ORIGINAL: HEAD0001
With the current higher prices on the Leupold scopes-the difference in price between the best Leupold's and the A-Line Swaro. is not as large as you think.
I realize everyone has their own opinion on things. However I have seen a bunch of guys who have a half dozen deer rifles and a half dozen different scopes. Then they say they can not afford a high end scope?? I would much rather have one high quality rifle and scope over 5 or 6 low or even medium quality rigs. But again that is just my opinion. But you know what they say about the guy who only has one rifle...................Tom.
+1
That was my point for spending more on the scope. I'm not rich (not even close), but I wanted a great rifle with great glass that I'll be proud to own for the rest of my life. Awhile ago I realized I preferred accuracy to volume, so I sold my SKS's and inaccurate semi-auto rifles and started buying bolt action rifles that would shoot 1.5 MOA or better. I could blast all day with an SKS as surplus Russian ammo, but I'd be very lucky to keep all the shots on an 8.5x11" sheet of paper at 100 yards. After serving in the Marine Corps and having the chance to put 10's of thousands of rounds downrange from real machine guns, the appeal of the SKS wore off.
More recently I realized what many hunters don't, that the quality of the glass is every bit as important as the rifle it's mounted on top of. I know many, many guys who won't think twice about buying a $700-1,000 rifle, and then they'll mount a $50 Trashco in the cheapest aluminum rings they can find on it, and wonder why the darn thing gives them fits at the range. Most of them then blame the RIFLE!
Is $700 a lot to pay for a quality rifle? Most would say no. So why then do so many balk at paying at least half that much for at least mid-level glass? If you can save for the rifle, then you can save for the scope, too. It might take you longer to scratch that new-gun itch, but you'll be glad you waited.
Mike