Why'd you pick that scope?

[Big Phil]

I've been thinking about this topic for quite some time. The thing is, to a degree I don't agree with all the hype out there that says you have to buy a "high end" scope to get acceptable or even great results. I think scope bases and rings are as important if not more important than the optic itself. I understand the quality of the glass itself is much better in more expensive optics however many companies are catching up. So that being said here are some questions I'm interested in.

What optic?
Contributing factors?
met or exceeded your expectations?
What base and rings are you using?
Could a lesser quality optic lead you to the same results?
For fun-what would be your ultimate choice


-Sightmark 8.5-25x50 Triple Duty
-Factors-price, magnification, side parallax, illumination
-Exceeded my expectations, I'm getting great groups from a stock 700
-EGW 20 MOA base with Seekins rings
-I consider this optic to be near the low end, so I think I can only go up.
-I would love a S and B 5-25x56 PM II/LP/MTC/LT with a Horus Reticle.

4 shots at 100 with test loads

3 at 200 with refined loads

 

[M. Sage]

How the optics are mounted is absolutely as or more important than the optics you mount. Nothing will hold zero with crap mounts. That said, the noticeably better quality of higher end optics make them a better long-term investment.

What optic?

Specifically? A Millett DMS 1-4x.

Contributing factors?

I could afford it and it's 1-4x.

met or exceeded your expectations?

Met, did not exceed. Clarity is meh, but somewhat less bad at 4x than I expected, though you have to be in exactly the right spot behind the optic to use it at 4x. The glass is actually somewhat wavy, even at 1x. I don't notice it on a 3 gun stage, but it's there. The magnification ring binds in a spot or two, also. In some ways, exceeded, in others it didn't meet them. Overall met, but just barely.

What base and rings are you using?

SWFA SSALT. I'm pretty sure it's manufactured alongside the Burris PEPR. It's not a great mount, but it's held zero with me tossing the uncased rifle into my trunk, and having the rifle dumped into (and yanked out of) barrels. Cheap, but good. Just don't expect it to hold zero if you remove it.

Could a lesser quality optic lead you to the same results?

I seriously doubt it.

For fun-what would be your ultimate choice

A friend of mine has a Leupold Mk 4 CQ/T and the field of view is significantly better. In fact, there's less occlusion from the scope body with that scope than there is from an Aimpoint or even EOTech. Clarity at any magnification also blows my cheap-ass scope out of the water. However, it's only a 1-3 (though at 3x I could probably see better than through my 4x)...

I'd like to get my hands on this one or I've handled one or two of these and they make mine look like a cheap Chinese POS.

But if money were no object... This one mounted in either this or this.

 

[Big Phil]

Anyone else?

 

[grumper]

Leupold MK4 LR/T M1 4.5-14x50mm
Barrett 30mm rings

Umm, it came with the gun

 

[Big Phil]

You obviously missed the first post

 

[Dawico]

Right now I have a Leupold 3.5-10x50 on my AR10 in a Burris PEPR mount and I am happy with it. It is about the right size for what I am doing with the gun and the mount is a good value considering the price and quality.

I am very brand loyal to Leupold.

I am trying to talk myself into a Mark 4 8-25x50 with Horus reticle for my new long range rifle. I just don't know about dropping that kind of cash on it right now. I haven't decided on rings either but I will get something good for the project.

 

[duns]

On my SCAR 17S, I installed a Leupold Mk 4 scope, having variable magnification from 3.5x to 10x. I had never shot a scoped rifle at that time so my selection was based on internet research as to appropriate range of magnification and on the fact I wanted the scope color to match the rifle! The Leupold scope appears to work very well but since I have never used any other scope it is difficult to say more.

The Leupold mount is an ADM SSR Delta, which is extremely well constructed. Probably stronger and more rigid than it needs to be and very easily mounted and demounted. It mounts firmly with little contact pressure so may be less likely to chew up the rails than some other mounts.

I also mounted a red dot sight (Aimpoint H-1) piggyback on the scope for close shooting. The red dot sight is offset at 45 degrees and you rotate the rifle to use it. I chose the Aimpoint based on internet research, which indicated it was functional, reliable, and with a phenomenal battery life (years even if you forget to switch it off).

The Aimpoint was piggybacked using a LaRue LT787.

You didn't ask, but the bipod is an Atlas, which is a very sturdy chunk of metal.

I'm pretty confident that all these accessories will last many, many years. But they were not cheap (total of about $3k for all the accessories).

 

[Rangerscott]

Got a leatherwood CMR for my AR. Havent gotten to use it but I love the.reticle.

 

[M. Sage]

Another of my rifles. Home-built AKM with Romanian "G" parts kit (back when they still came with Romanian barrels).

What optic?

Aimpoint Comp M2.

Contributing factors?

Durability, ease of use, battery life.

met or exceeded your expectations?

Exceeded. I've learned a trick or two to running this optic. And it's effective to 300 yards (farthest I've tried), way further than I should ever have to shoot. This setup also gives me a 1/3 cowitness.

What base and rings are you using?

Burris wide 30mm low ring on an Ultimak railed gas tube.

Could a lesser quality optic lead you to the same results?

Hell no. The optic has been turned on for the past 8 months!

For fun-what would be your ultimate choice

Aimpoint PRO. Little better battery life, dot is half the size.

Overall the CompM2 is an excellent match for an AK.

 

[Sugar Land]

I sure do like the way the red dot is mounted 45 degrees. Is it comfortable to use?

 

[M. Sage]

I sure do like the way the red dot is mounted 45 degrees. Is it comfortable to use?

They're not bad to use, you just roll the rifle in until you get a sight picture.

 

[macshooter]

Great topic. I picked up a Leupold MK4 6.5-20x50 TMR recently cuz it was on sale and I got a pretty good deal. Haven't used it yet because I'm waiting for the rifle. Would have been nice to have zero stop or something to make it easy to get back to zero, or maybe first focal plane, but I'll be using a range finder whenever possible, and I doubt I will be shooting out at distances where I have to crank the shit out of the elevation very often. I guess I'll just have to remember how many times I went past zero and put it back. Maybe if I build a 338 and start shooting at a 1000 yrds all the time it will make sense to go with something better. As it goes this is a REALLY expensive scope for me. I usually like to go with the cheapest thing that works. I'd be interested to see what people think of Vortex, which seems to offer a lot of bang for the buck compared to other brands.

 

[Miloe]

So far the only rifle scopes I've bought are both Mueller brand. Got a 4.5-14 first for a 10/22, mainly for cost and because it had the type of turrets that you can adjust without removing the caps. Next came a 8-32 for a 17hmr. I think they're both really clear optics and hold zero. Now would they stand up to any real recoil or for very long, beats me, but neither rifle has any recoil, so?

 

[556.45.12]

Vortex Viper HST 4-16x50 FFP - because it's freakin' awesome and only cost me $800

 

[Big Phil]

^You also missed the first post. We are all now dumber having read that. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.