Simmons Blazer - excellent value.

[steve B]

Just a quick review - I bought one of these (6-24 mag with target turrets and parallax adjustable) off Gary K and am writing this because I am genuinely impressed with the quality. It focusses down to within a handful of yards on 6 mag and on 24 mag is clear and bright all the way out to the edges of the sight picture. Haven't used the PA for rangefinding but this should be a doddle, the rings are precise and easy to move.

Its not illuminated reticle or mill - dot. Useful as these feature can be give me a clear sight picture any day! Its obvious where Simmons have spent the money and frankly the sight picture is in a different league to scopes offering iluminated and/or milldot in the same price bracket that I have had or tried.

If mine is representative of the breed I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone looking for a truly good budget scope. I paid Gary the princely sum of £65 for mine and am well pleased! I think Gary's got a couple more iof anyones interested.

Impressed

steve B

[Retracted_Yeti]

Got one myself a little while back from BuddyBoy(top man!)

Best scope I've had yet!

Steve, try it in low light conditions and see what u think!


Cheers.

Roy.

[Davestate]

I must have had a crap one, either that or I've been spoiled by 'real quality' scopes.

[steve B]

Think you must have been unlucky Davestate. We're not talking Leupold or Burris here, but mines a damgood scope for the money, putting other budget scopes to shame.

Steve B

[Chewie]

I must have had a crap one, either that or I've been spoiled by 'real quality' scopes.

You weren’t the only one Dave I had one for a couple of months and then got rid of it. The quality of the optics must have improved since my scope had the worst optics of any scope I have used for years.

[steve B]

I've bought scopes in most price brackets up to the £250 mark over the last few years - I'd like to say I've bought scopes more expensive than this but I have never been able to justify the cost - when you get to a certain price point the percentage return in terms of quality for money gets lower and lower. The more expensive scopes are very nice if you can afford them, though!

I've found that a lot of 'budget' scopes over the years (ie much under the £100 new price mark) have been a false economy though (with a few notable exeptions) particularly on the higher end of the zoom. Dull sight picture, fuzzy at the edges, and in some cases unuseable.

It might all be a bit of a lottery at the lower end of the market. I've used some of the early Hawkes that others raved about and found them particularly crap, for example. Ditto some tasco's and BSA's. Others have been a delight, such as the nikko sterlings. If there was one scope I wish I'd never sold it was one of the early Apollo 5 stars, wonder how much they'd cost in today's money if still made!

The Blazer that I've got is crisp at all mags and easy to use, and as a budget scope that is going to get a few knocks and bangs I'd much rather fit this to a working gun.

ATB

Steve B

[imoyes]

I think you have to have reasonable expectations of what you're going to get. If you expect it to compete with £300 'scopes the chances are you'll be dissappointed. If you're not then IMHO you were probably wasting your money on the £300 'scopes in the first place.

However, they do only cost £60-70.

I've got three 'scopes on three guns now.

1: A Rhino 6-24x50 PA IR mildot. This is the duffer of the three. It's OK but not great. It's on my 9YO's S200.
2: A S/H Hawke Varmint 8-32X44 PA mildot. This is the best image quality. This is on my S400.
3: A Simmons Blazer 6-24 PA. It's as good as either of the others. It'll be fitted to my 11YO's S200 when it arrives in a couple of weeks.

The Blazer was £30 cheaper than the Hawke and to be honest I can't REALLY tell the difference in image quality, and it has the advantage 'cos it's a bigger objective. IMHO it's a much better image than the Rhino and it feels more "solid" too. It doesn't have the IR but, to be honest, for the FT & HFT we do it turned out it was a gimmick to satify the lads anyway. It's probably a really good tool for hunting but we just use the IR for farting about with.

I'd fully accept that they're all UTTER CRAP compared to a £300 'scope but then again I didn't have to pay £300 for them.

I think there's a lot of gun snobbery around trying to force you that you've got to have dearer and dearer gear 'cos you have to be able to show your mates that your serious about your shooting. Fact is, if you can't shoot (like me ) none of it'll help much.

Thank God that our club (Kibworth Shooting Ground) is not like that.

[master_shriller]

I had one of these and found it to be well made, the mag and p/a rings felt quality, nice and smooth, the target turrets were great, the image was better than Tasco/Hawke 42 mm varmints.

I'm sure these scopes must have cost more initially, I wondered if a load of them have been bought cheap in the US and offloaded here.

I only let it go as it was part of a combo I sold. If I need another low priced scope, I wouldn't hesitate in buying another one.


Regards


Ben

[LESS THAN FORTUITOUS KENNETH]

I'm sure these scopes must have cost more initially, I wondered if a load of them have been bought cheap in the US and offloaded here.


I bought one of the original Blazers (before Simmons had them rebadged) from a certain Mr Ramsbottom. My first FT scope. 8-32 mag. Image quality was great, but the differential in focus out past 45 yds was minimal, making unsuitable for serious FT work. Since Simmons put their moniker on them, they've gone down in price. I think I paid about £129 about 4 yrs ago.