 1/4-1/5 of the rifle, but it gets the job done without issue.


On my new build I'm going to be running a Vortex Razor HD 5-20x50. This costs more than what it cost me to build the rifle, but will be more useful for the application of the rifle.


Like I said if you're confident with your gear than you did it right.

The trick is to only buy Savage Axises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrThunder88

The trick is to only buy Savage Axises.

---

Haha. My Axis has out shot numerous high end rifles, but I will be building on a 10 and a 110 platform when I get home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sageratslayer

That being said, is there a point at which a high-end optic/mount combo are too good for the given rifle?
--SRS

---

In my opinion, yes, absolutely.

I'd far rather have a $2000 scope on a $100 rifle than a $100 scope on a $2000 rifle.

Today's mid-range scopes are remarkably good. $300-$700 can get you a very impressive optic and there are some optics out there for even less which offer far more than their low price would lead you to expect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barrel-nut

In my opinion, yes, absolutely.

---

I'd be interested in hearing more if you wish to elaborate.

"Right now my two main big game rigs are:

Savage 11FCNS in .308win with a Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10x50 mounted using Warne bases and Maxima rings.

Savage 114 Deluxe in .270win with a Leupold VX-2 3-9x40 mounted using Weaver Grand Slam steel bases and Warne Maxima rings.

Are these rifles over-scoped (quality wise) for deer and elk hunting? Is this a classic case of spending too much money for optics and mounts when something cheaper would do?"
--SRS

Question #1- absolutely not. I think that's a fair balance on each.

Question #2- possibly. It depends on your personal financial circumstances. You could certainly have "gotten by" with something cheaper in each instance. To me it boils down to, if you feel comfortable spending the amount that you spent, you probably won't ever regret having a higher quality optic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savage6x284

I'd be interested in hearing more if you wish to elaborate.

---

I think you answered that in post #6. Why put a $2000 scope on a $100 rifle, if a $300-700 scope provides remarkable quality?

lucky for us
technology and quality is skyrocketing with optics of all sorts and prices are falling.
a $500 scope or camera lens is magnitudes better than a $1000 one 10 years ago.
our cell phones have better cameras than we could buy for a few hundred dollars just a few years ago.
i just bought a 20x viper vortex and it is nice and clear at full power for $430 with a lifetime no B.S. warranty. no receipt needed and you dont have to be the original buyer.
that was unheard of when i first got into target shooting not all that long ago.
sometimes you will still pay a premium just for a name.
but the little guys are catching up and in some instances surpassing the big boys for half or even one third the price.
keep your eyes open and do research
it pays off

Welcome to the forum Billy. You are correct on the above post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BILLYZZ

lucky for us
technology and quality is skyrocketing with optics of all sorts and prices are falling.
a $500 scope or camera lens is magnitudes better than a $1000 one 10 years ago.
our cell phones have better cameras than we could buy for a few hundred dollars just a few years ago.
i just bought a 20x viper vortex and it is nice and clear at full power for $430 with a lifetime no B.S. warranty. no receipt needed and you dont have to be the original buyer.
that was unheard of when i first got into target shooting not all that long ago.
sometimes you will still pay a premium just for a name.
but the little guys are catching up and in some instances surpassing the big boys for half or even one third the price.
keep your eyes open and do research
it pays off

---

Well maybe some were overpriced to begin with, and competetion is driving cost down. Leupold has been offering that type of
warrenty as long as i can remember. I sent a 25 yr old 3.5x10 vx3 back for a knob install recently and they sent me a new scope.
Seems there was a problem i didnt even know about. As for opticle quality, go to Ebay and buy a clean pair of 50 yr old Bausch&Lomb 7x35 zephers.
They will set you back about $100. Then do side by side comparison with a new set of (good) glasses. Better yet use a friends set (good) glasses.
That way he will be the one feeling bad over all the money he spent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yobuck

Well maybe some were overpriced to begin with, and competetion is driving cost down. Leupold has been offering that type of
warrenty as long as i can remember. I sent a 25 yr old 3.5x10 vx3 back for a knob install recently and they sent me a new scope.
Seems there was a problem i didnt even know about. As for opticle quality, go to Ebay and buy a clean pair of 50 yr old Bausch&Lomb 7x35 zephers.
They will set you back about $100. Then do side by side comparison with a new set of (good) glasses. Better yet use a friends set (good) glasses.
That way he will be the one feeling bad over all the money he spent.

---

you are absolutely correct leupold has had that warranty forever.
but they also cost 2 or 3 times as much as one of the newcomers with the same clarity and warranty
i was trying as hard as possible to not turn this into a brand X is fabulous and brand Z stinks argument.

I dont think i said that, no doubt some of the newer rifle scopes are very good especially considering the cost.
Optics as a whole however, including binoculars and spotting scopes havent had similar changes as for optical quality.
If you think im wrong on that, simply check them out.

I swap scopes around to match the purpose of the shooting at the time.

Working up a load I just might have my Nightforce sitting on an action that I bought for $25.