Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics So What's the Diff?

If it works for you, go for it. A scope is basically an aiming device and at times it needs to be clear enough to verify points or other small issues when necessary. A sunshade will take care of sun flare issues most of the time but a scope doesn't need to be microscopically accurate to work fine in most instances. It just has to be tough enough to stand up to whatever treatment we put them through.

I prefer the Elite Bushnells for several reasons, but I have a Banner or two on rimfire rifles I've had for quite some time and they work fine for their intended purpose and would probably be fine on several of my deer rifles if I so choose...

I do have to admit I like higher end scopes, but I have a personal aversion to spending huge amounts of money on scopes like the $1500-$3000 high end Night Force, Leupold, and Bushnell LRHSi . I doubt my eyes could take advantage of the differences anyway...

He is bragging in a way. He's using throw away $100 scopes, is content and getting it done. For his style and needs, it is working. Others here have different needs. Not really about bragging rights though, the same can be said for the rest of us. If what we are using for our needs is working great, why change? I was at the range yesterday and had my typical targets stapled up and an old feller came along with a tactical looking 308 Remington 700. He asked why my "aiming point was so big". He was using a Swarovski. He said, "it just looks like a big orange blob". I said you better get a better scope then. I'm aiming at the 1/4" diamond inside the orange blob. Using one of my Nightforce rifle scopes of course.. Poor guy would have needed brail to see a target at 400...

Now that's an interesting take. I suppose in some perverse way, you're right. I got into hunting and shooting at a time when I was just a young buck COBOL programmer and really couldn't afford much, so I got used to deer hunting on the cheap. I never bought a new deer rifle until 2014-- after 40 years. I was always content to raid the bargain rack, or take some rusted up POS and try and make a tack driver out of it. That was how my fascination with cheap scopes developed. I learned early on that Tasco was a step below allowable limits and set my limits slightly above theirs.

But my question in this case was and is honest. I'd really like to know what I'm missing with a $100 scope.

Everyones eyes are different, confidence in you equipment is everything. If you comfortable using it then go for it. I have owned about every brand on the market from 39.95 to 2000.00 and japanese bushnell elites work better than anything ive used, so i use them. They match my eyes.

Over the years I've had more Bushnell Banners fail than Tascos and I think I've owned more Tascos. In fact,I have no more Bushnell Banners as the last two failed just in the past couple years and I threw them in the trash but I still have a couple Jap Tascos from the late 1970's - early '80's that still work perfectly. One of them is on a .22 that rides in the rack on my quad constantly. It holds zero tenaciously despite the rough treatment and punches out 1/2" 5 shot groups on demand from 50 yards. Optically it is not comparable to a modern Banner but it has killed a friggin ton of varmints and game over the years and continues to do so dependably.

I will take a different approach than others to discuss this topic. Invest in a high quality set of binoculars - they really are a lifetime purchase. Use them for scanning and identifying animals in conditions where your entry level scopes are not as clear as you need them to be to make a confident call on whether the animal is shooter or not. Once you decide, put your entry level reticle on the blur in the area you need to deliver the bullet and let er rip.

I feel confident in this approach, as I upgraded from an entry level set of binos to the best I could afford and the difference is absolutely stunning in every way.

While I prefer and find value in having all of my optics be higher performance, one does not "NEED" premium quality optics in both binos and scope - but at least one of them needs to be reliable in less than ideal light/conditions. If I had to make that choice, I would go with a premium binos and an entry level scope. Binos are so much easier to scan with than a rifle.

This kind of falls into the category of - "if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand." I mean that kindly, as I know yours is an honest question. I will say however, for sitting in a tree-stand, shooting whitetails under 100 yards, not much in terms of scope is needed. And really, a $100 can buy a lot of scope these days (reference the Burris Fullfield on sale recently).

So I guess, in an odd way, I've sort of talked myself in a circle right into your camp. I could easily use the Burris FF with dots for all my hunting.

Damn, I'm starting to sound like you

PS, so happy to hear about your recent cancer victory...

Nothing. You’ve said you can look through the scope and see everything you’d ever want to see, and the scope is incredibly reliable for you. It can’t get any better than that.

Since I'm the only person that use my scopes, I have one requirement... I CAN SEE out of them...

my eyes sight has always been far from perfect.... and I keep shots to 250 yds or under most of the time...

I've hunted far Northern MN for a number of years just south of International Falls...Problem up there was it was real cold frequently, so a real pain was breathe over your scope and it iced the glass over instantly....

other than that, when I picked up a scope, If it allowed me to be able to see out of it clearly enough to 250 yds....I used it...

and a lot of those were Tascos... Usually $69.00 World Class, but they consistently served me well....

which since I am the only guy pulling the trigger, I'm just fine with it.. even if others think I am a peasant with what I have...

Yeah I agree. I get what I want. There's exactly zero other people that know what I have mounted to my rifle so it's certainly not for bragging rights. Different people have different needs. Some people don't even need optics at all and that is just fine if it works for them. I've done this--think buckshot/30 yds or less.

My neighbor up the road is a snobby bastard. He claims to be a former Maine hunting guide and won't hunt with anything but Zeiss or Swarovski scopes on his custom rifles. He made it pretty plain that he thought little of my Weaver and Leupold scoped factory rifles when he first moved here but since then I have consistently dragged more and bigger bucks out of the woods than he has and I've made it a point to remind him of that fact more than once. The only thing that matters is dead meat on the ground and I couldn't care less what some snob thinks of my equipment. It works for me and the proof is on the meat pole year after year.

It's not often that I agree with Blackie !



Yep, still got a Savage youth model 111, .243, bought as a combo, with a Simmons 8-point scope. The family calls it the meat gun !

Even got a slip on recoil pad, to extend the LOP.

Butt ugly as Blackie, but ........

Put at least triple the meat down, that any of our slightly more classy rifles !

As to scopes, leupold manufactured Redfield & Burris is as high as we go, too.

As always, YMMV.

The difference, IMO low light conditions. Cheap glass is just that in low light conditions, cheap glass.

When growing up, ol' man Wayne, a fella I knew with the most and biggest bucks on the wall used an Ithaca Model 37 with a bead on the end.

He had one gun, that Model 37, and used it for everything - squirrel, rabbit, pheasant, coyote, deer.

That ol' boy could heart shoot a running buck at 200 yards with that 37 and Foster slugs.

And he always, always, got his buck.

You do you.

I’ve missed the ability to shoot deer, hit deer & the buck of a lifetime using cheap scopes on an accurate rifle. I am out early & late over 90 degrees & well below zero in steep brushy territory. A Bushnell Banner is a complete piece of crap in my opinion although so killed lots of deer with one before the reticle fell apart.

Once I had a Zeiss Conquest 3-9x 40 on my rifle those problems just went away. At less than $400 it solved lots of problems 20+ years ago. I’ve bought budget scopes but they don’t make it on my hunting rifles & missed squirrels never bother me like missed deer.

If you think a Banner is the right tool I’d suggest you invest in a Burris FF2 for a better more reliable scope for not much money. It’s your tool & $$$ but sometimes a little more money spent keeps you from having regrets for years.

Your post is interesting. I had more failure with Burris than any of the scope. When I went to Alaska because I had so much trouble with other scopes I installed a Tasco 4-16X on both 375 and a 300 Weatherby.

Personally, if I can ID the game and determine if I want to take the shot with my binoculars, I will be good with any scope which I can see the animal and the reticle. Its more important to me that it is tough and holds zero. I have noticed, the further the range, the harder it is to see that I'm on the right animal in failing light. Rarely at a shot under 200 yards will it be a problem on either side of the legal limits of shooting hour.

. . . and I've had zero trouble with Bushnell scopes. Go figure. I did have one Banner fail, but it was a freak accident. A wind gust blew my Rem 742 off of a gun rack at deer camp and it landed on the concrete from 5 feet up. The Bushnell offered to fix the scope, but it looked too far gone. The gunsmith refused to work on the rifle.

The only other real failure I had was a Simmons that came in a package deal for a new Savage 110 in 30-06. KYHillChick was shooting it from the bench and it spontaneously reverted to its component parts. I just threw it out and mounted a Bushnell Banner.

That's almost as funny as the time you blew up your lawn mower tire.

LOL

Do the world a favor and take up NetFlix as a hobby. JFC.

It's not what you're missing optically.
Some of the responses you're seeing are from guys that shoot more on a single weekend (maybe even a single outing) than you likely do in a couple of years.
If you shoot like many do here, there likely would not have been an inquiry.