Cheap Scopes..

30 September 2001, 05:27

Wstrnhuntr

Cheap Scopes..

Yesterday I went Scope shopping with every intention of finally making the move from Bushnell sportviews to a Leupold vari X II.

When I started comparing scopes, much to my suprise, it seemed to me that the Bushnell Trophy for half the cost was a lot brighter than the Leupold! (although I did like the XII a lot).

Simmons and Tascos in the like price range seemed hard to focus, I got the Trophy. I even compared it to a Bushnell elite they had on sale and still liked the trophy.

All Ive ever had have been the cheap sportviews and theyve given me no problems with the exception of cloudiness in very cold weather. If that 1 thing goes away then I expect good things from this scope.

30 September 2001, 08:11

Atkinson

Apparantly the Leupold was not focused for your eyesight....I have a barbed wire fence about a mile of so from my house that's on the skyline and late evening it tells me the Leupold is one of the best of scopes...Most scopes will no allow me to see the actual wire when it gets dusk....the Vari x111 is a bit brighter but not enough make any practical difference....

I have noticed many many folks never bother to turn the rear bell into focus for their eyesight....This needs to be done.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

30 September 2001, 13:52

Wstrnhuntr

Well Im unoffically calling my scope mounting a success. Since I couldnt reach the Kaiser on the phone I had to retrofit some weaver mounts on the old mauser but it looks real good so far. I used the epoxy method I saw in another thread here.

I got looking into the Cabellas catalog and noticed that the Bushnell trophy has one of the widest fields of view available in a 3-9 v, this is due to its short length Im sure. That probably affected my first impressions. Im sure the Leupold performs fabulous in all conditions but I also believe that a good Bushnell may be the most underrated scope on the market.

30 September 2001, 13:55

Wstrnhuntr

By the way, I used the eyebell on all of them. I wanted to make my choice a good one.

22 October 2001, 05:45

<Fish Springs>

While working at a large sporting goods store in Utah, we had a basket full of Bushnell Scopes that had failed in the field.

Some came back shortly after purchase and a a trip to the local rifle range. Some came back after not surviving the drive to deer camp and some seemed not to want to hold zero due to the phase of the moon. More than a few had elevation and windage adjustments that needed to be adjusted down to get elevation to go up. The point is that the frequency of return was X most scopes. Even Redfield's, lowend scopes survived longer.

The the replacement scope of choice was a Leupold Vari XII. Second was a Burris. Rarely did anyone even ask to have their Bushnell sent back for "free life time warranty repair or replacement".

Personally, I'd take along look at your budget. Maybe you should buy a cheaper rifle so you get a better scope. Or buy an aperture site.

A Williams 5D will set you back about 50 USD and will be vastly more dependable than poorly build scope.

In a pinch, the best deal to be had for a scope is a used M8-4X Leupold. There are a bunch of them out there, they are dependable and a lot of people have traded up little used fixed power for fancier variables. In most places a used M8-4X can be found for under 100 USD.

------------------
Fish Springs

22 October 2001, 14:39

franke

Westernhunter,
Here in the East,we have the same problems.
I bought a "used" 30/30 with a 3-9 Bushnell Sportview scope. I got nice groups at the range and a buck at almost 100 yards.
I couldn't leave well enough alone;I bought a new Leupold 1-4 vari 2 scope. It really looks neat on that little gun,and the glass is much better to look through.
Unfortunately,the reticle is not solid in the tube,adjustments are not reliable.
I sent it back,but I still do not have any confidence with it. The gun is still not sighted in,and the season starts nxt Month.
I agree that more money for a scope is NO guarentee that you get more scope.

------------------

22 October 2001, 17:07

jrslate

Gentlemen,
I have an old bushnell sportview that was originally on a .303 British, then a 7mm RM, now a .300 Savage. None of these are real hard kickers, and the scope has always performed great and seemed very bright. The only problem with it is that the variable is very very difficult to turn. I just pretend it is a fixed 3X and go from there.

Rifles around here wear a variety of scopes, but my favorite is my Bausch & Lomb Elite 3000 3-9x on my 7mm Rem Mag. It is bright clear, and doesn't move around. I saw them a while back at Graf & Sons on closeout for $149 or something like that. A great buy, and I like it better than my vari-x II.

Joel Slate
Slate & Associates, LLC
The Safari Specialists
www.slatesafaris.com

23 October 2001, 04:15

Rob1SG

I had a 3X9 Tropy I got as a birthday present from my wife and son. I mounted it on my 7mm RM and used it on a hunt that year it wouldn't hold it's zero and I ended up sending it to Bushnell they told me that I had aboused the scope and would not repair it under warranty. My RM now wears a Leupold 6 X 42 and is a shooting star IMHO.

24 October 2001, 04:46

Wstrnhuntr

I just returned from hunting and the Bushnell Trophy performed wonderfully. No fogging in 25* weather and my friend also liked it better than his vari X-II. Very nice optics for the $..

Also just for the record I learned that my mauser is an original sporter and the Trophy now sits on my new 06. The mauser will be restored to its original glory.

Fish Springs,

Which sporting goods store was that? Sportsmans warehouse told me that they get far more returns for tasco scopes than any other and that for the $ a bushnell is twice the scope of a tasco or a simmons..

Still the best yardstick I have is my own experience and after over 20 years of sportviews (2 of them, the first one was still fine when I got one with a rangefinder) the fogging was my only problem.

[This message has been edited by Wstrnhuntr (edited 10-23-2001).]

24 October 2001, 05:54

Crosshairs

I don't disagree that Bushnell (and Simmons and Tasco and....) are MUCH improved over the products they sold just a few years ago. They are VASTLY improved. And hey... they work.... most of the time.

However they still are just pretenders to the higher end scopes.

The differences will be noticed at dawn or dusk (not in a well lit department store). The differences will be noticed when that buck of a lifetime is sky lined and the shadows and double images from your Bushnell makes it confusing as to where the buck actually is... you have .5 seconds to figure it out... good luck. The differences will be noticed at sunrise and the sun is behind the bull... can you see it through the "flair" in that Bushnell? Probably not. The differences will be noticed after you dropped you gun so hard that the bell is flattened on top... will that Bushnell still shoot where the cross hairs land? The differences will be noticed when you send it back to the factory after your horse rolled over it. Trust me I've been there. The differences are real.

I've owned a bunch of scopes over the years but I won't buy another unless it's a Leupold or Zeiss. Cost DOES matter.

Yes, I still have a couple of Bushnell's.. I've mounted them on my .22s. They're perfect for that application.

No I'm not rich or a member of the elite... I'm just one serious hunter. I won't settle for boots that won't hold up or a scoope I can't trust 100%.

24 October 2001, 12:52

beemanbeme

Rob1s experience might tell the story about the low end scopes. Buying any scope can be a crap shoot but his experience tells what can happen with a cheap one.

24 October 2001, 13:27

p dog shooter

Spent more in long run it is well worth it I gave up buying cheap after having the 3 trip almost ruin by haveing the scope change zero. The mim is burris or leopold for me.

24 October 2001, 13:42

Crosshairs

For more thoughts on Leupold check out the thread in the African Hunting Forum. A bunch of endorsements here. Unlike Bushnell they stand by their products. I have a "Bushnell story" similar to Rob1SG but I won't trouble you guys with it....

24 October 2001, 16:59

Magnum Mike

quote:
Originally posted by franke:
Westernhunter,
Here in the East,we have the same problems.
I bought a "used" 30/30 with a 3-9 Bushnell Sportview scope. I got nice groups at the range and a buck at almost 100 yards.
I couldn't leave well enough alone;I bought a new Leupold 1-4 vari 2 scope. It really looks neat on that little gun,and the glass is much better to look through.
Unfortunately,the reticle is not solid in the tube,adjustments are not reliable.
I sent it back,but I still do not have any confidence with it. The gun is still not sighted in,and the season starts nxt Month.
I agree that more money for a scope is NO guarentee that you get more scope.

I'll trade you a Tasco for that Leupold...

mike

------------------
NRA Life Member

America, Love it or LEAVE IT!

25 October 2001, 02:45

<Warren Jensen>

Wstrnhuntr,

If that first hunting trip with that scope is the only one that you take then you made a wise purchase. I suspect there will be more trips.

The hardier scopes got their reputations for a reason. I learned the hard way. I missed what will probably be the finest mule deer buck I will ever see due to a scope zero shift. It had worked great up until then.

My own rule of thumb is that I should be spending as much or nearly as much on the scope/mount/site system as I am spending on the rifle. The part of the rifle that points it correctly is as important as the part that sends the bullet on it's way. In rough country don't expect cheap equipment to hold up.

------------------
Warren Jensen

Warren@lostriverballistic.com
lostriverballistic.com

26 October 2001, 09:49

franke

MissMagnum,
You are Too late. My trouble was caused by the fact that I was working up a new load for hunting with a scope with "suspect" accuracy of reticle adjustment. My solution was to replace it with a Known reliable Weaver for my load developement. Now that I have a known accurate batch of ammo,I can(an did),sight it in. It took a little time,but I think that,now that it is set,that it will hold. My practice shooting will verify that.
Thanks any way

------------------

26 October 2001, 10:23

Frank Nowakowski

Optics........"You get what you pay for"............ End of story.

I do not own ANY Bushnells , Tascos, Simmons, etc. Once saw a friend who had a very desireable elk permit, in a real trophy area,miss the absolute bull of a lifetime, due to his cheap Tasco Rangefinder scope malfunctioning. My hunting, and clean harvest of game animals means more to me than trying to cut corners on cheap optics.

26 October 2001, 13:34

Magnum Mike

quote:
Originally posted by franke:
MssMagnum,
You are Too late. My trouble was caused by the fact that I was working up a new load for hunting with a scope with "suspect" accuracy of reticle adjustment. My solution was to replace it with a Known reliable Weaver for my load developement. Now that I have a known accurate batch of ammo,I can(an did),sight it in. It took a little time,but I think that,now that it is set,that it will hold. My practice shooting will verify that.
Thanks any way

I think that we have all been there at some point. Never hurts try a scope that is a known qty when accuracy suffers....

Had a feeling that you would end up keeping that Leupold

mike

------------------
NRA Life Member

America, Love it or LEAVE IT!

[This message has been edited by mssmagnum (edited 10-26-2001).]

26 October 2001, 14:03

Wstrnhuntr

I didnt start this thread as a lesser is better thread but rather as an information exchange for those with a limited means like myself.

The line "you get what you pay for" is just a convienent maxim to justify spendy tendancies IMHO. I prefer the philosophy that "it pays to shop around".

Of corse those who have spent gobbs more on their scopes dont want to hear that a manufacturer who sells theirs for considerably less just MIGHT actually produce a quality product, I can understand that. And Im also not trying to suggest that a $100.00 scope is every bit of what a $1000.00 piece of glass may be, BUT! A lot of the same technology found in high end scopes IS also in mine, a 1 piece tube, fully multi coated optics, fast focus eyepiece, etc. Scope technology in general is not something that is only available to the upper eschelon and I submit that Baush and Lomb has learned from the past just like the others. They are in the optic business. Tasco on the other hand makes nearly anything for Kmart, see my point?

Personally I dont see how ANY scope could possibly be worth $1000.00 but I would like to hear from any springfield armory owners. Are they as good as they look?

Do any of you know what the Cabellas riflescope of the year is? A Bushnell Elite. Again I think they (upper end Bushnells) may be the most underrated scopes available. Ill bet that it wont be long before Leupold and Burris etc come up with their own version of Rainguard but will any of the big spenders remember who pioneered it?

With all of the cheap scope failures coming out of the woodwork in this thread I would mention that NONE of them are immune to failure. Im happy with the service that my bushnells have given me for 20+ yrs and none of the horror stories will change that.

Happy hunting all..

[This message has been edited by Wstrnhuntr (edited 10-26-2001).]

26 October 2001, 16:55

Frank Nowakowski

"You get what you pay for"

I just bought a pair of Leupold 3-9's, matte models, new in the boxes for $184 each. The Leupold warranty is legendary as is their overall quality. In 40 years of fooling around with guns and hunting as well as 27 years of LE experience I have never had a Leupold scope fail. I have owned literally dozens of them.

Over the years I have taken in Bushnells , Tascos, etc on trades or bought them cheap to throw on a "lender" gun or on a .22 for gophers. More than half failed in one way or another. Why put up with that failure? I'm not talking $1,000 scopes here. I'm talking Leupolds, or Burris at reasonable prices.

I stand by my previous comment.

Frank N.

26 October 2001, 17:24

Dr. Duc

I'm alittle confused about the relationship between B&L and Bushnell these days. I have several old fixed Balfor,etc the are incredably bright 50yrs later. I generally don't expect much from Bushnell scopes but recently I read the B&L was selling all their scope under the Bushnell name now due to name recognition. I have a B&L 4200 elite and it is a very under rated scope as far as brightness and image quality. I think it rivals my Zeiss conquest but has a narrow field of view. Cost $100 slightly used.
All of that being said, if I were spending serious money for a hunt, I would go with a Leupold, Burris. Zeiss or possibly Pentax. The scope is the cheapest thing about the shot next to the ammo. Don't try to go budget if you aspending big bucks to get there.
My PH in RSA had an old steel tube Weaver 2.5X.

26 October 2001, 18:15

boltman

Bausch & Lomb is a trade name that was leased to Bushnell to put on their top end scopes. B&L scopes were made by bushnell but bushnell didn't want to pay what B&L wanted to use their name anymore so the scopes are now called bushnell elite instead of B&L. The bushnell line of it's name being associated with high end scopes is a bunch of B.S. I don't know anyone who associates bushnell with high end optics. The elites are decent scopes, certainly the best that bushnell makes, but they're not in the same quality league as Leupold. I've owned two elite's in the past and now all my rifles have Leupolds on them. Not to bash wstrnhuntr's opinion but lots of folks (me included) started out scoping rifles with cheap scopes like bushnell's, tasco's, and simmons, after all they look the same on the outside and many of the cheap scopes look as good looking through them. What we all find out sooner or later is that these cheap scopes just don't hold up and invariably cost more than a good scope in the long run with ruined hunts and in my case lots of ammo shot up trying to zero a rifle with a faulty scope. This was posted: "Of corse those who have spent gobbs more on their scopes dont want to hear that a manufacturer who sells theirs for considerably less just MIGHT actually produce a quality product, I can understand that." Actually, a lot of folks here thought that until these cheap scopes proved us wrong as you will eventually find for yourself (unless you're extremely lucky). I for one didn't go out looking to throw money away on a scope. I still cringe when I write a check for a Leupold but I know that's money well spent. I now put good, proven scopes on my rifles, I can't afford to put cheap scopes on them.

27 October 2001, 18:20

Wstrnhuntr

quote:
Originally posted by boltman:
Bausch & Lomb is a trade name that was leased to Bushnell to put on their top end scopes. B&L scopes were made by bushnell but bushnell didn't want to pay what B&L wanted to use their name anymore so the scopes are now called bushnell elite instead of B&L. The bushnell line of it's name being associated with high end scopes is a bunch of B.S.

Wrong! I knew for a long time that Bushnell was a division of Bausch & Lomb but what I didnt know until now is that Bushnell "Was" a division of Bausch & Lomb and has now branched off.

Bushnell is one of many former Bausch & Lomb owned companies and that is why you can see several people in this thread praising Bushnell optics for their brightness and clairity, because they have Bausch & Lomb know how in the optics. Where they (Bushnell scopes) have been lacking is in the other intracacies of a riflescope that companies like Leupold have had a quantum leap on them. Hell, the only real reason I went scope shopping in the first place is because I know the sportviews are the bottom of the barrel and I wanted to improve and say what you will but I did improve considerably. I meant what I said about every intention of buying a Vari XII and liking the trophy better. The optics are supurb. Very bright, very clear and sharp and THAT makes a difference to me. Ill never go back to a sportview, I do know that much.

I suppose I can appreciate not wanting to take a chance on the hunt of a lifetime with a bargian priced scope but thats not something I personally get around to as of yet, I guess Ill have to work on that. If I ever get around to that Alaska trip in the back of my mind perhaps I will consider changing brands just to be safe. Until then I will continue to be happy with what Ive got until it gives me a reason not to be.

Have a day..

29 October 2001, 05:30

Atkinson

I think I have to agree that optics are one of the exceptions where you get what you pay for up to a point...I beleive European and foriegn scopes are very over priced, due to import restrictions etc....

I have seen Weavers ( old weavers ), Tasco, Bushnell, and some others cheaper scopes fail in the Pacific Northwests colder weather....I believe my main complaint is in the seal and they have a tendency to fog...

Just my opinnion for myself and I certainly don't care what another individual chooses in the way of any kind of hunting gear....I have choosen Leupold for myself and never regretted that decision.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

29 October 2001, 05:38

<Jordan>

What is the word on Burris? They look well made and seem bright and clear. The price is right and they are made in America (I have heard). What say you?

Jordan

29 October 2001, 10:56

<tasunkawitko>

if you work for a living and have to watch your budget, check out sightron.

www.sightron.com

------------------
tash

29 October 2001, 16:46

<sure-shot>

Jordan, I was considering the Burris Fullfield II for one of my latest rifle projects and posted some inquiries on some other forums. I got mixed replies. I then woke up and asked myself "what the hell am I doing straying from Leupold?" I bought a Leupold again and have been satisfied as always.

WstrnHtr, if you hunt as long and hard as I do that Bushnell will fail you when you need it the most. Don't scrimp on optics, a few more hours of overtime will put you in range of a Leupold. The Vari-XIIs were made for people with a tight budget. Alot of nonresident deer tags cost more than a Vari-XII3x9.

sure-shot

01 November 2001, 09:41

<Sparkman375>

...congrats on your Bushnell! It's an upward step in the right direction for you...buying better quality scopes (compared to your last Sportview). I hope your Bushnell Trophy never lets you down, and I hope you continue to migrate to higher quality. Learn as you go.
Trying to sell us your theory, we (who) HAVE been let down by cheap scopes, won't fly. We get set in our ways based upon NOT wanting to repeat past mistakes. Certain rifle/hunt applications will tolerate cheap scopes....but not many. I minimize risk and failure by trying to do it right the first time when it comes to scopes.
I think many here who have responded to you are trying to save you some growing pain. Experience has a way of projecting itself that way. Thanx for the heads-up regarding the Bushnell Trophy, I may try one on my .243, next trip to the range. But it will be in Leupold QR mounts....with a Leupold scope along as backup. Sparkman

01 November 2001, 15:51

<Talus>

Leupold has earned my money, and will continue to. If I have to save longer or shop used, so be it. I would take a used Leupold over anything else except the best Euroscopes. And those are above the point of diminishing returns.

If you can't see it, you can't kill it. But I do wish you the best with the Bushnell. The best hunter I know has killed truckloads of deer with one.

Of course, he now uses a Leupold VX II (which are going for cheap nowadays!) and lamenting the huge old mosshorns he would have killed if he'd had the Leupold sooner!

Jeff

03 November 2001, 15:39

<Steve in MI>

FOr those on a budget you might want to take a look at sightron. I have 2 of the 6-24's on is on a 300 ultra that got pounded for over a week on a PD this summer no troubles. I have a new burris Fullfield II that is great. I think it is a bright and clear as my VarX III 3.5-10 at dusk and dawn. For the money they are both great buys.

AS for the Bushnell junk they can keep them. I had 3-9 for a rim fire 22 cal, So I mounted it to fire form some brass for the ultra,and see how it grouped out of the box. Not having another scope handy I did not think it would be a problem WRONG!!!I
would ike to say it grouped great but the scope did not make it past the 4 rounds poped a cross hair!! I would go with out a scope before wasting my time and money on the cheap scopes.

[This message has been edited by Steve in MI (edited 11-03-2001).]

06 November 2001, 13:13

Paul H

Out of two Bushnell sportviews I had, both failed. One a 4x on a 10/22, and after 1000's of rounds, the rear lens fell out. The other was a 3-9 that came on a used 308, it never grouped, even after bedding it. Then one day I noticed a clicking sound as I shifted the scope. The 4x failed first, and its new replacement was put on the .308, it has withstood 100's of rounds, though I'm not sure how well it'll keep from fogging, and don't have alot of confidence with it. The 3-9 was repaired, but then quickly traded off.

I don't see the VX-II's as the be all end all of scopes, but they are a good solid scope, and IMHO, bottom rung for a scope I'd trust.