Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics What's your rifle to scope cost ratio?

Exactly this^^. It totally depends on what the rifle is going to be used for. Most of my "go to" hunting rifles wear cheap azzed Burris FFII 3-9x40 with ballistic plex reticle scopes. That scope works for about 90% of my hunting needs. If I draw a my "long range" tag, I'll pull out the CTR with Nightforce.. Ar's wear scopes that cost $350.00, except for one AR10 6.5CM. It has a NF NXS on top...

Pretty much the same scopes on all our rifles. With the exception of a couple Leupolds and Night Forces. This could change a little bit this year depending on what Tract comes out with.

1-18-22 they are announcing a new 30mm hunt series scope.

For the record I’ve killed all my animals with a sub $500, and most of those with sub $300 scopes, leupolds and (2) ziess conquest, (1) Ol school Swarovski I got for $250. Couple dump truck loads of meat with open sights (muzzleloaders) and bows.

$300 used on a $1500 tweaked 416 Rem. M70.

No influence at all. I buy a rifle for a purpose or set of purposes and I scope it appropriately for those purposes. In my case my most expensive rifle is my lightest rifle. I'm not hamstringing it with a 2 pound or heavier scope. It has a nice 12 ounce Leupold 2.5-8X in Talley 1 piece aluminum mounts. I'm spending my money for portability. The accuracy is way better than I can use regardless of gun weight in the area I hunt.

Seems like my applications call for $400 - $800 scopes no matter what the rifle is.

Tom

Show off!!! Haha

Never really thought about it.
Most rifles bought used.
Most scopes bought new.
Avg is 1.5 -2x.

And that, Sir, nicely sums it all up. I suspect every animal I've ever shot would be just as dead with a $300 scope.

No set ratio, that guarantees you'll spend unnecessary money to meet an arbitrary number.

The rifle is chose for a purpose and the glass is chose for a purpose. I have mounted glass costing 10% of the rifle, I have mounted glass costing 250% of the rifle, both examples have pleased me by serving their purpose.

No set number.

I buy a rifle I like, scope I like but don't "pair" them to cost.

Bergara with a Leupold
Ruger with Nikon
Montana with SWFA

No set ratio in my set ups. More application driven and what I can make work the best with what I already have.

I try to select both with the task in mind, not the price particularly. Not cheap, but not wasteful either.

I believe I’ll have to try one too. A few ounces heavier than I use now but I didn’t expect it to be any lighter or cheaper.

In the 90's my guide in South Africa advised the scope should cost twice as much as the rifle. The gist of this is that scope malfunctions were at the top of the list as to problems with rifles on Safaris and to not go cheap on a scope that could ruin a $25,000 and up hunting trip of a lifetime. He said all factory rifles were capable of adequate accuracy necessary for practical hunting in Africa and very rarely malfunctioned, if at all, in the field. So, in his mind focusing on the scope reliability and being able to see your target with the most precision was most important.

Today, scopes are much more reliable and choice is more of a preference. A $200 Burris will most likely serve your hunting needs adequately and you will most likely not miss any shot due to the scope versus a $2,000 plus Alpha scope. The problem is, once you compare Alpha glass to lesser glass, you are screwed and will end up wanting to upgrade.

As a border line looney, I said to myself that I’m going to get rid of the low end guns because I can only use one at a time anyway. I’d build up what I’m going to use for the rifle first. Then I’d mount a nice yet functional, but not exorbitantly expensive scope on it to use for a year or two. Then that scope would come off and go onto a 10/22 as an example. Then I’d find the best upper end scope for my use and that would finish that rifle. I’ve long since forgotten what I’ve paid for a Euro variable Zeiss or Swarovski, but oh the clarity, resolution and light gathering ability of those scopes pleases me when ever I look through them. It has never been an all or none process for me, it is a work in progress spanning a few years.

no number either but it is winding up about a 1 to1 ratio 1K rifle/1K scope

Kind of a moving target for me. Usually the rifle ends up as the higher number because of upgrades.

I have a lot of $300 junkie Leupolds still.
Every deer I’ve killed in the last 10 years has been with a Leupold that cost under $400 used. The only exception was with a Zeiss conquest that cost $250 used. Lots of old azz 3-9x and 2.5-8x and 1.5-5x. I didn’t know you couldn’t kill a deer with one til I joined the ‘fire.

A used $200 Vari-X-III 3.5-010x I bought at a pawn shop in Midland Texas in 1996. It seemed to have worked on my old FN Mauser 30-06 a few years ago.