I have never been much into what glass looks like but how it functions and IF it fills the need.
I find so many people buying scopes because of how they will "look" on a rifle.
some buying police type scopes with tall turrets that they will never use after the first zero.
or mil-dot reticles when they have no plan to learn how to mill.
matte finishes or silver scopes and now leupolds dark earth just compound the problem.
isnt a scope a tool?
i mean, if you have a show piece rifle with great looking wood and a deep blue finsh a silver scope is gonna look like a turd, i agree.
but is the difference between a matte and a gloss worth $100 for someone?
the semmingly steady decline of the quality of true blueing in the rifle biz will most likely llimit the production of gloss scopes in the near future wont it?
when looking at scopes i dont really care about ring marks. i mean, i wont buy a bent or dinged scope but ring marks? please.
anyone else here hit a $700 scope with black primer or grill paint?

quote:

anyone else here hit a $700 scope with black primer or grill paint?

Can't say that I have and I haven't purchased a gloss scope in many a moon as well. I agree there are tons of scope finish combinations out there and I believe the manufacturers should stick to one color or finish and spend the rest of their money on the internals. Overscoped rifles are a current malady in my opinion as well , I attribute it to Gun Writers and Flimsy TV outdoor shows. Human nature to want the latest greatest even though they will not use 90 % of it or the darn thing doesn't fit them right.

You said a mouthfull .Finding decent Blueing on a production Rifle is almost impossible.Example Kimber beadblasts barrels and actions to cover up blemishes.Results all new Kimber Rifles includeing The Montana Stainless are Highly prone to Rusting.Actually Polishing The action & Barrel cost money so only The Premium Guns get that treatment.Silver Scopes make me want to puke.Matte Black is OK.

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:
You said a mouthfull .Finding decent Blueing on a production Rifle is almost impossible.Example Kimber beadblasts barrels and actions to cover up blemishes.Results all new Kimber Rifles includeing The Montana Stainless are Highly prone to Rusting.Actually Polishing The action & Barrel cost money so only The Premium Guns get that treatment.:

You haven't seen enough Kimbers:




They can polish them quite well when they want too.

quote:

The Montana Stainless are Highly prone to Rusting.

Sorry but thats BS. I don't know what you have against Kimber but you don't know what you are talking about.
Anything can rust including stainless Kimbers but they aren't "highly prone" to rusting. I've had both stainless and blued Kimbers afield and do have a little experience with them....................DJ

DJ, I know that you are a Swarovski man what in the world happened to the rifle on the left.........

Actually, I think OLBIKER was talking about the entry level Kimber rifles, not the high end such as the two beautiful examples pictured by dj. I too have a Kimber Super America and it has the best blue of anything in my collection.

As for the topic of this post, why is it unacceptable to want a scope for looks? I have several guns that are unfired but are scoped with high end Leupold, Burris, or Nikon scopes. For some of us, our guns are our art, our hobby. Like stamp or coin collecting, fine china, antiques, motorcycles, cars, etc... I know, I hear it from my brother all the time. He won't own a gun he wouldn't shoot. But that's not me.

And yes there have been new finishes that manufacturers are trying. And gloss is all but gone, in favor of matte. I personally like the old school gloss look & 95% of my scopes are gloss. But I just mounted a Burris 4.5x14 (matte finish) in high Leupold matte rings, on a Cooper M57 Classic .22 & I believe it is not only SWEET LOOKING, but also useful. And I admit, the matte look is growing on me.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
DJ, I know that you are a Swarovski man what in the world happened to the rifle on the left.........

In the Spirit of the thread I used the optically inferior Leupold scope because it matched!

But of course there are others:








Probably the one I'll hunt next is another 8400 270 WSM with a nice ding in the scope....darn metal tree stands!....................DJ

With good looking rifles like DJ's, I want to match scopes too. I see nothing bad about matching a good quality scope to a handsome rifle, like DJ has. I spend a lot of time admiring my nice rifles and I like things to look like they belong together. It's called taste.
YMMV

Don

Here is mine...





www.titanium-gunworks.de

Even if the scope is not silver like the rest of the gun, I find this more aestitic and of course, it´s oe of the best scope You could buy (and they are not available in other finishs than black, glass bead blasted...)

And like You could see, I have spend money to have a scope mount, which looks adequate to that rifle: made from Titanium...


Klaus

I put a silver Leupold on my SS Tikka T3 lite, I like how it looks, the Matte and Silver are the same price. My other SS rifle a Ruger has a Matte Leupold. looks OK but shoots exceptional!!

djpaintles I have nothing against Kimber .I have an 82 Classic 22and 89 BG with fantastic Blueing.I also have a newer Hunter S 22 amd a Montana.Both of them are highly prone to rust.It looks like they were grit blasted.The surface of the Moon is smoother.They shoot fine and function as they should.I just expect a little more out of The Kimber name.My comment was that it is a cheap way to avoid polishing,which it is.I would gladly pay more on the basic Rifle for some better workmanship.Obviousley a Beancounter got involved in the Gunmakinging process at the New York Kimber.You did not get that kind of a finish from Oregon.They did offer a matte Blue,but it was Vapor blasted and did not leave craters.I am sending Both barreled actions to Robar before they dissappear before my very Eyes.

quote:

Originally posted by KSTEPHENS:
I have never been much into what glass looks like but how it functions and IF it fills the need.
I find so many people buying scopes because of how they will "look" on a rifle.
some buying police type scopes with tall turrets that they will never use after the first zero.
or mil-dot reticles when they have no plan to learn how to mill.
matte finishes or silver scopes and now leupolds dark earth just compound the problem.
isnt a scope a tool?
i mean, if you have a show piece rifle with great looking wood and a deep blue finsh a silver scope is gonna look like a turd, i agree.
but is the difference between a matte and a gloss worth $100 for someone?
the semmingly steady decline of the quality of true blueing in the rifle biz will most likely llimit the production of gloss scopes in the near future wont it?
when looking at scopes i dont really care about ring marks. i mean, i wont buy a bent or dinged scope but ring marks? please.
anyone else here hit a $700 scope with black primer or grill paint?

Then again if we like hunting with Steyr Safe-Bolts we need to resign ourselves to hunting with ugly rifles anyway!.......... ...............DJ

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:
..........I have an 82 Classic 22and 89 BG with fantastic Blueing.I also have a newer Hunter S 22 amd a Montana.Both of them are highly prone to rust....................The surface of the Moon is smoother..........................

I would think your penchant for Hyperbole to be pretty much self explanatory..................DJ

Personlly, and no offence to dj and etc. I'll take about any finish as long as it's blue/black.
The one thing I can't stand is that 'orrible cylinder on the occular end of the newer European scopes. Looks like some sort of plumbing.

The best shape for me was a cheap Bushnell with a lovely curved bell front and back.

I spend a lot more time than I care to admit putting scopes on rifles to see how they look on that particular rifle.

I'm firmly in both camps. I try to pick my scopes very carefully based on desired performance, magnification, reticle, etc. but frankly there have been quite a few rifle/scope combinations that seemed perfect to me until I mounted the scope and realized it looked simply aweful on that rifle and yanked it immediately.

Most all of my rifles are matte stainless or matte black and as such aren't very pleasing to the eye but there's still a something very pleasing to the eye in a rifle with a well matched scope and I've fallen prisoner to a few scope/rifle combinations that didn't make much sense other than the fact that they look so danged good together.

To quote Chic Worthing and a few others... "Life's too short to hunt with an ugly gun!"

DJ... You have some really gorgeous rigs there...

$bob$

djpaintles, Yes that is correct ,but the fact is on a Alaska Coastal Hunt last fall my Montana`s barrel and action Rusted quite easily while my Brothers Remington Stainless showed none. Just looking at the two together it was apparent which had the smoother barrel and action.Do a side by side comparison and tell me which you think has the better finish.I am not speaking of the Super Americas or higher grade Rifles.I just think if Remington,Savage and Winchester can afford to put a better finish on their mass produced rifles that Kimber could do the same.

quote:

Then again if we like hunting with Steyr Safe-Bolts we need to resign ourselves to hunting with ugly rifles anyway!.......... ...............DJ

I can't believe you said that

I just put a Swaro on mine to make it look prettier ..I figure Austrian Rifle= Austrian Scope.

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:
djpaintles, Yes that is correct ,but the fact is on a Alaska Coastal Hunt last fall my Montana`s barrel and action Rusted quite easily while my Brothers Remington Stainless showed none. Just looking at the two together it was apparent which had the smoother barrel and action.Do a side by side comparison and tell me which you think has the better finish.I am not speaking of the Super Americas or higher grade Rifles.I just think if Remington,Savage and Winchester can afford to put a better finish on their mass produced rifles that Kimber could do the same.

Maybe your stainless ain't stainless. My cousin bought a stainless winchester and it started to rust. He sent it back to
Winchester and it turns out that it was a carbon steel rifle that was in the white..........

quote:

Maybe your stainless ain't stainless. My cousin bought a stainless winchester and it started to rust. He sent it back to
Winchester and it turns out that it was a carbon steel rifle that was in the white....

Kimber montanas would be Stainless 416 grade. I had an 84m that would rust at the sight of a rain cloud but not owning any Montanas but knowing some people that do I have never heard the rust complaint. I would imagine if your Talking Alaska though it would qualify for extreme conditions and most SS guns would be better served plated or coated with something to help out . Only gun I don't wipe off and never have on any hunt Snow or Rain has been a Weatherby SS gun whether Vanguard or Mk V but they were made of 410 stainless and that in itself is better against corrosion.

I lived no less than 30 ft from a salt water canal that was linked to the Gulf of Mexico in Cape Coral Florida for several years and NEVER had a Remington rust even with repeated trips to the range and hunting.

I've never owned a Kimber but my stainless Winchesters never gave me problems either but my TC Encore barrels required periodic application of WD-40 to avoid rusting.

Stainless ain't necessarily stainless nor is it rust free...

$bob$

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:

quote:

Then again if we like hunting with Steyr Safe-Bolts we need to resign ourselves to hunting with ugly rifles anyway!.......... ...............DJ

I can't believe you said that

I just put a Swaro on mine to make it look prettier ..I figure Austrian Rifle= Austrian Scope.

I love my Steyr Scouts but pretty they ain't. The do however perform beautifully.............DJ

quote:

Originally posted by OLBIKER:
djpaintles, Yes that is correct ,but the fact is on a Alaska Coastal Hunt last fall my Montana`s barrel and action Rusted quite easily while my Brothers Remington Stainless showed none. Just looking at the two together it was apparent which had the smoother barrel and action.Do a side by side comparison and tell me which you think has the better finish.I am not speaking of the Super Americas or higher grade Rifles.I just think if Remington,Savage and Winchester can afford to put a better finish on their mass produced rifles that Kimber could do the same.

This of course begs the question as to whether your brother might leave a little better grade of protective oil on his Remington or not?
Another Alaskan on another forum spoke volumns about how much he loved his Kimber Montana and I don't recall him mentioning it rusting more than his Remington's but perhaps I missed some of his 6000 posts........... ...............DJ

Dude ,I just shared a personal observation of mine.Believe it or not I could care less. OB

I do believe in matching the scope to the rifle. It doesn't take much extra and it means you have a package.

A new custom with gloss blue gets a Swarovski Nova which is dissasembled and blued with the rest of the rifle. A stainless synthetic gets a new Swaro with the anodised alloy finish. A well worn BRNO gets a well worn blued scope.

A small amount of effort and thought makes for something that is pleasing for life.