Reply With QuoteOk I see ... is there a custom place that makes an interchangeable fore sight for a BSA Scorpion PCP? I’ve already got a Walter match diopter.
Registered User
All good points above.
One reason Sidwinders are good is because they were designed from scratch and the machinery was all new to make them. All the new toys and advances in one scope. Priced very keenly too. To get all the features make them a bit big. They shpuld be repeatable for a good while, ie all the parts keep working and doing what expected.
When a manufacturer brings new technology, new machinery, and new models often the products are pretty good. Though its needs to be new design rather than some dusted off old one.
A good few branded scopes are older designs from older machinery with a few bits remodelled just to look a tad different.
Choice of coatings also adds to the mix, cost, and light performance.
Yep, its a minefield, which is why few recommend a scope. Just too many variables.
may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration
Ok I see ... is there a custom place that makes an interchangeable fore sight for a BSA Scorpion PCP? I’ve already got a Walter match diopter.
Registered User
Ah right, so you don't actually want "a good scope" you want cheap, but without being complete tat, that's good out to 50yds.Originally Posted by Hsing-ee
It's not snobbery, it's talking about completely different parameters
Ooo, nasty snark, get back in the cage now.
may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration
He he ... I like quality ‘fings’ as much as the next chap .. I suppose it’s where does the point of diminishing returns occur in terms of performance? A £1000 scope isn’t going to be 10x better than a £100 scope but a £10 scope is not as good as iron sights. I think I’ll just shut up now.Ah right, so you don't actually want "a good scope" you want cheap, but without being complete tat, that's good out to 50yds.
It's not snobbery, it's talking about completely different parameters
Ooo, nasty snark, get back in the cage now.
Registered User
Years ago I forked out for a Z6i. I justified the price as it was to be used regularly and in every type of weather on my foxing rifle and also repeatedly dialled on the range days. It remains the best optic I’ve owned for performance and reliability.
On my HMR I used a Meopta 7x50 and on my .22lr ‘truck gun’, I used a Nikko 3-9x40 that cost me £30. Both optics on those two rimfires never missed a beat, despite being used hard for years - ok that’s not so surprising with the Meopta but a failure could well be expected from a bashed up £30 second hand optic.
I never touched either scope on the hunting rimfires. I’d zero them, forget about any adjustments that were available and use hold over as both were ‘point and shoot’ rifles.
So budget optics can and do cut the mustard, it sometimes just depends on how you use them in their intended role.
Put on heading 270, assume attack formation
tlhIngan maH. taHja
Tracking repeatability.
Removal and re attachment not shifting zero.
Non fussy eye relief or scope blacking out if you move your head 0.5mm off centre.
Quality crisp edge to edge image with no aberration.
Very fine Xmas tree ladder ret with IR that doesnt burn you eyeball
Smooth mag, focus and turrets.
Zero stop.
Glass that actually transmits light
Decent warranty and a no F$#@ about warranty and attitude.
Good after market resell value.
Makes looking through it a total joy
In a battle of wits I refuse to engage with an unarmed person.
To one shot one kill, you need to seek the S. Kill only comes from Skill
may also be employed in conjunction with a drawn reciprocation dingle arm, to reduce sinusoidal repleneration
That’s an answer that is satisfying. Thanks
Registered User
To start with it depends what you're using it for. 20 yard plinking or flattening foxes out to 300m at night.
For quality optics that last and are used for anything upto 40m with an air rifle I think Simmons WTC 1.5-5x20 and others in the range such as Aetec 2.5-10 x44 are lovely scopes and cheap for what you pay. Some don't like the duplex reticle and prefer mildot etc.
I've had Tasco AG scopes and find them ok but not as good as the above. I've a little Webley Gold 4x40 and the clarity is fantastic.
Each to their own and what they can afford.
Always on the look out for Brum / Venom - Webley Longbow / Tommie rifles and parts.
Registered User
No need to shut up, because you're looking at it from a different situation/view point than I am, the point being that the requirement needs to be clear.
& while you're correct a £1000 scope will not be 10x better than a £100 scope,
a £300 scope probably will be 3x better
Ph.D (Language studies)
I'd never spend more than say, £300 on glass - doesn't matter what rifle I had. Total waste of money ...
"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life son" Dean Wormer.
Registered User
I have a Game King NS and Tasco 2.5-10 (so sub 100) or should be, I find 'tolerable', I've missed opportunities in woods on squirrels in shade because the glass isn't 'good enough' to see them clearly
Nikon Pro staffs, Bushnell Legends Good / Very Good- I've never missed an opportunity
Bushnell Elites Very good / Excellent, never missed an opportunity and smile too at the experience, and marvel at the 'kit'
Goes without saying they need to track etc, have OK build quality
The Bushnell Prime 4-12 SF for £200 from Edgar, £225 from Uttings is what I currently think of as a Very Good air rifle scope, glass wise, build, warranty, plenty of MOA
In reality I wouldn't spend over 500 quid on a scope - and certainly would want a bullet proof, transferable lifetime warranty on the product itself to entertain the idea. An exception may be if it's one of those weird field target things and that's your bag 40 x plus mag sat on a Cush, shooting pellets at really really small targets far far away .and if that's what lights your bonfire - absolutely fair play
I think that is probably all most people need to spend, to not end up 'dissatisfied' over long term use
I've chopped and changed loads of cheaper scopes, knowing really, I'm knocking on a bit and I'm not going to be happy with too much compromise. The best cheaper scopes I've seen glass wise are Panamax (if at right price) though the build is clearly budget. Nikon will be a huge loss at performance for money bracket.
Looking for TO-6 Trigger unit unmessed with or T0-6 kit for 34
Registered User
I've been using a dirt cheap, Chinese manufactured scope for the last four years or so. I brought it as a 'stop gap' whilst I saved up for something decent, like I said four years!
The point is it holds its zero and whilst the glass is obviously allegedly not the 'best' in the world, it does it's job and is perfectly adequate for MY needs and requirements.
Fact that is doesn't carry a sexy, expensive known name may bother some but I'm not fussed. Need to remember that a lot of scopes are manufactured or, at least, contain Chinese components.
Make your own conclusions. ��
Registered User
Plinking 20-30 yards, a 4x32 or 6x40 costing no more than £70 is plenty for me.
Hunting out to 40, lower light leves etc, a 3-9 for up to about £150
HFT - bushnell 10x40 about £150 imported a while back (around £300 new UK)
BR I can see going up to £300 (e.g. Super Sniper 20x)
If you do a lot of lamping, then the 7x50 meopta is a great scope, but still less than £300 (it might be more now, I had mine years ago)
FT of course is a whole different party.
For most airgun usage out to 45 yards, I can't see much point in spending more than £150.. For niche situations, yeah, £300
I have a bunch of cheap scopes that work OK - Hawke Panorama EVs seem good value for example (under a £ton new). NS Gameking 3-9x40 was £30 brand new in a clearance (sportsman's I think) a couple of years ago, and is just fine for the money.. not the crispest, of brightest, buit for £30 !? But the panoroma is a whole lot better. Even a £20 SMK 4x28 is actually not bad clarity for garden ranges - it's way better than the nasty milk bottle stuff of old. I really don't like the mountmaster range though - clear enough but lots of them seem to break on springers (erector tubes and rets).
Works OK for me means it holds zero and I can clearly see my target and ret. On the cheap scopes I've noticed plenty where the box test will show some lateral movement when doing vertical adjustments, and vice versa, but as long as it's not too extreme, and it goes back to the zero at the end of the test, I'm fine with that. They won't have great light transmission, and the image may be slightly unclear towards the periphery, but it's nice and clear in the middle 75%.
Cheaper scopes these days are just so much better. I remember the old hawke pro-stalk - terrible clarity. Same with most of the tasco varmint 6-24x - but the 2.5-10s were much better (all on the same mag). The little cheap hawke reflex 3.5-10x44 was clearer than all of them by a mile. It was a complete lottery.
Just some ramblings from my own experiences.
Always looking for any cheap, interesting, knackered "project" guns. Thanks, JB.
Registered User
If it's just 'plinking' at say 20-30 yards, unless your eyes are as bad as mine, why use a scope at all? On a couple of guns I've gone for cheap red-dots. Again, not the answer for all but maybe a consideration.
Likes to wear driving gloves in the bedroom
It depends on your own budget and the type of shooting you do, many people drop a grand on an iPhone which they will sell for £200 after 2/3 years, by comparison a scope at £1500 which will last a lifetime is an absolute bargainI'd never spend more than say, £300 on glass - doesn't matter what rifle I had. Total waste of money ...
Making a mockery of growing old gracefully since I retired
Posting Permissions
