nksmfamjp

Cheap scopes lose zero, are hard to sight in, can fog up and will probably not survive much of a tumble and still shoot. At $100, I would try a Simmons, but my expectations wouldn't be super high. It will probably get you through a season. If you have a hard kicker, these cheaper scopes will probably whack you in the eye with short eye relief. On Sample List, I found a Simmons 2.8-10x44 Aetec Master Series for $169. That maybe worth trying, but. . .I can't be sure. Weaver Classic K-Series Scope 4x 38mm. I have one of these from the 1960's. It continues to hold zero and serve my father well. I would hope the new ones are as good for $124 from MidwayUSA.

At $200, I think I would buy the cheapo Leupold or I keep seeing a Sightron SII 6x in MidwayUSA on a super sale. Also, a Weaver fixed power scope might be available in this range. For a cheap scope, I would try to stick with a fixed power scope. Also, your dollar goes further at places like www.samplelist.com I found a Leupold FXII 6 x 36 model for $270. That would be a lifetime scope. At MidwayUSA, Bushnell Elite 3200 Scope 10x 40mm Mil-Dot Reticle Matte for $198 has quite a following. I have heard good things elswhere also, given it's price. At $224 from MidwayUSA, I think Sightron S2 Compact Scope 6x 42mm Plex Reticle Matte would be my top choice at the $200 price point. Sightron when I have compared their top of the line models has always looked and felt very impressive. I am not sure how S2 is vs. S3, but it should be good. It is just hard to make a bad $200 6x scope from a good company. The reviews support this opinion.

At $300 - $400ish, the Zeiss Conquest looks good. Also, I hear lots of good about the Super Sniper, if 10x fixed is ok for you. Bushnell 3200 seems good in this range. Also, Leupold and Nikon have some stuff in this range. Weaver Grand Slam is supposed to be good. On Sample List, I found a Nikon Monarch 3.3 - 10 x 44 for $299. That would be a lifetime variable. So would the Zeiss 3-9x40 Conquest for $349.

Wow, I looked at this again and I truely surprised myself what good fixed power $100 and $200 scopes I found. Those are my recommendations in your ranges.

Now hear me out. I truely have been sucked into the idea that the riflescope should be 100 - 200% of the rifle value to be a match. This is not a statement of snobiness, but when I compare these things, I don't get to impressed until I'm holding about $500 worth of scope. Some better or worse than others, but cost for feature is about the same. For a good variable hunter, I think $500 is a good place to shoot for. Fixed power will allow you to shave $100 - $200 off that. The color and resolution get much better starting from there. After that, you may feel all are good enough. For $500, the mechanicals should be good enough for a single zero scope. If you want a multi-zero turret twister, I would add about $200 to that as a base. The way I tell how much better a scope is optically, is by judging resolution and color clarity side by side. When you look through a good scope, it just feels like the magnification is higher because you can read those letters at 200 yards even at lower powers. That resolution tells you if that is a 5pt buck or just pretty big. For example, I just put a $700 Burris XTR 3-12 on a $650 Savage 12BVSS. That was me trying to be cheap. A Nightforce or US Optics SHOULD be on this gun. Last, the mount should match up. Oh yea, $20 - $50 mounts exist, but good mounts start at about $100 or so. TPS products can get you out the door with a great mount for $150. Cheaper mounts will work if you put much more effort into making them straight(lapping and bedding) and secure(bedding and locktite). If you buy a $75 mount, lapping kit $30, alighnment bars $30, bedding compound $15 and add 5 hours of labor, are you farther ahead than if you bought TPS mounts and bedded the base? IMHO. use a 1 pc base for alignment.

deerslayer223

nksmfamjp it would be great if everyone could afford 500+ dollar scopes to put on their guns but the common working man who is you're weekend warrior hunter doesnt spend that kind of cash. They are happy with their blue light special tasco that they got from walmart for $40. I say as long as it works for them it works for me. I personaly can not justify spending more than about 250 on a scope. I've seen some 25yr old bushnell sportsmen scopes still going strong and i've seen a burris signature series become total trash in 4 years. You get lemons and diamonds in every bunch. My next scope will be a bushnell elite 3200. Right now i use bushnell banners on all my rifles and they suit my needs just fine. Both of my deer rifles i have them on get hundreds of rounds through them every year and they have yet to let me down. They let me see past legal shooting light and well before legal shooting light in the morning to. To each his own. If i had the money i'd buy the high end stuff to but when you dont you find what works for you and go with it.

Duckbutter48

I dont think you can only look at dollar amount if a scope is cheap or not. At 200 there are plenty of quality optics for the hunter. There is also some junk. You are correct buy calling the 200$ Leupold a cheapo. They are junk compared to what else you can get for 200$. A non-one piece non-fully coated scope should be in the 100$ price range and thats exactly what the VX1 and rifleman's are, dont waster your money on them.

nksmfamjp

My mistake. I said Leupold at first, but then lead towards the Sightron. When I said Leupold, I was talking about my father's Vari II 3-9 which isn't bad, but I think he gave $300 for it. At $300, it probably isn't ideal.

2006HighSierra

I have a Simmons 8pnt 3-9x40 on my .17HMR which has worked very well and i paid 35 bucks for them on sale. The other is the same scope on my Marlin 336 .35 Rem and it has held zero very well, decent clarity for the money. I have a Bushnell Sportsman on my Thompson Center which was $80 and well worth it to me, great clarity, awesome scope. This year when I purchase my BLR I plan on matching it with either a undecided model Leupold or Nikon Monarch. If I have the money I want the best and if not I can make do.

Predator26

I didn't read your post because its too long and I'm a lazy bastard, but judging by what your thread's title is, all I have to say is you pay for what you get.

Duckbutter48

Not always, sometimes you overpay to have a certain "Name" on your scope, even though you could have got better quality for less $.

M77man

I generally think that Nikon is the best way to go for the quality and the price. I have a Nikon Buckmaster right now, wouldn't mind at all if it were a Pro Staff in stead, but my next one will probably be a Monarch. Generally speaking overall, you can't go wrong with Nikon.

IL-Cornfed

As many have mentioned, you can and WILL tell a difference between many of the scopes you mentioned to the slightly more expensive models. Of the scopes you mentioned, the Nikon Monarch is a quality optic for the money especially compared to other scopes even in that price range. I have a Nikon Monarch in my T/C Omega and I consider it a good investment.

Now, for the ultimate in optical perfection and a difference I promise you that you'll notice compared to ANY other scope on the market..... I added a Swarovski to my T/C Encore and it's simply awesome! In low light and at long range it's in a totally other class compared to ANY other optic I've ever seen! I wish I could put 'em on all my firearms!

My babies

bigcountry

Shooting and guns are our hobbies guys. Not just a tool to go cheapest possible. I have had all kinds of scopes and know alot about optics. When you make the jump from a 200 dollar scope to a 400 dollar, your buying that last 3% to 5% of quality. Its just the way it is in any field. For instance, when I buy optics for lab use, I can buy say a Polished (less than 25dB of back reflection) connector for 10 dollars, but when I got to SP or super polished (less than 40dB of back reflection), price goes up to 30 dollars, and then going to UP or ultra polished (less than 50dB of back reflection) it can shoot up to 50 dollars. The work to get that extra 3 to 5% of quality can be twice as much. And some of it is Quality Assurance. The price it takes to guarantee the quality you bought.

So most if not 90% of hunters will do just fine with 200 dollar scopes, but the last 10% might like to have a adjustable objective, or be able to use elevation or windage to make MOA adjustments on the fly at 500 yards. This is where the high dollar scope shine. And even buying a 500 dollar scope won't guarantee you a scope can be adjusted up say 10MOA and then return back to zero every time. You have to check for that, and if it doesn't send it back.