Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots What's wrong with today's scope manufacturers?

It seems like in times of yore I remember being able to pick up a quality FIXED power scope very inexpensively. Leupold M-8's, Burris had a model, Zeiss did too. What happend to fixed powers? They were small scopes, and looked elegant atop particularly our single shots. Those that I did buy are still functioning flawlessly today.

Now, it seems as though one has to buy something with illuminated crosshairs, circles, triangles or other whizzbangs that fuzz up the sight picture so that I can shoot at extanded ranges; multiplying my chance of wounding and/or losing game; big bells front side to shoot beyond my posted legal shooting hours; or scopes that just have too much weight, heft, or other bells and whistles one really doesn't need. Now you can choose what color camo on some models...it's entirely insane, and prices to match!

Does anyone else out there mesh with my sentiments...or is it just me?

Very similar, I hate looking at scopes only to find that the one I wanted only comes in Matte or silver.. It's hard to find a gloss scope without going through the 'custom shop' or the used market (which is where I've scoped a majority of my No. 1's to date).

Matte black is in vogue... Hopefully the market will turn and we'll see some more gloss scopes in all the lines with each manufacturer...

I agree. Its hard to find a scope that looks "right" on a Browning Low Wall in .223. Its such a small rifle it is hard to find a that looks good. I think an old Weaver K6 might work.

I'm with you, but we seem to be in the minority. Maybe in a few years the trends will swing back the other way. I also wish the matte black metal work would go away as well. I miss the gloss blued look, like 1885boomstick said.

Scope makers make what they can sell.

Retailers carry what they can sell.

Most people think they "need" a variable (and a huge one to boot) and so that is what most stores carry. This is especially big box stores where volume is everything - if it doesn't move quickly it isn't there. Probably the manager at your local Wal-Mart (or Bass-Pro or Academy or Sportsman's Warehouse) doesn't even have the option to order in a fixed power.

When I tell people I use fixed power scopes I almost always get this uncomprehending look - why, because they don't comprehend. They may listen to my reasons, but wind up with a variable. It's just outside their paradigm.

If you want a small, gloss fixed power, they aren't hard to come by, if you are willing to buy a Leupold and order it from one of the online retailers. Heck I'll bet Rick here at the 'fire would be happy to get you one.

What the heck - "hunters" are even buying scopes with built-in rangefinders, cameras and/or camcorders.

It seems there's an awful many folks out there that think the equipment is the only key to success.



.

Personally I suspect there is a lot more fiddling with gadgets going on than actual hunting with those huge, battery-powered THINGS. People talk about them, dream about them, save for them, then actually buy them, show them off, learn all the bells and whistles, then get bored and sell them off or put them in the safe. Everything, in short, but hunting with them.

OK, so I'm an old crustacean. Don't like scopes, just need them because my formerly excellent vision has gone to crap. I have a few, all on hunting guns: Nikon 4X Rimfire Special, Redfield 2 3/4X (two of them), Unertl 6X "Small Game," Leupold 3X (I replaced a Weaver V3 with that; the variable was just too confusing with my bifocals!). For me, ANY scope comes under the category "necessary evil."

Halloween is coming; now I have to go out and practice my "You damn' kids get off my lawn" cackle.....

Mesa,

I have the Weaver V3 and I often wondered how it compared to the Leupold 3x. How would you rate the resolution between the two?

I hate to say it, but the V3 is a newer design and the Leupold is oldish; the Weaver was at least as bright as the Leupie. My problem was that the V3 didn't work well with my bifocals except on 1X or 1.5X for some reason.

The gun I had it on was a combination gun with a shotgun barrel as well as a .308 barrel and I'd planned to use it on 1x for shooting shot in the shotgun barrel, then switch to 3X for the .308. Didn't work out. Now I just keep a buckshot shell in the shotgun barrel for "close encounters of the 'way too-close kind" and use the .308 barrel for normal hunting.

I was in the scope business for many years, and believe me it's the buying public determines what's available in the long run. Most manufacturers offered fixed pow scopes long after they quit selling at the retail level. There is something called the economy of volume, and it applies to all mass produced goods. At one time, variables were considerably more expensive and somewhat less reliable than fixed powers. As variables got better they became more popular, especially on rifles chambered for cartridges suitable for varmints and big game. As variables became more popular, the prices came down relative to fixed powers and it wasn't long before a 3-9x was about the same price as a fixed 4x, 6x, or 8x of the same quality. It got to the point where I was selling about twenty variables to one fixed. There is such a thing as perceived value, and most people are not willing to pay the same or more a fixed power than for a variable.

And indeed, why should one pay more for a fixed power scope than a variable? They're no better in any way, resale value is worse and the magnification isn't flexible. There are times when 10X magnification is useful and times when 2.5X magnification is more useful.

By the way, I could buy probably a dozen different gloss rifle scopes on MidwayUSA right now. In addition, with just a little shopping I'm quite sure you can find many gloss scopes on the used market right now.

Why buy a scope at all?

You know, that's a unique idea.

I believe many hunters would be absolutely lost if they had to use iron sights on their rifle in this day and age.

Irons still work. They are always my first choice. And that doesn't mean just barrel sights either.

Rifles w/o scopes carry a lot easier, cost less (sometimes) and look a lot better. All of that is pretty obvious. But what has been lost on most folks these days is that they shoot really really well. Just about as well as scopes in most situations.

I feel your pain. I have always liked compact scopes. Got a fixed 2X compact Leupold on a Ruger #1 and a Weaver K-2 on a 30-30. Never cared for huge scopes except on a varmit or target rifle. Seems like some people mount their rifles onto the scope rather than the other way around.

I'm beginning to think you are right. I'm starting to re-think the aperture sight again.

The advantages of optical sights has been well known since the 18th century, but so were the disadvantages. The main advantage is having the sight and the target in the same optical plane so the eye doesn't have to try to focus on two or three distances at the same time. Even a 1x scope is better than "irons" when it comes to precision, regardless of distance. This contributes more to sighting accuracy than all other scope features combined. Secondly, but not quite as important, is magnification. The advantage of magnification is it allows you to better see what your shooting at and becomes more important as the target distance increases. This is not to say a scope is necessary to shoot well and will not make a bad shooter a good shooter or make up for poor hunting/field skills. However, a scope will make any shooter a better shooter. Target match shooting proves this. At any given range, scores shot with an optical sight are generally higher than those shot with metallic sights. I do agree that a scope adds nothing to the "looks" of a firearm and a Lyman Alaskan looks better mounted than the most expensive European variable with a 56mm objective.

An interesting observation for whatever it's worth.

I'm far sighted. When I was young I used aperture sights on my rifles and open sights on my handguns. As my eyes aged I went to scopes and thought that was the cat's meow. Now that my eyes have cataracts and have changed yet again aperture sights are starting to look like a better sight for me. When my cataracts are replaced and if all goes well I should have my long distance sight restored not that that sight is all that bad right now.

I've noticed that I can't adjust the scopes to a level of fineness I once did which also includes my spotting scope. Scopes can help a person to see better somewhat but can't make up for poor eyesight. Maybe an aperture sight can't either. Time will tell.

Perhaps it's just a knee jerk reaction, but the purchase of a new rifle also immediately has me thinking of a new scope. I can identify with iron sights for some, nothing wrong with them in certain instances. Too much magnification has been a problem at times, particularly when the scope was left on high power from the target range, and the next thing you know I'm looking at fleas in deer hair....not good. I believe what I enjoy most with the fixed powers are the durability and size. They just look cleaner on a mannlicher, No. 1. A, or any smaller rifle. That's not for everyone either. Seems there was the rage (now thankfully over) for everyone to have the largest bell out front they could. Heck was it Leupold who even designed a non round objective so the scope could be mounted lower? Then came along all the other crap that just befuddles. Give me a smaller fixed 4x on any of my rifles and I'd be content, however ranges are short where I hunt, I could understand a bit more power out West or in open areas. Derby Dude, good luck on the cataracts, I've had the surgery; it's a piece of cake.

Thanks. Doc says not yet but hopefully before the government won't allow the cataracts to be done. I've got money set aside to pay out of pocket if necessary.