I've read that there's one aspect of the very top tier scopes, that really makes them worth their price. There may well be other traits of these scopes, that users of them benefit from. But the ONE that I am alluding to, to me, really DOES make their price worth it. Why do you, who spend the money on the S&B, Swarovski or other expensive top tier scope believe that the extra money is justified? I'll post the reason that I'm thinking of, after some posts come in from you all. Thanks for what ever info that you share.
Its all in the NAME!You know if you have a too ask you can`t afford it.Why do some watches cost $10,000 and Up????
Its all right to be white!! Stupidity left unattended will run rampant Don't argue with stupid people, They will drag you down to their level and then win by experience
Tracking, accuracy of adjustment, consistency/repeatability, focus, parallax, durability, image quality, good customer service that rarely if ever is used.
All about the glass for me. BUT lots of other reasons as well. Robust construction. Reliable adjustments. Tactile feel (ergonomics) Eyebox Accessories available
Once you get past the $400 tier of scopes, they all have pretty decent focus and resolution. Probably not a 5% increase in these areas for a 500% increase in price.
I would not say the same for tracking.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
I started hunting elk in about 1966 with a Model 88 Winchester in..308. It had a Bushnell Banner 4X scope on it. I believe it cost about $18. It didn't even have self centering reticles. I eventually used a Weaver V-7 , 2-7X that cost about $50. MY Model 70,.06 had it on for quite awhile until a fellow I took elk hunting gave me a Leupold 2-8X power. I had two of those V-7's and I used them on a few other rifles.I killed as many elk with that old Bushnell as I did with the Weaver or Leupold. I value a good set of binoculars more than a scope.
Probably the top dollar do have the attributes listed previously.
Last edited by saddlesore; 04/09/22.
If God wanted you to walk and carry things on your back, He would not have invented stirrups and pack saddles
I value a good set of binoculars more than a scope.
So do I. That said, my 20 year old Pentax roof prisms have done an excellent job all this years and they still have lots of life left in them. My eyes are another matter.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
Brad says: "Can't fault Rick for his pity letting you back on the fire... but pity it was and remains. Nothing more, nothing less. A sad little man in a sad little dream."
...most importantly, low light performance at dusk and dawn.
Houston we have Lift-Off !
THIS ability, to actually add some number of minutes per day, that you can shoot with confidence, because you CAN SEE the animal's kill zone through the top quality glass of the scope. And these two times of the hunting day, "dusky" minutes and "dawny" minutes, are when SO MANY animals are moving! This is the dominant reason for spending the money on the top tier scopes IMO.
So, all of the attributes of the top dollar scopes: do the people doing the attribution "based on experience" them to a number of other scopes that are down the price line under identical conditions at identical times? Are these comparisons done a significant number of times? Are poor reports based on a "sample of one?" Or, are the attributions based on advertising and the opinions of those of like mind? Or is the old "you get what you pay for" school of thought coming into play? I am asking this in all seriousness; not just trying to pick a fight.
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.
Happily Trapped In the Past (Thanks, Joe)
Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well.
My remarks are reserved for hunting purposes only, not competition or real-life sniping.
Most of my scopes would be considered to be in the Alpha category. Is the extra measure of value you get with them worth the extra money from a value to cost perspective, absolutely not.
I started out poor and when cheap variables first started hitting the market, they were unreliable and could not be counted on. Things have completely changed and you do not have to spend $1,000 or more to get a serviceable and reliable scope. There are lots of options out there.
There is not one shot I would have missed with a lesser scope in my 45 years of hunting except those in super low light conditions where I would not have been able to see the game with lesser scopes. Is that worth $1000 or more in price, from an economics point of view, no.
Why do I prefer Alpha Scopes when I could save money with lesser scopes, purely preference. They put a smile on my face when I look through them and I love hunting with them.
I will also add this, Alpha scopes I paid well over a thousand dollars for in the 90's are still my most used and favorites. Alpha scopes are a lifetime investment.
Alpha Scopes are a luxury and option, not a necessity for most hunters.
