The general index of Shooting Sports topics is now here.
Related pages:
When upgrading or buying a new scope for a rifle, there are a great variety of brands, types and models to choose from. I'll try to explain the scopes, their features, and their uses.
First, define the gun and the use it will be put to. Will it be used in wide open spaces, early morning/late evening or midday, in heavy but open Western brush, under a thick canopy of leaves, or on the open plains? Is it a short, handy carbine, or a big, flat-shooting bolt action, a rifled shotgun or big dangerous-game magnum? How long will typical shots be?
Short, handy carbines, like Marlin and Winchester Model 94 levers, .30-30's, the Ruger Mini-30, etc. should have a small, handy low power scope with a wide field-of-view for quick target acquisition. Large, high-power variable scopes are the worst choice. They have a short and critical eye-relief: you have to hold your eye quite close to it, and at a precise distance, too, detracting from the quick-handling nature of the gun. Besides being slow to acquire a sight picture, they are heavy. A large objective (front lens) lessens the handiness in heavy brush, and must be shielded from knocks at all times. High power also means a narrow field-of-view, which means you can see large game close by, put your eye to the scope, and then spend a couple of minutes examining blades of grass and tiny insects trying to find it. Finally, carbines are of limited long range potential, so there is nothing to be gained by choosing a powerful, delicate scope.
Good choices for carbines are usually fixed power, low-power scopes. They have the widest field of view, good for quick target acquisition. The fixed power means less moving parts in the mechanism, making for a sturdier instrument. Being low power, they do not need large front lenses to gather light well in dark wooded areas. Two to Four power scopes are the most popular in this class.
What holds for carbines is also true for slug-firing shotguns. With long receivers and even longer recoil, shotguns often call for Intermediate Eye Relief scopes, to prevent eye injury from the recoil. Scopes in this class typically have a magnification power in the 1.5x to 3x range. Red Dots are another popular choice (though shootings slugs can make short work of cheap Red Dots).
Flat shooting high-power rifles are increasingly popular nowadays, even in areas where short-range brush hunting used to dictate the use of handy, lever action carbines. I suppose that this is the "My equipment is bigger than yours" syndrome. I don't let that stop me from carrying my lever action Marlin. (Anyway, one of the best hunters I knew of (R.I.P.), used a Burris brand fixed four-power scope on his 7mm Remington Magnum. Mostly these guns make for bloodshot meat and are overly destructive at distances less than 100 yards, but he found the 4x scope more than sufficient for long shots.) For hunting across clearcuts, farm fields, and open countryside, a higher power scope would be in order. The most popular choice used to be 3x-9x variable power scopes with 32mm objectives. Lately they have been suplanted by a larger 40mm or 44mm objective, and extended magnification of 10, 12 or 14 power. If hunting is done around sunup or sunset, or in dark cover, the larger objective may be in order. For hunters who must take long shots in dark, misty woods, a quality 50mm objective scope might be desirable, if they are willing to tolerate the size and weight. For most hunters, 32mm to 40 mm gathers enough light for daytime hunting and preserves reasonable size and handling.
Varmit hunters and target shooters have certain luxuries and certain liabilities, as well. Heavy rifles, scopes with large target knobs (that would be easy targets for field breakage), comfy seats and rifle rests are all normal. This makes large, high power scopes more practical. The high magnification is also needed for precision shooting- the vital area on a big game animal is larger then an entire praerie dog, for example. Since targets are small and/or distant, wide field of view is less critical. Large objective lenses are needed to compensate for the amount of light lost to the high magnification. Sensitive mechanisms can be babied on heavy, easy-recoiling guns of moderate caliber. Short, precise eye relief can be tolerated on the bench stabilized gun. Fixed power scopes of 15 to 30 power have been popular, but recently variable power scopes like 6x-24x or 8x-32x have been in vogue.
Of all scoped rifles, 22 rimfires have the most lattitude. A simple, cheap 4x scope will match the accuracy of most any boy's rifle. Given their very light recoil, a .22 hunting rifle is one place you can probably skimp and still get your money's worth out of a cheap scope.
When searching for accuracy under 1 MOA, suddenly higher magnification becomes necessary, but some high-power scopes won't focus down to 25 or 50 yards. That's why rimfire shooters are always looking for cheap scopes with Adjustable Objectives (A/O). The same goes for airgun shooters, only they have another issue to deal with. Spring piston airguns have an unusual reverse recoil as the piston slams home. This recoil in an unexpected dimension plays havoc with scopes made only for the expected. Not all A/O scopes adjust down to the very short ranges, though. Buy a scope specifically made for airguns, or a brand like Burris or Leupold that rates all its scopes for them.
Whatever you buy, make certain it doesn't have a lot of parallax error at short ranges. Consider sending it back to be adjusted for 50 yards, or do it yourself.
A cheap scope on a quality gun is like plastic earings worn with an evening gown. A rule of the thumb is that you should be spending about as much for the scope as you did for the gun. This may be a hard pill to swallow for some, but a $400 scope is a good compliment to a $400 Remington 700 or a $500 Winchester Model 70. A $40 third-world manufacture X-Mart scope is going to let you down when you most need it, after a long hard stalk on an expensive hunting trip. Does that save you any money?
Zip up to the top.
Branding does not mean you know who made a scope. Branding is a process of advertising and establishing market identity, picking a price point and feature list for a given market, finding an OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) to make it, and then selling to that market. Adjustments are made as market conditions dictate. Market conditions include lower cost of production in emerging countries, new competition, economic trends, exchange rates, etc.
For example, Hakko scopes are not generally available in the US under that brand, but some have been available as the Tasco Super Sniper series and Springfield Gen III. There are (at least) two large riflescope manufacturing concerns in Japan, Light Optical Works and Hakko, and one in Taiwan, Asia Optical. LOW is considered the best, then Hakko and then AO. However, all make products according to spec. The more features and quality control an OEM brander wants, the more they pay for, the more they get.
So, it is quite possible to get a nicer Hakko that is a better scope than an lesser LOW (or vice-versa). However, you will pay more for the better scope, no matter who makes it.
A disturbing trend is for a company to start production of a new model in Japan. After the magazines review it and the reputation is established, manufacture is shifted elsewhere on the Pacific Rim. Examples here include the Simmons Aetec, BSA Platinum, and the Tasco World Class.
Zip up to the top.
The scope brands section has moved to its own page.
Zip up to the top.
Riflescopes have followed a predictable evolution over the years. Early scopes were fixed power and only the mounts adjusted. Later some had elevation but not windage adjustment, some zoom. Eventually most scopes had both internal windage and elevation, and zoom as well. Fine crosshairs of spider silk gave way to Duplex wire reticles. Zoom ranges went from 2x (e.g., 3x-6x) to 3x and now 4x (e.g., 4x-16x).
Current trends include:
Left out of this mess of featuritis is really important stuff, like how well is the inner tube darkened, how much light path is wasted due to bad design, how many lens coats constitutes a multi-coat (2? 4? 8?), usable field of view, and so on.
The American deer hunter should avoid anything that slows down a snap shot. Varmint hunters, target shooters, and other knob twiddlers can indulge in features as their wallet allows.
A lot of these features are unneeded and unwanted by hunters. Tall target knobs subject the scope to leverage when snagged in branches or dropped, and are more likely to lead to broken scopes or loss of zero. Batteries can fail for lighted reticles, they add weight, complexity and introduce more points of entry for moisture. USMC Mil-Dots are not too bad, but some complex reticles require a PhD and lots of time to operate. Big objectives and tubes are unweildy and heavy, and are not useful except at higher magnification in low light, and then only if the optics are of very high quality and resolution.
If you wonder why you can't get a decent cheap mil-dot scope, why the reticle is always too thick? Easy. Cheap scopes (and some expensive ones) have wire reticles, not glass etched. If you hang something heavy (say, a mil-dot) on the thinnest, weakest part of the wire reticle (the narrow center of the crosshairs), the extra weight will pull the reticle wire apart during recoil. Hence, thick, unusable reticle centers on cheap mil-dot scopes.
Low-light stuff amuses me. If the optics are of good quality, simply using a lower magnification power will give you a good view. Just divide the objective size by seven and set the zoom to that power for optimal light from any scope. All the lit reticle gizmos can be handy for a farmer waiting up by the henhouse for a raiding fox, beyond that, they are primarily good for bragging rights.
Zip up to the top.
Repeatability Every experienced shooter knows that different weight bullets, and different brand loads, shoot to different centers of impact. It would be nice to just adjust a scope a few clicks depending on which load you choose to use. With a quality scope, scope adjustments are repeatable. This means that if 20 clicks left will zero when changing loads once, it will always, and 20 clicks to the right will always take you exactly back again. On a cheap scope, each click is variable in adjustment, often a shot or two must be fired before it settles in, and adjusting it back doesn't bring it back to the same place.
After bore-sighting a couple dozen scopes, I noticed that the dime-store scope adjustments are very stiff when new. A few shots must be fired to force large adjustments to take. On the other hand, older cheap scopes move very freely, whether they are being adjusted or not. Either way, adjustments to the vertical affect the horizontal, and vice-versa. I've seen some cheap scopes that actually have portions of the adjustment range that move backwards. When they get a little older, reticle float is common. The reticle settles in a different place after each shot.
View Quality scopes employ precisely ground optics and expensive Multiple Coatings. They have less color bleed, transmit more light, and have less edge distortion. All this can mean the ability to pick out antlers among the branches, and brown fur amoung the Autumn leaves.
Usability A quality hunting scope has a longer and more forgiving eye relief and a bigger exit pupil, making them more comfortable and easier to acquire the proper sight picture. They often have a wider field of view than comparably powered cheap scopes, for faster target acquisition. Depth of field is also another issue where cheap scopes lack, especially at higher magnifications. Depth of field is minimum to maximum ranges at which objects will appear in focus. Not a big issue on the range, but it can mean everything while hunting.
Strength Almost all scopes are marketed as shockproof. Not all are. If you dropped your rifle while sliding down that muddy slope, it would be nice to know (once you got all the mud out of the barrel) that the scope is still OK and your rifle still zeroed. The trend towards one piece tubes has helped across the board. There are a few remaining multi-piece tube scopes, notably Meade/Redfield Trackers and Leupold Rifleman and VX-I's. However the Leupolds are a proven reliable design (the Vari-X II design) so you cannot always draw conclusions for specs.
Reliability Cheap scopes are more likely to lose their seal integrity and fog-up, particularly if they have lots of features, like illuminated reticles, adjustable objectives, etc.
Design Cheap scopes are more likely to have design gaffs, such as: Fisheye, Vignetting (outside edge of image getting dark) at low magnification, increase in flare at high zoom magnifications, etc.
Zip up to the top.
Pick up an issue of Popular Photography, and take a look at the camera lens tests they publish in every issue. (Some examples here.)
Most everything they test is also applicable to scopes. So, where are the tests for rifle scopes? Who dares to publish the truth? No one. (The photo mags have their own credibility problems too; while they are hard on manufacturers, they allow sleazy rip-off New York/New Jersey camera shops to advertise despite their continued consumer fraud.)
Pick up a hunting or gun magazine. What do you see? An ad for the scope right across the page from the article reviewing it. No doubt the scope will be called "bright". Just likes public schools, they call all the children there "bright", right?
I challenge reviewers to be true journalists and test the following factors of every scope they review:
Any moron can do the first 6 tests. The light tranmission test can be done with a modicum of photographic equipment (a light meter, duh). The last two can be done with minimal equipment, but can be very time consuming, or they can be done quickly with a few thousand dollars of test equipment.
Zip up to the top.
Some definitions.
At least five things cause flare. One is light entering the scope from angles outside the viewed area. (This can be reduced by a recessed objective lens or scope shades.) A second is impurities inside the cheaper grades of optical glass. The third is a rough or imprecise grind on the lens surface randomly reflecting light. The fourth is the lens/air interface or lens surface itself is reflective, especially with a high polish. This can be reduced with a good coating. The fifth is poor scope design, which arbitrarily discards unused light at certain magnifications. In all cases, light bouncing around is reflected until it is either absorbed by a dark surface, or enters your eye and detracts from the optimal image.
Internal baffles and scope tube darkening treatments can stop this light and reduce glare. Cheap scopes lack baffles, and have bright aluminum, poorly anodized or unpainted internal reflective surfaces. Very large objective scopes (50mm/56mm) using 1" tubes must employ careful design discipline to avoid discarded light from becoming glare. Reducing the total number of lenses used improves flare.
Since the lens coating is only part of the glare equation, the quality of the lens glass and grind must be considered as well. It is altogether likely a high quality fully single-coated system can outperform a cheap fully-multicoated system in terms of resolution and flare.
Why can't someone make a really good scope cheap? Well, modern scopes (even the cheap ones) are better than many scopes from pre-WW II. That's not saying a lot, though. If you look at rifles from that era, they had both iron sights AND removable scopes.
Volume manufacturing can only drive down prices so much. There are real costs to making better lenses versus cheap lenses. A better lens finish takes more time to grind, better raw materials like high purity glass costs more, a higher level of quality control means more rejects. Precision lens alignment depends on tools, dies and parts maintaining critical dimensions througout a production run. All of these things slow down production and drive up prices. A BSA or a Tasco ordering a zillion scopes might allow them to offer more features at a lower price, but it cannot give them a scope that is as good mechanically or optically than a low-production, high dollar product.
My advice is, shop wisely for the best price, but still buy the most scope you can afford. By that I don't mean the most features or zoom power, but the best brand/model. Some people buy a 6-20x 44mm AO scope for US$200 thinking they are getting a better scope than a plain $60 3x-9x40mm, when in fact that is the same quality level! The 20x just has more power and features. If durability and repeatability matter to you, it is better to buy a 3x-9x32mm for $250.
I suppose it's possible to buy a cheap scope and be happy with it. The hunters that I help sight-in don't have to experience my frustration when I try to get their scope reticle to move the required distance to make zero. As long as the scope is not banged and it stays relatively unused, the reticle adjustment may stay overly stiff and not float. Many shoot only during the hunting season, and can leave their scope zeroed for use with one load, because that's the only load they will use all year. If shots are kept to a moderate distance and the objective was accidently factory adjusted to a reasonable parallax setting, shots can be kept inside the kill zone on medium and large game.
While every hunter I know takes hunting and shooting very seriously, many only shoot their deer rifle once a year. I suppose the low-ball scope companies are betting that most hunters won't have a noticable problem during a limited amount of use. As for me, I shoot too much to put up with cheap scopes. I now save my money for reliable, sturdy equipment.
Zip up to the top.
Back to Shooting Sports
Back to Home