Rifle Scopes Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

[BobD]

Whether you're taking down a hog, deer, prarie dog, competing 3 gun, benchrest, LE, military etc... You purchase a scope as a tool to help accomplish a certain task. All of these tasks require glass and scope features of different needs. However, in every situation I can think of there is a point where one could have 'enough scope' and investing beyond is simply an added luxury. Many want the best, the latest, the greatest, optical excellence, x mag range, most innovative reticle, with x turrets and a minimum of x total travel... but a what point are you no longer gaining a considerable advantage?

A major issue people deal with when deciding on a large scope purchase is how to justify the amount of money theyre spending. There are times when spending the extra 3-400 dollars is noticeably worth the extra investment and times where one might question whether or not its practical (in terms of optical clarity, durability and versatility).

Obviously, the idea of this discussion is incredibly subjective... and could be interpreted in many different ways from believing in a monetary value to comparing a level of quality from a manufacturer of either a particular model or feature.

*for example only
(P-dog 400 yards, 22-250 rifle) Zeiss' conquest line would be ideal for this set-up,
scope maintains poa poi in a sfp scope which might be needed not to obscure target.
The glass is polished enough to show the detail necessary for this type of huntinig.
Also, the 1" tube is more than sufficient for azimuth adjustments at this range. You
Could double what you spend and get into the Victory line to see clearly see the
expression on the P-dogs face but it wont save you a shot.


* for example only
(short-mid range optic, target, .223) if you are just beginning to get into
competition and cant break the bank yet, try to stay above $400, there are plenty of
options around this price mark and you should have some decent glass and a scope
that tracks consistently. A $200 piece may look sufficient but wont offer the same
clarity and durability needed for quick shots. You might gain a bit of an advantage moving up to something like the Vortex Razor, you will get signifigantly better
glass, and more user friendly
features that can get you on target faster. There are more expenive options han this
but you wont be gaining a considerable advantage.

I think it would be an interesting idea to hear others opinions and experiences together on this. Offer anything you can- even your own issues explaining something where you felt the more you spent the less you were getting back in product or vice versa. Curious how others approach this situation as well-

 

[fireEMT5]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

I'd throw out the idea to buy the best that "you" can afford, or get the best bang for your dollars.

My own experiences led me down the road - starting out, to buy a Vortex Viper 2-7x32, followed shortly there after by a SS 3-9. At the time this was stretching my budget, but I saved up until I could make the purchases. In each case I felt as though I was getting more for my money vs. comparable brands and each scope exceeded my expectations far beyond price paid.

Fast forward to the SS 5-20/1-6 group buy. Same story here. I probably shouldn't have spent the money, but managed to fit it in the budget. Again, the SS 5-20 far exceeded my expectations. Note, I've never had the pleasure of comparing it to any of the other "Alpha" priced brands. That said, I can't imagine that I'm giving up a whole lot, especially when one factors in the group buy price or even the regular price of the SS 5-20 compared to S&B, NF, Zeiss, Premier, etc. Sure, I may be giving up something, but having never done a side by side comparison, I don't know what that might be and don't miss it.

One thing for sure, the market has changed in the past few years, and for the better as far as the consumer is concerned. Sometimes, if you are willing to save up and spend just a little bit more than you planned, you can get alot more glass than you thought you might. Occassional group buy pricing doesn't hurt either.

I certainly have no regrets, but on the other hand would not have spent much more. My Vortex and SS experiences proved to me that you don't have to spend to the moon. Oh, you can if that's the way you roll and your bank account allows for it.

I'm totally satisfied right where I'm at with my glass purchases and if I miss, it's the driver and not the equipment. Carry on.

 

[leadbullet]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

I buy my scopes as a long term investment, usually the best i can afford. I will sell rifles and other things but not my scopes.

 

[oldfatguy]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

Good scopes seem to hold their value well. It would be very interesting to do a little research on what used scopes are going for compared to their current prices. Just might be that the life cycle cost of a S&B PMII is no more then those costing half as much.

OFG

 

[mjmcmahon]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

OFG -

you've touched on something that I've been considering lately, especially after selling a rifle and scope...Time has taught me the benefits of a buy once-cry once approach to my shooting hobby. Obviously, one has to be fiscally responsible, but I've been stung far too many times by buying something less than what I truly wanted because you wind up spending more money in the long run and you almost never get even 50% of your money back for the temporary stop-gap. After seeing what some of the sellers of higher-end equipment have been able to sell their gear for, and the speed at which they're able sell that equipment, I question whether buying low- to mid-range is worth it for me.

Here's my quandary: I've been looking at the Bushnell Elite HDMR and some of the prices I've seen are AMAZING. The concern is whether the pricepoint on the HDMR doesn't put it at a point where the money might be better invested into something a bit higher-end. My thought process is that the more expensive scopes have one thing going for them that I perceive Bushnell (currently) does not: name recognition. That name recognition means that should I decide to sell a well cared for optic down the road, I'm more likely to recover more of my initial investment. That just means that I get more money to buy bigger toys later on.

What's your thought on this? I know the Bushnell is well regarded but I'm a little put off by the number of private sellers putting one up for sale on the 'Hide currently. This makes me wonder how good of an investment the Bushnell would be versus, say, a Vortex Viper PST EBR-2 - something more of a 'known quantity'.

Brain food...I think it leads to more confusion!

Mike

 

[samnev]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

I uaually buy NF scopes. Butrecently purchased a Votex 4-15X50 FFP to use on an AR that will only see range use. Great scope, tracks well glass very clear and great reolution but it is not a NF. But it fullfills the light duty use it will see. For situations that requires a more robust scope I use my AR's with NF scopes.

 

[BobD]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

Mike,

The scopes your looking at in my opinion are right there in the beginning of the high end market. You are already creeping in the territory of NF, Zeiss, Swaro, SWFA, and Vortex's Razor line etc...

Your dilemma parallels much of what I was brining up initially in this thread. The glass you have your eye on has earned a fairly good reputation. If the HDMR has everything you will ever need from a scope you should grab it. However, throw in a little more and you should continue to see improvements in a few department (I'm not saying the HDMR is lacking or will make you feel so).

Personally, I believe you should think hard on what it is exactly you want from the scope... besides reticle talk... For instance, if you wont be happy with this as you 'dream' scope that you finally have, maybe you should pass and keep saving. If its not, do you have one in mind that you are planning to buy or trade up to? Or is this more a fits the bill for the moment type purchse? How long to you intend to keep it before another purhase?

As far as the two you mentioned... Vortex has the no questions lifetime warranty and is also more of a 1 size fits all scope... My forecast is that the PST would move quicker as if there were any problems one could just have it replaced but would likely still get more money back on the HDMR. I may be wrong but it seems likely if you are speaking of the hourus reticle, which i think is for a very specific market...


On the other side, if you would be thrilled to have a scope from the high end market and are considering the exotics for resale value and recognition I would consider the following possibilities:
1) you may end up feeling the need to baby the scope rather than enjoy it. They were built durable and thats part of what youre paying for.
2) If its a not keeper, you might get a panic attack every time you take it out for use...
3) you may forgo other considerable Investments for shooting... Think an extra $1-2,000

I think products like Hendsolt and S & B can be great purchases if you are buying them for their function and desire the excellence only they can provide, then their resale value with the possibility of recouping part of your investment becomes an added bonus. Its kind of similiar to exotic cars... still costs half a fortune to get a 15 year old Ferrari, even if its not in perfect condition.

I wish you the best with whatvever you deide to go with. Please don't miscontrue any of this to be judging or condecending, I'm just trying to offer a way that I would personally look at the situation. There are so many things to consider it messes with your mind-
Good luck

 

[BobD]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

Speaking of the 'exotic' spectrum of glass...

Any owners of $2,500+ pieces? Scope, spotter, binos etc...?
Would like to hear how you feel your purchase has compared to its next closest competition, or even a significant step down... slightly better? Blow your mind better optically? Can you see or detect things now that would have otherwise not been possible, or able to make a shot you would otherwise be unable to make? Or just an overall detail that cannot be obtained in lesser makes?

Also what pushed you over the edge to make your purchase? Investment, disappointed by a high end purchase and wanted better, competition needs etc..?

Feel free to share any of your experiences with them, even pictures
would really like to hear what makes this category so great from those that own them.

 

[oldfatguy]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

S&B scopes are a good investment. Given reasonable care they will retain their value or even appreciate. So the cost of ownership is low, or non-existant. Cannot say that for the MK4s in the safe.

Then there is the warrenty and CS. With their facility in VA service is pretty close by, if ever needed. Bottom line here is that S&B is a known quantity that will be around for a very long time.

The glass, turrets, reticle choices, fit and finish.....are all first class. There are some other high end choices that are offered to be superior in one area or another, but overall S&B delivers the complete package.

OFG

 

[turbo54]

Re: Glass: A Tool of Diminishing Returns

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Speaking of the 'exotic' spectrum of glass...

Any owners of $2,500+ pieces? Scope, spotter, binos etc...?
Would like to hear how you feel your purchase has compared to its next closest competition, or even a significant step down... slightly better? Blow your mind better optically? Can you see or detect things now that would have otherwise not been possible, or able to make a shot you would otherwise be unable to make? Or just an overall detail that cannot be obtained in lesser makes?

Also what pushed you over the edge to make your purchase? Investment, disappointed by a high end purchase and wanted better, competition needs etc..?

Feel free to share any of your experiences with them, even pictures
would really like to hear what makes this category so great from those that own them.



</div></div>

I've had Simmons, Tasco, Bushnell, Burris, Leupolds, NF, S&B and Premier.

I currently have three Premier Heritage 5-25s and a 3-15.

Why? Because they're awesome. If you buy them used for $2000-2500, you'll get nearly, if not all your money back when you sell them. That means cost of ownership is zero or close to it.

For $0, you get premium FFP glass second to none, and a great feature set.