So What is the Best Rifle Scope?

[fireblade_rrw 20]

I’ve noticed on this and many other shooting forums, every now and again a post will crop up asking ‘what scope should I use’, or ‘what’s the best rifle scope’, so I thought I’d start a deliberately provocative but hopefully objective article that we can all add to and share.

 

I’ll start by saying, in my opinion, there isn’t a ‘best rifle scope’ what there is however, is the best scope for a particular application; eg: there’s probably no point in putting a top of the range Swarovski scope on an old airgun to shoot at cans in broad daylight! I’ve used many scopes on my rifles, both expensive & not so expensive, but for now I won’t divulge my personal preferences.

 

So what constitutes a good scope? The following are in my opinion, key in assessing a ‘good’ scope for any particular application:

 

• The intended use

• Manufacturing & build quality

• Optics quality

• Magnification

• Waterproofing

• Reticle

• Cost

 

The intended use

This is the most important part when deciding which scope to buy. If it’s to shoot cans or occasional rabbit with an airgun, then there’s little point in spending a small fortune on a high end scope, a functional cheaper scope will do fine. However, if you are shooting in low light conditions, at great distances, then it would have to be a scope with good light gathering qualities.

 

A good example of this; A friend of mine purchased a pretty cheap Japanese scope against my advice. It worked fine until the light was fading, when he found it to be less than useless. The internals also fell apart due to recoil from the .270. He now uses a Zeiss.

 

Manufacturing & Build Quality

Like the example above, its down to what you want to use the scope for, and on which application. Little point putting a top quality £1200 Zeiss scope on a 100 quid airgun – well in my opinion anyway!

 

Optics Quality

To me, this is what its all about. You pay for what you get in optics. German & Austrian optics are classed as exemplar, with good reason. Whilst the USA have some fine scopes (Leupold etc), they fall well short of the quality in German or Austrian optics. This is even more the case, now that much of the USA stuff has been outsourced to China & the like.

 

Magnification

This is an area that’s probably not debated enough. Sometimes too much magnification can be a distinct disadvantage – how many of us have struggled to get a close in target zeroed on the scope? In these instances you’d arguably be better off without a scope at all !

 

Similarly, shooting foxes or deer at distance on an open hill requires a decent magnification of probably up to x 12 or 15.

 

I use a variable magnification because I do many types of shooting, however there is an argument that variable scopes don’t have the same clarity as fixed power models. I used an 8x42 scope for many years without too many problems, but being able to zoom in on a distant target makes life a lot easier nowadays. When I’m in woodlands, eg; for Roe, I tend to have the magnification set to minimum.

 

Waterproofing

Often forgotten about, but there’s little point in having a scope if it fogs up all the time, or worst still it leaks !

In the UK there is a standard for water ingress, (IP ratings), however for scopes, ive found that manufacturers tend to use the Japanese rating:

 

JIS "0"

No special protection

JIS "1"

Vertically dripping water shall have no harmful effect (Drip resistant 1)

JIS "2"

Dripping water at an angle up to 15 degrees from vertical shall have no harmful effect (Drip resistant 2)

JIS "3"

Falling rain at an angle up to 60 degrees from vertical shall have no harmful effect (Rain resistant)

JIS "4"

Splashing water from any direction shall have no harmful effect (Splash resistant)

JIS "5"

Direct jetting water from any direction shall have no harmful effect (Jet resistant)

JIS "6"

Direct jetting water from any direction shall not enter the enclosure (Water tight)

JIS "7"

Water shall not enter the enclosure when it is immersed in water under defined conditions (Immersion resistant)

JIS "8"

The equipment is usable for continuous submersion in water under specified pressure (Submersible)

 

I guess the actual standard doesn’t matter too much, as it’s the interpretation of the standard that matters. You could argue that the Japanese have the best quality systems on the planet!

 

From my experience, Swarovski, Zeiss, Docter, etc, are all rated around the JIS 6&7 mark. Much cheaper scopes don’t usually have a standard rating identified. They usually just say either ‘splashproof’ or ‘waterproof’.

 

Reticle

Another oft forgotten about key feature. Cross hair, or command post, or graduated … The list is almost endless, however I’d offer this as my simple take on it:

 

Fine cross hairs for well lit and open targets

Thicker cross hairs for woodland shooting or dimly lit areas, where the cross hairs can be difficult to see against trees etc.

Graduated – for judging longer range shots

And my favourite – normal cross hairs with a small illuminated red dot, great when it’s difficult to see the cross hairs.

 

Costs

The $64,000 question, usually answered by ‘how much can you afford?’

 

Take all of the above points, and any others you can think of, ask yourself what you think you can compromise on, and what’s the available budget, then that’s your answer !

 

So in summary, what’s the best scope? Everyone will have their own preferences & favourites, however I’d suggest the following categories, which isn’t complete nor is it exhaustive:

 

In no particular order:

 

Highest quality & expensive scopes: (These scopes would score very high on most of the above key categories):

Swarovski, Leica, S&B, Zeiss, Docter,

 

Very good scopes:

Leupold, Nightforce, Meopta,

 

Good scopes:

Bushnell, Burris, Nikko Stirling, Nikon,

 

Average quality, cheaper scopes:

Hawke, Tasco, SMK,

 

Poor quality scopes:

Too many to list in this category – have a look on Ebay, the list is endless !

 

 

Please add to the above as appropriate, and I do hope this helps for anyone thinking about buying a scope. I look forward to the ensuing debate.

 

Please be constructive in your replies, as it’s meant to help others. And remember, I'm no expert, but I do have a great many years of using great and sometimes utter crap scopes, so I know what works for me !

 

As an aside, to affirm my objectivity, I actually have a Hawke scope on my .22 Ruger, and it works fine. However, when the light fades, it’s next to useless for light gathering qualities.

 

 

 

I’ll now go and get my tin hat on and await the replies…..

[HarveyTheHunter 6]

u have to include mtc they make great scopes!!! i got one its so clear! but not as good as Swarovski ive looked through their scopes and i was stuned at how clear they where!! ang you need to say about the paralx they made a scope alot better i mean its like haveing a range finder build in your scope!

harv

[stalkerboydy 4]

i have for MANY YEARS and still do swear by SWAROVSKI Scope's and Binoculars but for the last three years due to not bein able to afford another set i bought a MTC-Viper 4-16x50 an fitted to my .300 Win-Mag and have to say of yet it has NOT Failed me in any shape of form also i do use my .300 a LOT

[andyf 144]

I’ve noticed on this and many other shooting forums, every now and again a post will crop up asking ‘what scope should I use’, or ‘what’s the best rifle scope’, so I thought I’d start a deliberately provocative but hopefully objective article that we can all add to and share.

 

I’ll start by saying, in my opinion, there isn’t a ‘best rifle scope’ what there is however, is the best scope for a particular application; eg: there’s probably no point in putting a top of the range Swarovski scope on an old airgun to shoot at cans in broad daylight! I’ve used many scopes on my rifles, both expensive & not so expensive, but for now I won’t divulge my personal preferences.

 

So what constitutes a good scope? The following are in my opinion, key in assessing a ‘good’ scope for any particular application:

 

• The intended use

• Manufacturing & build quality

• Optics quality

• Magnification

• Waterproofing

• Reticle

• Cost

 

The intended use

This is the most important part when deciding which scope to buy. If it’s to shoot cans or occasional rabbit with an airgun, then there’s little point in spending a small fortune on a high end scope, a functional cheaper scope will do fine. However, if you are shooting in low light conditions, at great distances, then it would have to be a scope with good light gathering qualities.

 

A good example of this; A friend of mine purchased a pretty cheap Japanese scope against my advice. It worked fine until the light was fading, when he found it to be less than useless. The internals also fell apart due to recoil from the .270. He now uses a Zeiss.

 

Manufacturing & Build Quality

Like the example above, its down to what you want to use the scope for, and on which application. Little point putting a top quality £1200 Zeiss scope on a 100 quid airgun – well in my opinion anyway!

 

Optics Quality

To me, this is what its all about. You pay for what you get in optics. German & Austrian optics are classed as exemplar, with good reason. Whilst the USA have some fine scopes (Leupold etc), they fall well short of the quality in German or Austrian optics. This is even more the case, now that much of the USA stuff has been outsourced to China & the like.

 

Magnification

This is an area that’s probably not debated enough. Sometimes too much magnification can be a distinct disadvantage – how many of us have struggled to get a close in target zeroed on the scope? In these instances you’d arguably be better off without a scope at all !

 

Similarly, shooting foxes or deer at distance on an open hill requires a decent magnification of probably up to x 12 or 15.

 

I use a variable magnification because I do many types of shooting, however there is an argument that variable scopes don’t have the same clarity as fixed power models. I used an 8x42 scope for many years without too many problems, but being able to zoom in on a distant target makes life a lot easier nowadays. When I’m in woodlands, eg; for Roe, I tend to have the magnification set to minimum.

 

Waterproofing

Often forgotten about, but there’s little point in having a scope if it fogs up all the time, or worst still it leaks !

In the UK there is a standard for water ingress, (IP ratings), however for scopes, ive found that manufacturers tend to use the Japanese rating:

 

JIS "0"

No special protection

JIS "1"

Vertically dripping water shall have no harmful effect (Drip resistant 1)

JIS "2"

Dripping water at an angle up to 15 degrees from vertical shall have no harmful effect (Drip resistant 2)

JIS "3"

Falling rain at an angle up to 60 degrees from vertical shall have no harmful effect (Rain resistant)

JIS "4"

Splashing water from any direction shall have no harmful effect (Splash resistant)

JIS "5"

Direct jetting water from any direction shall have no harmful effect (Jet resistant)

JIS "6"

Direct jetting water from any direction shall not enter the enclosure (Water tight)

JIS "7"

Water shall not enter the enclosure when it is immersed in water under defined conditions (Immersion resistant)

JIS "8"

The equipment is usable for continuous submersion in water under specified pressure (Submersible)

 

I guess the actual standard doesn’t matter too much, as it’s the interpretation of the standard that matters. You could argue that the Japanese have the best quality systems on the planet!

 

From my experience, Swarovski, Zeiss, Docter, etc, are all rated around the JIS 6&7 mark. Much cheaper scopes don’t usually have a standard rating identified. They usually just say either ‘splashproof’ or ‘waterproof’.

 

Reticle

Another oft forgotten about key feature. Cross hair, or command post, or graduated … The list is almost endless, however I’d offer this as my simple take on it:

 

Fine cross hairs for well lit and open targets

Thicker cross hairs for woodland shooting or dimly lit areas, where the cross hairs can be difficult to see against trees etc.

Graduated – for judging longer range shots

And my favourite – normal cross hairs with a small illuminated red dot, great when it’s difficult to see the cross hairs.

 

Costs

The $64,000 question, usually answered by ‘how much can you afford?’

 

Take all of the above points, and any others you can think of, ask yourself what you think you can compromise on, and what’s the available budget, then that’s your answer !

 

So in summary, what’s the best scope? Everyone will have their own preferences & favourites, however I’d suggest the following categories, which isn’t complete nor is it exhaustive:

 

In no particular order:

 

Highest quality & expensive scopes: (These scopes would score very high on most of the above key categories):

Swarovski, Leica, S&B, Zeiss, Docter,

 

Very good scopes:

Leupold, Nightforce, Meopta,

 

Good scopes:

Bushnell, Burris, Nikko Stirling, Nikon,

 

Average quality, cheaper scopes:

Hawke, Tasco, SMK,

 

Poor quality scopes:

Too many to list in this category – have a look on Ebay, the list is endless !

 

 

Please add to the above as appropriate, and I do hope this helps for anyone thinking about buying a scope. I look forward to the ensuing debate.

 

Please be constructive in your replies, as it’s meant to help others. And remember, I'm no expert, but I do have a great many years of using great and sometimes utter crap scopes, so I know what works for me !

 

As an aside, to affirm my objectivity, I actually have a Hawke scope on my .22 Ruger, and it works fine. However, when the light fades, it’s next to useless for light gathering qualities.

 

 

 

I’ll now go and get my tin hat on and await the replies…..

Well:

I've had lots.

But after many years I go to America often so that's my scource!

LEUPOLD yes! I have an LPS and 2x VX3 LRT's on my Rifles, OK there not the 'best' if you follow the press, but mine are really top line for me!

My shooting collegues have NightForce and Schmidt & Bender and yes they are top gear, but I have the luxury of trying them in the 'real' world

and therfore I can report that they are are good but NO BETTER then the Leupold.

However if your buying in the EU they are on a par so it's down to you (and you pocket)!

See you at the CLA next weekend???

AndyF

[fireblade_rrw 20]

Oh strong opinions there ! In bold capitals too !

 

I'm intrigued as to what the 'real world' is ?

Edited July 19, 2011 by fireblade_rrw

[jamie g 17]

leupold under the lamp are not in the same league as the zeiss,swaro and s&b scopes

[blunderbust 4]

Oh strong opinions there ! In bold capitals too !

 

I'm intrigued as to what tbe 'real workd' is ?

 

Me too.

[akton 15]

All comes down to what you can afford,and what you need it for ????

 

most of the high end scopes are out of most peoples league.

 

and dont forget the fake scopes, the chinese markets are producing, these include swarovski,leica,smidt & bender and leupolds

plus many more, just be careful who and were you buy from these high end scopes dont come cheap