Top 5 best & worst rifle scopes
10-16-2010, 01:02 AM
#62
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 66
Wow you guys really put things into a different perspective. I remember growing up and hunting with my dad everyone would say Bushnell is the scope to buy. They always said you could spend more money on a scope but you'd never get a better scope. They would say dont get the $50 tascos and simmons, its worth spending 50-100% more to get the $69.99 - $100 Bushnells. Heck the gun that got me my 'handle' (270 Rem 7600) had a ~20yr old Bushnell Sportview. The thing had no knob to turn and was harder then heck to rotate after all those years but never fogged up and I could pretty much nail a pop can at 300 yards. That gun was so dang accurate when I bought my own rifle for the first time I went out and bought the exact same gun as dads, only 20 years newer (270 rem 7600) and topped it with a Banner, and dad thought I spent to much on a bigger 40mm banner vs his smaller sportview lol!
I think I'd give up hunting and buy my meat from the store for the price of one of those fancy scopes... But I realize times have changed and standards have gone by the wayside now eveything is made a cheap as possible... so compared to a cheap scope 20 years ago maybe the bottom line for a decent one is a couple/few hundred now.
I think I'd give up hunting and buy my meat from the store for the price of one of those fancy scopes... But I realize times have changed and standards have gone by the wayside now eveything is made a cheap as possible... so compared to a cheap scope 20 years ago maybe the bottom line for a decent one is a couple/few hundred now.
02-21-2012, 06:03 PM
#64
Spike
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1
On the better scopes that I have had trouble with would be the Burris Signature with the possi-loc that they no longer make. All the BSA type Russian trash has failed with Simmons and the cheap Pentax all failing but, one Simmons out of six is still hanging on. Counter Sniper and Dark ops optics are a total shams about the same as Osprey that stay together but, the glass is very cheap.
Nightforce
Valdada
Vortex
Trijicon
Sightron SIII
Leupold Mark 4
Burris MTAC & Signature
Bushnell Elite Tactical or Super Slam
Nikon Monarch Side focus
Hawke Sidewinder
Millet
Mueller
Having be coming tired of the trash cheap "Mad in China" scopes I have been seeking to find the better made of the "Mde in China". I have a good Millet and a very good for the price Mueler. So, when I got chance to see a good Hawke Scope when looking through one at the range, it was a Sidewinder Tactical 8.5-25X42 and it was clearly better then the Mueller or the Millet that I have, near the quality of any of my Burris! So, I decided to buy a Hawke scope for a coyote rig and dew to the fact that it was $100 off from the Wal-mart price - being a demo, I decided to go for it.
I got this scope from SCOPESTOP.COM and I decided comparing it to the Mueller 8.5-25x50. The Hawke reticle I choose for the 8-32X56 Sidewinder was the SR12 after checking out the software I got from the Hawke website. The scope came used not as a "As New" demo as stated. It had ring marks from being mounted and light scuff marks from being handled but, that is the chance I took in buying from the internet.
Well the Mueller I got a couple years ago seems to be super clear for Chinese made and Hawke claims to be Europe engineered with ***anese glass but, the scope is made in China. I used bugs, grass, reflective surface, high contrast in all three direction in relation to the sun. The Mueller seems much clearer but, once I put the sun shade on the Hawke it got closer to the Mueller in sharpness and once the sun was setting both scopes were about just as sharp (Testing both at 25 power). It seem that the 56mm objective lens on the Hawke pulls in so much light it makes it hard to see how clear the glass can be. I then tested the scope @ 200 yards with the ISO 12233 optics chart on 8X14 legal letter size premium paper printed @ 1200X1200 DPI. Once again the Mueller seemed clearer @ 25 power then the Hawke @ 25 power but, I could see the same amount of lines of resolution from both scopes. The resolution did not get any better and maybe a tad worse when the Hawke went to 32 power. Edge Sharpness is not as good as the Mueller. The one inch wagon wheel at that distance was noticeable but, it seemed to only have four legs with a dot in the middle @ 200 yards for both scopes and with the Hawke at 32 power it just zoomed in with only the same detail being apparent. Without a doubt the color seems washed out in the Hawke and is vivid in the Mueller. I would say this Hawke scope is inferior to the Millet 4-16X50 once past the same magnification of 16 power. I have seen better MIllet glass then the one I have and I have seen worse. Millet has been all over the scale on quality glass in my opinion. It seems I am getting the idea that this is normal when dealing with scopes made in China. On the Hawke scope this is claimed to be ***anese glass, it surely does not live up to this in the scope I bought.
For a much better Glass but, at $850 I would have gone with the Sightron SIII Long Range 8-32x56 Scope with Side Focus as I have the Sightron SIIISS10-50X60 LRMD and it is mind blowing crystal clear. I would say it is the same or better then any of my Burris scopes or Leopold and much better then my Nikon glass.
I do not think every Mueller is as good as mine and I would guess most Hawke scopes are as good and could be better then my friends was at the range. I would imagine my Hawke is the lower of what they put out and is good for Chinese but, if someone is going to buy, China, I would think it would be to get something that is close to or very near to the same product for a great savings in money. I do have Burris, Leopold, Nikon but, can not afford to have these on every rig so, I do have one Millet, Mueller, Sightron and now a Hawke looking to see if money can be saved and still get quality sharp glass with a repeatable scope. I feel I got lucky with the Mueller, the Millet is worth what I paid for it and like I said, the Sightron is amazing! The Hawke I have still needs to be tested at the range for the, “box test” and repeatability and I will do those tests. At this point I did not save any money on this scope and I do not think I got what I paid for at this time. Being fair, I have seen much better when it comes to Hawke scopes.
Nightforce
Valdada
Vortex
Trijicon
Sightron SIII
Leupold Mark 4
Burris MTAC & Signature
Bushnell Elite Tactical or Super Slam
Nikon Monarch Side focus
Hawke Sidewinder
Millet
Mueller
Having be coming tired of the trash cheap "Mad in China" scopes I have been seeking to find the better made of the "Mde in China". I have a good Millet and a very good for the price Mueler. So, when I got chance to see a good Hawke Scope when looking through one at the range, it was a Sidewinder Tactical 8.5-25X42 and it was clearly better then the Mueller or the Millet that I have, near the quality of any of my Burris! So, I decided to buy a Hawke scope for a coyote rig and dew to the fact that it was $100 off from the Wal-mart price - being a demo, I decided to go for it.
I got this scope from SCOPESTOP.COM and I decided comparing it to the Mueller 8.5-25x50. The Hawke reticle I choose for the 8-32X56 Sidewinder was the SR12 after checking out the software I got from the Hawke website. The scope came used not as a "As New" demo as stated. It had ring marks from being mounted and light scuff marks from being handled but, that is the chance I took in buying from the internet.
Well the Mueller I got a couple years ago seems to be super clear for Chinese made and Hawke claims to be Europe engineered with ***anese glass but, the scope is made in China. I used bugs, grass, reflective surface, high contrast in all three direction in relation to the sun. The Mueller seems much clearer but, once I put the sun shade on the Hawke it got closer to the Mueller in sharpness and once the sun was setting both scopes were about just as sharp (Testing both at 25 power). It seem that the 56mm objective lens on the Hawke pulls in so much light it makes it hard to see how clear the glass can be. I then tested the scope @ 200 yards with the ISO 12233 optics chart on 8X14 legal letter size premium paper printed @ 1200X1200 DPI. Once again the Mueller seemed clearer @ 25 power then the Hawke @ 25 power but, I could see the same amount of lines of resolution from both scopes. The resolution did not get any better and maybe a tad worse when the Hawke went to 32 power. Edge Sharpness is not as good as the Mueller. The one inch wagon wheel at that distance was noticeable but, it seemed to only have four legs with a dot in the middle @ 200 yards for both scopes and with the Hawke at 32 power it just zoomed in with only the same detail being apparent. Without a doubt the color seems washed out in the Hawke and is vivid in the Mueller. I would say this Hawke scope is inferior to the Millet 4-16X50 once past the same magnification of 16 power. I have seen better MIllet glass then the one I have and I have seen worse. Millet has been all over the scale on quality glass in my opinion. It seems I am getting the idea that this is normal when dealing with scopes made in China. On the Hawke scope this is claimed to be ***anese glass, it surely does not live up to this in the scope I bought.
For a much better Glass but, at $850 I would have gone with the Sightron SIII Long Range 8-32x56 Scope with Side Focus as I have the Sightron SIIISS10-50X60 LRMD and it is mind blowing crystal clear. I would say it is the same or better then any of my Burris scopes or Leopold and much better then my Nikon glass.
I do not think every Mueller is as good as mine and I would guess most Hawke scopes are as good and could be better then my friends was at the range. I would imagine my Hawke is the lower of what they put out and is good for Chinese but, if someone is going to buy, China, I would think it would be to get something that is close to or very near to the same product for a great savings in money. I do have Burris, Leopold, Nikon but, can not afford to have these on every rig so, I do have one Millet, Mueller, Sightron and now a Hawke looking to see if money can be saved and still get quality sharp glass with a repeatable scope. I feel I got lucky with the Mueller, the Millet is worth what I paid for it and like I said, the Sightron is amazing! The Hawke I have still needs to be tested at the range for the, “box test” and repeatability and I will do those tests. At this point I did not save any money on this scope and I do not think I got what I paid for at this time. Being fair, I have seen much better when it comes to Hawke scopes.
02-24-2012, 03:53 PM
#65
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
The Bushnell Elite 6500's use the same glass as Nightforce but are about half the weight, I perfer the Bushnell over the Nightforce on a HUNTING rifle where I like to keep weight down but on a benchrest rifle where weight is a non issue the Nightforce is the scope. I have a Elite 6500 4.5x30x it is a great all arround hunting scope, and about $600 cheaper and just as clear as a Nightforce. Unless you are jumping out of planes or planning on driving nails with your scope a Nightforce is not needed on a hunting rifle. JMO.
02-25-2012, 04:49 PM
#67
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 228
The Bushnell Elite 6500's use the same glass as Nightforce but are about half the weight, I perfer the Bushnell over the Nightforce on a HUNTING rifle where I like to keep weight down but on a benchrest rifle where weight is a non issue the Nightforce is the scope. I have a Elite 6500 4.5x30x it is a great all arround hunting scope, and about $600 cheaper and just as clear as a Nightforce. Unless you are jumping out of planes or planning on driving nails with your scope a Nightforce is not needed on a hunting rifle. JMO.
02-27-2012, 03:38 PM
#69
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
I am glad you think I dont know what I am talking about. Yes the 6500 and the 4200 have the same glass, also the same glass that Nightforce uses. They both use ***anese glass from the same manufactor.
Last edited by fritz1; 02-27-2012 at 03:45 PM.
02-27-2012, 06:26 PM
#70
Fork Horn
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 228
Show me some proof that they use the same glass as Nightforce does? Because they don't. I won't disagree with you that the 4200's and 6500's are made in ***an as are many other scopes, but that doesn't mean they are all using Nightforce glass.