burniegoeasily

I recently spent 400 dollars on Leupold VX II scope. Got it home and slaped it on a 300 wby. My problem is that I dont see much difference in this scope and my cheaper Simmons. I have many rifles with different scopes. I have rifles with simmons, tasco, leupold, redfield, weaver, and bushnell. I have yet to see a difference worthy of hundreds of dollars. I have guns that have had cheap simmons scopes on them for over 10 years. I have carried these guns in all weather, in all kinds of conditions. I have been rough with them and still have yet to replace them. The only difference I have seen is in the eye relief. Leupolds have a greater eye relief. I still cant justify a couple hundred dollar difference for an extra inch eye relief.

Is is me, or are the over priced scopes just that, over priced.

Danny45

Burnie, there's no doubt that you paid a little extra for the name. But, 20 years from now, that scope will still be going strong when the others have clouded up, loosened up, or just plain died (assuming they'll be used as much as the new one will be). When it comes to optics, you truly do get what you pay for. Be patient, and happy in the knowledge that you have a fine piece of glass there, and don't worry about it.

I think for about 50 bucks more, you could have gotten a VXIII. (read that on another forum, haven't personally tried it yet). That would have been the way to go, and still not too late as long as you didn't scratch the tube when you mounted it. Might consider upgrading.

marty1028

Give it time and you will find that the cheaper one will fall apart when they are against large mags. You get what you pay for.

bigcountry

It all comes down to confidence. If your shooting one hole groups with a tasco on your weatherby, then its a moot point. But when you get groups that show flyers, you start questioning your scope. Now if you saying that the leupold isn't clearer than your tasco, then something if wrong with the scope or you haven't focused it right.

Try a test. Do a box test. With your tasco zeroed in, move up 6MOA, shoot another group, then move to the right 6MOA, shoot another group, then down 6MOA, shoot another group, then move back to zero by moving left another 6MOA. One, see if that tasco is back to zero, two, see if it moved up an actual 6MOA, and over. Usually the quality of a scope shows thru at this point. Next, try setting the tasco to its lowest power, and shooting at 100 yards, then up to its highest, and see if you have the same zero. I have yet to have a problem with these two tests with a Leupold, but have had numerous problems with bushnell, BSA, etc. I have had simmons that have not stood up to the recoil of my sluggun with the reticle falling.

James B

The good news here is that you don't have to go either expensive or cheap. There are some good middle of the road priced scopes. Bushnell Trophy scopes go for about 100.00 on up. Swift scopes go from about 100.00 on up. The Luepold Rifleman and VX-l go for about 180-220.00 dollars. I have never had a problem with the Bushnell Banners and they go for under a 100.00. I used to use Tasco scopes. Never had a problem with them either but Tasco is a little iffy. They went down once and thier future is a little uncertain IMO. I would not be afraid to bet my hunt on a Bushnell Troopy Model. Or go a little more and get the 3200 series. They are top quality for 200.00 most places. If I had waited to hunt until I could afford a Luepold scope, I would have missed my first thiry years of hunting. I have f iour Luepolds now but they are really not that much better scopes than some of the middle priced scopes. The Simmons Aetec is one of the best scope going and they start at about 130.00 Nothing beats them for eye relief and I have seen nothing clearer or better in low light. I have a Simmons 6Xx40 straight power on my 30-06. ^%.00 I love it. Graeat light gathering and mighty clear. I would bet on getting 15 years or so from that scope. I have a Redfield and two Bushnells that I have had and used hard for thirty years so far.

Vapodog

This is the one area I never agree with anyone. I've had a cheap Bushnell on a .375 H&H for over twenty years and it's never failed me in any way. I had a $90 Weaver 3-9 scope on my .300 H&H on my African Safari and never lost wink one because of it. This is something too.....I took along a backup scope as well.....a TASCO.....Yup!

I'v had Tascos on my varmint rifles and never a complaint from me!!!

I own one Leupold 3 X 9 compact that I like because of it's light weight.....other than that it's not any better than my other scopes.

I've had trouble with Simmons however.....and don't own any anymore.

This guy is not at all convinced you got to spend a lot of money to own a functioning and reliable scope.

burniegoeasily

I posted this because I have spent more on some scopes than the gun they are put on. When I said my leupolds are no clearer than the cheapies, I simply ment they didnt merit another 200 to 300 bucks. Yes my redfields and leupolds are very clear, but that clearity has never done anything more for me in the field than any of my cheapies. I have had a simmons on a 30--06 for over 10 years, give or take a few years. I have never had to adjust it. It has held 1 to 1.5 inch groups with no flyers. I guess I just started questioning the extra cash. I have a cheap weaver that has been on a 30-30 for over 20 years. Never touched it. Now I will agree with the tasco. I have had two of them in my life. The first one was not very good. It started fogging with in two years. My other tasco, which is on a 308, I gave the gun to my uncle, who has done nothing to the scope and feels it works fine. Its about 15 years old.

Now I have some expensive scopes, and for what I paid, they better not mess up. I guess since I bought this last scope, I started questioning why I pay so much. Like I said, the expensive ones are crisper, but not engough to merit the cost. I might see the difference in years to come, but then agian I have some rather old guns with the original cheapies on them.

Oh well who am I kidding, I will keep paying for new toys. Its in my blood.

bigcountry

Burnie, I agree with you on the clarity. I used to purchase optics for my company. The price goes up exponentially with clarity and quality. But doesn't everything.

I mean you can get a 3.5MOA gun for 200 dollars fairly easy. If you want a 1.5MOA gun, you usually have to double your price to 400 dollars. If you want a .5MOA gun, you have to double that price and maybe then some past 800 dollars. But in this examples, there are exceptions to the rule, as there are with scopes. I notice the quality inspection and testing of cheaper lens is of course very sparce, but several good lenses get thru. Human interaction and testing is expensive and probably the most expensive thing.

Now that 95% transparity of a top of the line leupold has to go thru many more steps, and I can tell you, that it does cost. The problem lies where most of our eyes can't detect this from a 85% lens. But some can.

Also, its like craftsman. Do you really believe thier tools have that much more quality than a husky. Sure, a little, but you pay dearly for that lifetime, no questions warranty. And like mechanics with tools, us shooters do usually take advantage of that warranty sooner or later. I know I have with Leupold when a scope fogged up.

Bottom line, what your buying is confidense. When my groups are big with big boomers like your magnum, I just don't ever blame my scope. I blame my runout, I blame the brass, I blame me. So what I bought is confidense.

burniegoeasily

bigcountry
That is the very reason I went with a leupold for my mag. I wanted to be confident that when shooting errors occur, I cant blame the scope. I was just pondering the excess cash. But like you said, you pay for the extra quality controle. It just hurts my wallet to pay so much for a scope, and would really hurt me if my wife knew what I paid for the expensive scopes. What she dont know, wont hurt me.

Danny45

I think the older scopes from Tasco, Bushnell, and especially Weaver were great scopes. They had to be, they were the only things out there for many years. However, it's my opinion that as time has moved on, and with the rising costs of production, they are no longer of the same quality they were 20 years ago. One reason being, they've had to make cuts somewhere to keep their scopes within a certain price range. Whether those cuts were materials, or quality control, you still wind up getting what you pay for.