I say it depends on what you intend to do with the rifle and how much money you have. I have always read to spend as much as you spent on the rifle on the optics. That's cool if you have the money, but what if you don't? I have had plenty of guns that shot really well with 50 dollar scopes on them.

If you are talking about target or long range shooting then a high power scope would be nice. And for sure the more money you spend the better the optics will be. But if it is for normal use or light hunting I don't see where you need a 500-1000 dollar scope. It sure would be nice, but a requirement? I don't think so. My .17HMR was $200 and it has a $400 dollar scope on it. However it has a 20 power varmint scope on it and it will shoot 1 inch or better groups at 120 yards if I do my part. Would it be less accurate with a cheaper scope, no, but the one I have sure is nice to look thru at that power.

I have remington 700ml inline muzzle loader that has a BSA Catseye 3.5-10x50 scope on it that cost like 150 bucks. It shoots plenty well at 100 yards and beyond. Before that it had a 50 dollar bushnell 3-9x32 on it. Guess what, it still shot 1 inch groups at 100 yards. Were these scopes as clear and bright as a Conquest, hell no. However they did do the job at a fraction of the cost which was what I could afford on what I make. The deer sure can't tell the difference I'll tell you that much.

If you can easily afford a more expensive scope though I would get it. Or buy from a place like Cabela's where you can return it if your not happy. That is what I did with mine. I tried 4 scopes until I found the one I wanted. It ended up being a Cabela's Alaskan Guide model for 100 bucks more than I really wanted to spend. However for what I wanted to use it for the optics were much better. That is the most I have ever spent on a scope in my life. I doubt I will ever be able to do it agian with my income.

That's just my opinion any way.

Paul

I recently purchased a refurbished Nikon Monarch UCC 3-9X40 Matte from Natchez Shooters Supply for $199.95 with shipping it came to $214. I mounted it on a Remington 870 w/cantilever slug barrel. Firing saboted hard kicking slugs, around 80 rounds so far I've had no problems. I would buy one of the refurbed Monarchs over the Aetec. I do have one of the older Aetec's on my .50 cal muzzleloader and I believe the Monarch is a better optic.

You could get a nice Leupold VX-II for under $300 at this website...

https://www.dnrsports.net/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=DSC&Cat egory_Code=vx2scopesleu

Just my 2 cents

Is it a "sin" ? Nonsense. I realise that this was used in a euphumistic sense... but, I think that you should install whatever type of scope you wish - to h&## with anyone else's opinion. I absolutely agree that one tends to get what one pays for with optics. But, just because the rifle cost $1200...this doesn't mean that a good, workable scope must cost $1200 as well. There is a lot of scope "snobbery" out there. It seems that, to many involved in the shooting/ hunting sports, that the brand of scope is more important that the success of the user. It often seems that way, in any case. All that is really important is whether the scope works as intended...and thus, the character of the RESULTS. I certainly realise (and agree) that the odds of good results are much better with a fine piece of optical equipment than a cheap one....but there can be exceptions. The heart of it is - are YOU (the owner/ user) satisfied ?

Many purist' will tell you that the scope should cost as much, or more than the gun! I say bull hockey! I would stay away from any "under a hundred dollar," junk, but the Aetec is a good scope! I'd say it is as good as any low-end Luepies. Is it as good as a 800-1000 dollar scope? No! But the 1000 dollar scopes aren't 5 times better than the Aetec either! Aetec is good glass!

Putting a Simmons on a Sako is a sin roughly equivalent to having sex with your mother-in-law.

It was a bad idea to think about it....it was a bad idea when you was doing it and the next morning when you woke up you knew for sure it was a mistake.

I think I'm going to be ill at the thought![:'(] I can't even believe that my wife is related to that thing...er..woman! But your point is well seen.

Anyway, I think I'll probably just go with my original plan and put a Nikon Monarch on it, or maybe a Bushnell 4200 Elite. I'm prepared to spend $500 on the scope, or even a shade more. I think I might try an Aetec on my Savage 10ML-II. It's got a cheapy Bushnell on it right now and I wouldn't mind having better glass on it.

I really appreciate everyones input.

Mike

That's like buying a Corvette with a 4 cylinder engine!
Man buy a scope to go with that rifle! You said money was no object!

I don't agree, at least not completely! What about internal sealing?????

I'd much rather have a decent scope that the company has a history and reputation of NOT going south whenthere product isin the field, than a scope that's a bit clearer and of unknown quality!!!

Takeyour scope and put it in the freezer "overnight". Then drop it in a sink full of "warm" water and look for bubbles. "If" it won't pass this test, i wouldn't put it on my pellet rifle!!!

When i'm out hunting the last thing i need is my scope pukeing or even getting some fog in it, and i can say i've "never" had even one Leupold scope fail in any way in the field! I have thrown a couple cheaper scopes in the garbarage over the years though.

Drilling Man

Dude go with a better scope. If your buyin a rifle like that it deserves a little better. I hear those aetecsare decent scopes, especially for the price but I would definatly go with something else.