Entry Level Long Range Optic?

[JasonS]

I will say that I’d does like from reading many different forums, you get what you pay for to an extent. Meaning with cheaper 400-1000$ scopes you will see comments on how the glass might now be as clear/ mirage is worse, the turrets don’t track as well/softer feel on turns, heavy scope, internals break after years on higher recoil rifles.
It seems like less complaints when buying 1500$ and up scopes that are an established brand. However, I can deal with mushy turrets, glass that isn’t the crispest. Depends on what your doing and what you overall goals are. I kinnda am of the mind that most people probably can’t shoot to their guns/glass ability anyways. Practice time and consistency of form are often forgotten.

But maybe I am wrong on a few things, I am still learning.

[muddydog]

I'm just getting into some long range shooting myself. I just got 2 Ruger Americans in 308 win. And 223. Both guns are consistent sub MOA. Now i must confess I'm a tight wad! I'll buy a 500-600 dollar rifle and put an 80.00 scope on it. I did this and so far I'm very happy with a Center Point 6-20x. I shoot only for fun, not serious competition. I would rather have 2 very accurate guns with cheap glass than spending more on the scope than the rifle. Not saying it's better a scope than what everyone else is recommending, but you don't have to spend a bunch of cash to hit some steel at longer distance. To me the rifle is of more importance. I've done this with every rifle I've ever owned! Never had a single issue with any scope. Regardless of who made it Just something to think about.

Sent from my moto e5 cruise using Tapatalk

[Lone_Wolf]

I'm just getting into some long range shooting myself. I just got 2 Ruger Americans in 308 win. And 223. Both guns are consistent sub MOA. Now i must confess I'm a tight wad! I'll buy a 500-600 dollar rifle and put an 80.00 scope on it. I did this and so far I'm very happy with a Center Point 6-20x. I shoot only for fun, not serious competition. I would rather have 2 very accurate guns with cheap glass than spending more on the scope than the rifle. Not saying it's better a scope than what everyone else is recommending, but you don't have to spend a bunch of cash to hit some steel at longer distance. To me the rifle is of more importance. I've done this with every rifle I've ever owned! Never had a single issue with any scope. Regardless of who made it Just something to think about.

Sent from my moto e5 cruise using Tapatalk

You're gonna stir up a lot guys with that comment.....

[Lone_Wolf]

Just saying. A lot guys think I'm a cheap *** for not spending over $700 for a scope. Started out as a kid with a rifle shooting deer with a 30-06 and an $80 scope. That scope did eventually break, to tell the truth. But I killed a lot of deer with it. Then became mostly a bowhunter. Now I'm getting back into the rifle, longer distance thing.

[Jethro]

CameralandNY is doing a mini Black Friday sale this weekend. That Bushnell 3-12x44 LRTS in FDE is getting another $50 off in instant rebate. Knocks the price down to $649, and pretty sure that is no tax or shipping either.

At that price IMO it easily beats the SWFA, and I am a SWFA fan. I have 5 of the SWFA in various formats including 2 of the 3-15 in FFP, I have 1 of the 3-12 Bushnell LRTS, and 1 of the 4.5-18 Bushnell LRTS. I have run them all side by side. LRTS has way better glass, and some very useful features that the SWFA does not. Tracking in either SWFA or Bushnell LRTS is proven.

https://cameralandny.com/shop/bushnell-elite-tactical-lrts-3-12x44-flat-dark-earth-g3/96f06790-7be4-0137-44d8-00163ecd2826?variation=1971938

[Buckwheat]

Bushnell Nitro and Vortex Viper lines are in your price range

I have the nitro. And I love it. Honestly I don’t have much to compare it to seeing that it is my first scope like this. But the glass is clear and it tracks very well. Mil/mil


“There's more fun in hunting with the handicap of the bow than there is in hunting with the sureness of the gun.” -Fred Bear-