Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics 10/22 Scope Recommendations?

SquirrelNuggets,

Positively I would put a Tasco 4-16X on a 10/22. How can I be so sure? 'Cause that's what mine has.

A Tasco? That explains so much....

fwiw,
I could not recommend more strongly that you avoid a $150-200 stop gap ring/scope combination. Yes the Leupold is not cheap, however, you will have a scope that will function for life... Buy junk and you will have wasted the $150 and have little to show for it...imho

Regards, Matt.

This one is called both a riflescope and a shotgun scope...would it be bad to put this on a 10/22?

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikon-riflescope-prostaff-2-7x32.html



And would I be better to go with a rimfire scope? The idea of the parallax limiting me to around 50/60 yards bugs me.

Parallax can be a deceiving issue. The closer the range is the worse it becomes, however the closer the range is, the less it matters if you are off a little bit with a shot, UNLESS you are doing serious target shooting. In benchrest shooting, 1/4" of parallax will put your scores in the dumpster. IN the woods, it will have absolutely no effect whatsoever, IF and IF is important here, your scope is below about 10x in power. Below that 10x arbitrary mark, the parallax is very low, and down around 4-5x, is virtually insignificant. Above 10x of magnification, it gets progressively worse as the magnification increases. It can be important on long range target rifles, benchrest guns, varmint rifles, etc. In my honest opinion, for rimfire hunting rifles and also most big game hunting rifle/scope combos, parallax is not much of an issue to be concerned with.

Rimfire specific scopes are set to be parallax free at a distance of 50 yards, usually. This brings the scopes parallax free distance range down to the area where a .22 rimfire rifle is traditionally used at. It does not mean the scope is only usable at 50 yards, and everywhere else it will be horribly out of focus and display significant parallax error. The parallax error will increase in proportion to the distance away from 50 yards in either direction, and depending upon the focal range of the scope itself, can be slightly bothersome to totally insignificant. I do not use a parallax adjustable scope on a rimfire rifle. I have had them in the past, and unless you are punching paper for scores in a competition, it is a waste of time, and only adds bulk and complexity to your scope. I have a Burris 3-9x compact with a non adjustable objective on my Kimber 82, and it has not handicapped the rifle from shooting ragged hole 1/4" groups at 25 yards, 1/2" groups at 50 yards, and 1 to 1.5" groups at 100 yards. That's good enough for any .22 long rifle firearm, save a pure competition piece.

Don't worry too much about things which would hinder a competition rifle, unless you ARE shooting competition. Just look for the best scope you can possibly afford, because you will be getting bright enough glass to see a clean clear image at all times of day and all lighting conditions, you will get adjustments that actually work and stay put, and you will get durability. Cheap stuff below a hundred bucks might or might not work for a while. Medium and high quality scopes are several times more likely to be good from the beginning and last a long time.

It's just like any other consumer products you buy. Take shoes for example. If you go to some cheap azz shoe outlet that sells low quality low priced shoes made in some Third World country, they may look OK for a few days, but they'll hurt your feet and fall apart soon. Go to a reputable shoe dealer and pay a little more, and you'll get something far more durable and comfortable. Or you can go all out and get the best money can buy, and it's going to be great. BUT the best deals are in the middle of the road range. Welp, gotta go, the movie is coming back on! Hope all this yapping is actually helping, not confusing you more.

Actually, that was the best explanation of parallax that I'd seen so far....I'd seen it explained on a couple optics sales and sporting goods sights, and I still had unanswered questions...this pretty much covered it for me. Thanks for taking time to explain all that.

All parallax is, is the apparent displacement of the reticle because it's not on the same focal plane as the image of the target. A scope is only parallax free at one place at a time, wherever it's focused at. The shorter the distance and the higher the magnification, the worse the affects are. If you get a chance, take somebody's rifle (if you don't have one handy yourself) with a higher powered scope set parallax free at a long range, put it on a bench, aim it at a target, and then move your head around in a circular motion behind the scope. You'll see how much parallax is there right quickly. Turn the power way down, and it will become less. Super precision shooting like benchrest competition with high magnifications makes parallax adjustable scopes a must. For busting a squirrel at 35 yards, I've never had a problem with the parallax exhibited at that sort of ranges. Everybody will tell you that you will shoot tighter groups IF you use a parallax adjustable scope, which is TRUE. You will. But I've never seen the squirrel or rabbit that could tell the difference between a 1/4" group or a 3/4" group.

The same prinicple holds true when we rimfire shooters go to clawing for ever last little bit of accuracy by tinkering on the rifles and buying up all the high dollar match ammo trying to knock off 1/8" off of our groups. I finally came to a realization here a while back. You can buy high dollar match ammo, and it will likely shoot best groups in your rifle, but if you try several brands of high velocity hunting ammo, you'll usually find something that groups close enough to forget about the differences. For example, I can shoot good expensive match ammunition in my Kimber and it will shoot 1/4" to 3/8" groups at 50 yards. I can shoot lower grade target ammo or subsonic hollowpoints through it, and get 3/8" to 5/8" groups. I can shoot CCI Minimag high velocity hollowpoints through it, and get 1/2" to 3/4" groups. To knock 1/4" to 3/8" off of my 50 yard benchrest groups, I have to go from $25/500 rounds to $60-$100 per 500 rounds of ammo. It is NOT worth the difference. There are no benchrests out in the woods, and there is no way anybody can hold tight enough groups from makeshift woods rests like tree trunks to find that 1/4" difference gained from tripling the ammunition costs. Also, the high velocity ammo will fall 4" at 100 yards from a 50 yard zero, while the match velocity ammo will fall anywhere from 7" to 10" dependant upon the velocity and bullet design. Flatter trajectory makes for easier hits.

Parallax adjustable scopes and high buck target ammo looks great on paper, but out in the woods, give me a 4x, 2-7x, or 3-9x with good hvhp ammo, and I'll kill mo' better. I would spend my money on a good quality sane and normal type scope of known brand and reputation, get lots of ammo with the rest of my money, and practice practice practice until I could be confident of my shooting. I grew up when shooting areas were plentiful, ammo was cheap, and kids had lots of time to fool around and play, so I got years and years of walking down the river and across woods and fields picking off pine cones, blackbirds, rocks, floating sticks in the water, knocking mistletoe out of trees, and shooting up old cans and bottles at dumps. Plus I had several pellet rifles, and shot them til I got tired of pumping and cocking. Time spent shooting builds experience that won't be forgotten.

I wish I had back some of the money I wasted on clunker scopes and rifles and ammo, I could afford more ammo nowadays! Get a good scope and good rings on that 10-22, and enjoy shooting it a lot. Don't buy junk scope bases and rings either, no scope will stay put in cheap crap aluminum rings from the discount store's sporting goods section. Good mounts are as important as the good scope. If you can't afford a good scope right away, take the guy up on the offer to give you a clunker to use now(reference to the other thread), so you can save the money to buy a better one later. You won't regret it. I will never forget pulling off that Tasco 4x and screwing on the Leupold 3-9xEFR on the 77-22 Ruger I had at the time. A world of better.

Hope I didn't put ya to sleep, sort of a long boring post, I know, but sometimes it takes long and boring to tell stuff!

A 10/22 does not need expensive scopes. I put on an old Weaver fixed 4 power after looking through several of my older scopes to find one that focused well without parallax at 25 yards. Some scopes just will not focus well at close distances. Look in the bargain scope bins at gun shows and find one that will focus at the close distances you will typically shoot with a .22 rifle. You probably will find a good one for this application for under $50. Fishdoc/

fwiw,
What a 10/22s "needs" depends on the 10/22 in question, what you expect out of it, and the depth of your pockets. I work with scopes, albeit Schmidt Bender, as a day job and have a fair understanding of what works and what does not. It gets back to the old dictum of "You pays your money and you takes your chances."

The last issue is to remember just how wide a net you cast when you ask for information on the internet. Knowing the source of the information could make or break the advice. Pat Rogers refers to it as the "disinformation cowpath" versus the information super highway. I would tend to concur...

Regards, Matt Garrett

I saw an interesting post over on either the Ask the Gunwriters Forum or the Rimfire Forum about decent scopes for .22's. Posted by our resident optics expert, John Barsness, it involved the use of the Burris FFII scopes on .22's. John reported that he was able to adjust out much of the parrallax in these scopes at typical .22 RF ranges by using the focusing ring on the back of the scope.
John also went out of his way to mention what very good scopes both the Burris FFII's and the Nikon ProStaff scopes were in his article "Tough Scopes" which appear in the July, 2004 ed. of Handloader magazine. Since he tests about 20 scopes a year, and really knows how to do it right, he's worth reading.
If you have any questions concerning scopes for this application, I'm sure he will respond to any questions you might have if you post over on the Ask the Gunwriters forum.
I personally can find nothing more to add to either Matt's posts or Mr. Nesmith's. Both have covered the subject very well. E

Ah, Matt. You sure do have some neat toys. Drool ! E

A good .22 gets shot a lot more than any centerfire rifle. A person will spend a lot of time behind that scope, compared to a few minutes a year with the typical deer rifle. That alone justifies spending more money than your typical bubble pack rimfire scope. I have not yet personally met anybody who bought a high quality riflescope that regretted it. Can't say that vice versa, I do know lots of folks who bought poor quality and regretted. Lots of great scopes in the $125-$350 price sector. Hard to choose.

Here's an example of what I've been saying. Two targets that I just went outside and shot. Two groups at 50 yards, one at 25 yards. The first shot at 50 yards from the cold barrel went a tad to the right, plus the wind let up somewhat by the second bullseye. All groups are CCI Minimag hvhp's. Rifle is the Kimber Model 82, scope is a Burris Compact 3-9x32mm without an adjustable objective. I have adjusted this scope parallax free at 50 yards myself. Placed on the bench, centered on a target at 25 yards, I measured less than 1/4" of parallax. The targets were shot at 9x of magnification at 50 yards, 6x at 25.

Phillip;

Excellent post.

There are a ton of quality scopes for .22s (and almost everything else) in the $100-$350 range.

Leupolds, yes, as well as Nikons, Burris, Sightrons, Weavers, Swifts...

I broke two (albeit LOW end) Bushnells on .22s, and after that, I'm done with Bushies. Ditto that on LOW end Tascos. Simmons, has fared even worse for me. Those three, along with BSAs, Barskas, and NCStars are out... Way, Way, out.

I'm really starting to think that a Nikon Prostaff 2-7x32 is the way to go. But I keep seeing it listed as a shotgun scope....would it work on a .22? I just don't want to pay extra for the 3-9x40 version.

It'll work. As far I can find specs on those scopes, it has the standard Nikoplex reticle and the parallax free distance is specified as 75 yards, instead of 100 or more as a centerfire scope would be. Have you ever been over to www.rimfirecentral.com? It's a rimfire shooters specialty website, with tons of good information to read.

mueller makes a nice 4.5-14 apv bought one on ebay very nice for 115.00 put on my ar 15 and it is holding up very good ,Im sure it would make a wonderful .22 scope.go to, mueller optics.com also your wont be disapointed.

A shotgun scope with parallax adjusted for 75 yards will serve you well. Leupold sets their rimfire scopes to be parallax free at 60 yards. I like mine set at 50. But, any parallax experienced between 50, or 60, and 75 is negligible, and can be eliminated by centering you eye in the ocular of the scope.

Don

Thanks to Phillip and everyone else for the helpful comments, they're definitely productive and I'm getting a better feel for what I need. At first the parallax concept didn't make a whole lot of sense to me, and now I realize that it's the reason I never liked the scopes that some friends of mine have had on their rifles. I understand how it gets worse with magnification and how knocking it from 3/8 to 1/4 isn't really worth it for the extra $$$ it would cost. On that topic, would going a tad more pricey and getting a scope with 100+ yard parallax be worthwhile or would a 50/60 yard parallax be fine? I understand what parallax is, how it relates to .22 ammo and

I did a test using a scope with parallax set at 100 yards on a target set up at 50 yards. By moving my eye from one extreme edge of the eye piece to the other produced 1" of cross wire movement.

Don