Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

The rifle,or the optics,,,,

montanajoe
  • Community moderator
Which do you give more attention,cost of investment in to ???
0

Comments

26 comments

Date Votes
  • Ricci Wright
    If you can?t see it you can?t shoot it.
    0
  • NeoBlackdog
    In all things, Gaspopper, there must be balance.
    That said, great optics will make a crappy gun shoot up to it's full potential. Poor optics will ruin you on a good gun.
    0
  • Grasshopper
    This is saga advice from the Grasshopper-put the same amount of money in the glass as the rifle-
    0
  • randomnut
    As much importance or more. I have no expensive rifles, so it's possible for me to spend 2-3 times the cost of the rifle on optics.
    0
  • remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    In all things, Gaspopper, there must be balance.
    That said, great optics will make a crappy gun shoot up to it's full potential. Poor optics will ruin you on a good gun.


    ^^^no truer words spoken...

    That being said, I would rather shoot with iron sights than with a poor scope no matter how good but Gun is, and I have opted for iron sights over a poor scope,... At least I know then it's going to be on.

    I would suggest match the scope to the gun. If you have a great gun, buy a great scope. If you have an average gun, either by an average scope or a great scope. If you have a poor shooting gun, buy a different gun.

    It would be ludachrist to put racing slicks on a Yugo, and it would be just as Ludacris putting street tires on a funny car.
    0
  • kidthatsirish
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    In all things, Gaspopper, there must be balance.
    That said, great optics will make a crappy gun shoot up to it's full potential. Poor optics will ruin you on a good gun.


    Very true words!
    0
  • He Dog
    On several I have more in the glass.
    0
  • babun
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    In all things, Gaspopper, there must be balance.
    That said, great optics will make a crappy gun shoot up to it's full potential. Poor optics will ruin you on a good gun.


    Generally true.
    But I had a exact different problem with great optics.
    I shot 50 foot NRA 4 position matches.
    Used an Anschutz 1413 rifle. {about the best gun for this competition}
    With the Olympic open micrometer iron sites, I was very good.
    When I went to an Unetral 20x scope, my scores dropped a bit,
    took me a year to get back to where I was.
    [V]
    This is the same as what I used to shoot 50feet!!
    3-3.jpg
    [img]https://www.{elsewhere}/UserImages/124973/930708331/wm_2727089.jpg[/img]
    [img]https://www.{elsewhere}/UserImages/124973/930708331/wm_2727089.jpg[/img]
    0
  • yoshmyster
    quote:Originally posted by Grasshopper
    This is saga advice from the Grasshopper-put the same amount of money in the glass as the rifle-


    To some degree. I have a Kriss Vector CRB in 10mm I think I paid $1700? I don't think I could justify buying a scope that costs the same price. 50 yard to 100 yard plinker at best.

    Now if I were stupid enough to buy a CheyTac I would spend stupid money on a scope.

    So bottom line if the gun can't get it done, the scope ain't gonna be much help.
    0
  • jwb267
    I will put my money in the firearm from now on.
    years ago I purchased a Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x40mm Rifle Scope. I think I paid over $500. I also had a bushnell 4x12x40 that I had sent back for repair, but received a Bausch and Lomb 4-12x40 Elite in its place
    there is no doubt that the B&L is clearer than the leupold for a lot less money
    I have had both in rain and snow hot and cold
    0
  • danielgage
    I have bought $400.00 rifles new and put $800.00 dollar scopes on them and lived happy ever after

    so far
    0
  • KX500
    Anybody can come up with a blanket statement for a question like this and of course it will be true part of the time.

    And really, it comes down to what you want or more importantly what you really need.

    If you are trying to shoot small groups at 1000 yards and beyond with your 50 BMG, you're about going to have to drop some serious money on the scope. But then, you've already spent serious money on the gun.

    If you are a deer hunter in the east who seldom shoots beyond 125 yards, what does a $500 scope get you that a $200 scope doesn't?

    Of course I like Nightforce, Swarovski, Weatherby etc. but I buy Leupold, Redfield, Savage etc.

    And something I understand with manufacturing is that, for what ever you make, you may as well offer a high end, very expensive version with all the bells & whistles. It will sell, simply because many follow the old adage of 'It never costs more to go with the best'. And then there are the rich folks who detest anything but the best of the high end stuff.
    0
  • shootuadeal
    This statement may be unpopular but it is true...The expensive great scopes of 20-30 years ago are the $200 scopes of today. If you dropped $800 on a Baush&Lomb in 1987 it is not nearly as nice as $150 Vortex Crossfire of today.
    0
  • Warbirds
    When i was younger the rifle, now that im old they are at least equal and if I have to choose. Ill spend more on the glass than the rifle.

    I really like this:
    quote:quote:Originally posted by kidthatsirish
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    In all things, Gaspopper, there must be balance.
    That said, great optics will make a crappy gun shoot up to it's full potential. Poor optics will ruin you on a good gun.


    Very true words!
    0
  • Rocky Raab
    The Unertl (correct spelling) scope on the rifle babun showed above was state of the art - in 1950. Today, it would be reviewed as dark, optically challenged, and clumsy. All true when compared to today's scopes.

    But to obliquely answer the question, I cannot tell you how many excellent rifles I took in trade for cheap because they "wouldn't shoot worth a darn" and every one of them wore a $39.95 Bushnell 3-9X scope. Which I would promptly throw away. With a decent Leupold, Redfield, Pentax, or Burris scope from stock, I could then resell them for triple the trade-in price.
    0
  • llama
    You can sell a rifle and keep using the scope on its replacement.

    For scope I buy the best bang for the buck that I can afford to fit a given purpose/need. My two "target 22" scopes have been on 10 or so different rifles between them over the years...
    0
  • pulsarnc
    Buy a decent gun and put at least as much money into the scope The midrange optics of today are some of the best scopes available think Swift,Vortex ,Burris etc . Cannot go wrong with good glass
    0
  • KX500
    Now that I think about it, I'd bet the first guy to say 'spend as much on the scope as you did on the gun'.............worked in sales - selling scopes!
    0
  • Brookwood
    Drilling holes for a scope in a vintage Winchester barrel always makes me puke a little in my mouth!
    0
  • Brookwood
    Drilling holes for a scope in a vintage Winchester barrel always makes me puke a little in my mouth!
    0
  • JimmyJack
    Scopes have improved so much in the last few years I do not believe you have to spend absolute top dollar to achieve the potential of your rifle. Think now Id spend a little more on the gun and a little less on the glass.
    0
  • Grasshopper
    quote:Originally posted by yoshmyster
    quote:Originally posted by Grasshopper
    This is saga advice from the Grasshopper-put the same amount of money in the glass as the rifle-


    To some degree. I have a Kriss Vector CRB in 10mm I think I paid $1700? I don't think I could justify buying a scope that costs the same price. 50 yard to 100 yard plinker at best.

    Now if I were stupid enough to buy a CheyTac I would spend stupid money on a scope.

    So bottom line if the gun can't get it done, the scope ain't gonna be much help.


    WELL, I was addressing a shooting, target, hunting rifle...I stand by my words/
    0
  • yoshmyster
    quote:Originally posted by Grasshopper


    WELL, I was addressing a shooting, target, hunting rifle...I stand by my words/


    I suppose I should've made aware of the parameter of this "shooting, target, hunting rifle".

    My Springfield M25 White Feather might fit the bill as a "shooting, target, hunting rifle".

    Anyways when new the White Feather was in the $5000+ range with scope. She came with a Leupold?s LR/T 3.5-10x40mm at the time Leupold listed for $1500. The cost of the scope is less than third the price of the rifle. Even if I took in to consideration $1000 for "hype" or trading on the "White Feather" name. Still less than the cost of the rifle.

    Today I believe 1/3 or 1/2 the price of the "shooting, target, hunting rifle" for a scope will get it done.
    0
  • SCOUT5
    quote:Originally posted by jwb267
    I will put my money in the firearm from now on.
    years ago I purchased a Leupold VX-III 4.5-14x40mm Rifle Scope. I think I paid over $500. I also had a bushnell 4x12x40 that I had sent back for repair, but received a Bausch and Lomb 4-12x40 Elite in its place
    there is no doubt that the B&L is clearer than the leupold for a lot less money
    I have had both in rain and snow hot and cold


    I have several of the 4200 elite scopes, excellent for my purposes.
    0
  • select-fire
    Rifle. Cheap rifles won't shoot good with any scope regardless of price. A precision rifle will.
    0
  • Geri
    in 1968 I worked for an outfitter. He told me, get $1000, spend $250 on rifle, $250 on scope, and $500 on binoculars. He was right.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity