[Rainman1977]

I just bought my first rifle, other than a 22. It's a Ruger 270.

I plan on deer hunting with a long shot being about 100 yards. Is there any need to put more than $100.00 in a scope?

RM

 

[Saskshooter]

Only if you want it to work.

A scope has several "critical aspects" to its operation. One is of course optical quality. You have to pay for that, and $100 won't get it. Another is repeatable, reliable adjustments. Sighting in a scope that won't adjust is absolute frustration. $100 won't get you that either. Another is the ability to change magnification power without changing point of impact. You can't get that for $100.

You can't have quality optics cheaply. A gun is only as good as the sighting mechanism it uses.

 

[Tnhunter]

Unless you find one heck of a deal, I'd say yes, there is a need. I own a good number of scopes and through trial and error I've found the decent quality ones run a bit more and start with such brands as Weaver K & V series, Nikon Prostaff, Bushnell Elite 3200, Redfield (leupold made) and Burris FFII. By searching internet sites you should be able to find one of these between $100 and $150. I'd also check Ebay and other sites, such as GunsAmerica for a good used one.

I'll also say that as a new shooter of CF rifle/scoped, don't get blinded by the need for high magnification. I have several .270s that wear straight 4X scopes and also 2-7 variables. Higher magnifications are also going to bring higher $$ and IMHO you'll get more quality in a higher grade scope in lower magnification than an "el Cheapo" in 14X.

 

[Gil Martin]

It depends what you prefer

I have used Bushnell Banner and Trophy scopes for years and they are available for $100.00 or less. Never had a problem with them and whatever I shot never knew the price difference. All the best...
Gil

 

[Jim H]

http://swfa.com/Nikon-2-7x32-ProStaff-Shotgun-Scope-P42190.aspx
i've also seen these for 99.00 in cabelas bargin cave too. they will hold their POI and the will service as well as you could hope for at a 100.00 limit. my .02
also you can find some real bargins out there on some better glass if you don't mind buying gently used. usualy can save a real 30% sometimes more.

 

[Rainman1977]

Thanks Guys.

I can buy a more expensive scope, but wanted to know why. I have a 3 x 9 Bushnell Dusk Dawn on my Henry 22 and it is great for plinking at around 50 yards. I was wanting to know why I needed more scope on the 270.

RM

 

[broom_jm]

If you can set a budget of $200 (or more) you'll be much happier with the glass you get for your 270. I have a Bushnell Elite 3200 2x-7x on mine and it does a fine job.

 

[Tnhunter]

Thanks Guys.

I can buy a more expensive scope, but wanted to know why. I have a 3 x 9 Bushnell Dusk Dawn on my Henry 22 and it is great for plinking at around 50 yards. I was wanting to know why I needed more scope on the 270.

RM

After that, I'll give you two very simple reasons: 1. More recoil!!!!! and #two is one many do not think abouut 2. MUCH larger trophy potential! I'm still trying to remember when I heard someone say that they were devastated that the squirrel they missed due to bad parallax, or low light performance, or their scope simply getting out of "sight-in" occurred. Now, when it comes to a .270 and deer, antelope, elk, moose, bear, or... well, you get the drift..............

 

[broom_jm]

To add to what TnHunter is saying, that inexpensive Bushnell is fine for targets and squirrels, but many of your best opportunities on big game come at times when there is barely enough light for the job. A quality scope means you can be positive of your shot, whereas a lesser scope could result in having to wait and possibly miss out on a great deer or other big game animal.

 

[Saskshooter]

I just want to add that, although it is possible, as has been suggested, to use a cheap scope, a good scope will last a lifetime, perhaps on several different guns, and be a pleasure to use the whole time. It is not necessary to get the most expensive, but whatever you spend over the $100 limit will seem to be very well spent in 10 years.

And don't ever look through something like the Zeiss Conquest series. You will lust after one the rest of your life.

 

[au2183]

Have you considered a red dot? I have a Rem 7400 in 270 with a UltraDot 30 on it that I use for deer, with 100 yards being a long shot also. It's just about perfect. Much faster than a scope. Last deer I shot was an 8 pointer that was running left to right through the woods at nearly 100 yards. It was easy to pick him up with both eyes open and get a lock on him. Only trouble was the trees that got in the way. I made kindling with the first couple shots, then cut the top off his heart and destroyed both lungs. I don't know if I could have done that with a scope. It just happened too fast.

 

[Jim H]

as others have said and i agree with, buy as much quality optic as you can afford. that being said, in regaurds to your original post about not shooting past 100 yrds, i will stnd by the opinion that yes you can get by very well for 100.00 as ilustrated by the Nikon choice IF you need to limit yourself. for a deer only rifle and a short range hunting situation like you originaly posted about i don't beleive you would be hadicapping yourself at all with the proper 100.00 choice and there are several options. another would be a fixed power scope of 4x, a fixed power scope will tend to be a bit better opticaly as compared to the same priced variable scope. not always but generaly it will go that way. i have decent glass on all my rifles, not the best but good decent DEPENDABLE scopes. over the years i have either now own or have used Bushnell Elites (both 3200 & 4200) Sightron S2, Nikon Monarch, Leupold Vari-X II & VX-II. Simmons and a host of older B&L made bushnells. i started with the Simmons some years back and got schooled about optics and their ability to hold their point of impact or the lack there of. that was with a cheap 8point model that i bought after shooting my buddies rifle that had a older Simmons Aetec which was a decent scope but the 8 Point i found out was not, at least not on top of my 30.06, the image was great but the POI would shift from month to month or shot to shot. so there it started my journey on optics and their performance needs. first and foremost the image don't mean squat if you wont hit the target. a scope needs to hold point of impact shot after shot after shot. good tracking is nice and makes it easy to get dialed in but in the end, it's the ability to hold the POI year after year that is important, and the ability to make out what you're trying to hit doesn't hurt either.

 

[Bird Dog II]

I just bought my first rifle, other than a 22. It's a Ruger 270.

I plan on deer hunting with a long shot being about 100 yards. Is there any need to put more than $100.00 in a scope?

Your solution is easy. Get a Weaver K4 or K6. (K4 if you hunting woods/brush - K6 if you hunt more open areas).

I have the K6. It is no kidding clearer and brighter than my $300+ dollar Leupold and $200 Burris variables when they are set to 6 power. Why? Because fixed power scopes are more efficient. They have fewer lens and also fewer seems between lens, so they lose less light and less distortion as it passes through to your eye. They also tend to hold up to punishment better for the same reason and because there are fewer moving parts. These Weavers are $124 now at Midway. For $124, you will have as clear and bright a sight picture as other hunters using $300 variables. The game will never know your scope is only fixed power. Paper won't know either. I reload and shoot a lot, always striving for sub MOA groups. The tightest shot group I have ever printed was with a gun attached to my K6. A man with a $4000 Schmidt and Bender could have shot no better that day.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=174349

 

[Rainman1977]

I hope everyone had a happy and safe Thanksgiving. My little girl is home from college so mine was/is excellent.

To re-index this string a bit, I have always been somewhat of an optics snob. I ran a small photography business on the side for twenty years. I’ve always put top dollar in lenses for my cameras, darkroom equipment, etc. In that application, I could ‘see’ the difference good glass made.

In the shooting sports, I guess the difference is not as clear to me. At one hundred yards, I can see clearly with the Bushnell and hold tight groups shooting from a rested position.

Again, I can spend three or four hundred dollars for a scope, but I’m still not sure why I should. The low light situation makes sense to me, but otherwise, I’m unclear.

That said, you guys are making me feel I would not be sorry for dropping another couple of hundred bucks.

Thanks guys,

RM

 

[huffmanite]

Rainman, For around $100, after its $50 Rebate, you can buy a Nitrex TR1 3-9x42 from www.natchezss.com It is a discontinued scope that once sold for around $300. Heck of a buy for a scope with good glass and well built. It is basically a Weaver Grand Slam scope. Check out this webpage.

http://www.natchezss.com/product.cf...tail&brand=WE&prodID=WE94563&prodTitle=Nitrex TR One 3-9x42mm Rifle Scope Matte Finish TrexPlex Reticle

 

[Rainman1977]

Rainman, For around $100, after its $50 Rebate, you can buy a Nitrex TR1 3-9x42 from www.natchezss.com It is a discontinued scope that once sold for around $300. Heck of a buy for a scope with good glass and well built. It is basically a Weaver Grand Slam scope. Check out this webpage.

http://www.natchezss.com/product.cf...tail&brand=WE&prodID=WE94563&prodTitle=Nitrex TR One 3-9x42mm Rifle Scope Matte Finish TrexPlex Reticle

Looks good...anyone else know about Nitrex?

RM

 

[tpv]

Looks good...anyone else know about Nitrex?

RM

yea, i have the nitrex 5-15x
good scope, buy it!

 

[Bird Dog II]

I don't know much about Nitrex. I would check out their warranty though. Burris makes solid hunting scopes in the Fullfield line for under $200. If anything goes wrong with them they will repair or replace them. Leupold is the same. I guess if you are a one high power rifle man and have experience with optics, I would steer you towards a Zeiss Conquest 3x9. Yes it is $399, but that and the .270 is really all you will ever need and you won't regret having the quality. If I had one rifle, that is what I would do.

 

[huffmanite]

Just google Nitrex scopes or Nitrex scopes reviews, you'll find comments and etc. about them

 

[MMichaelAK]

Rainman,
couple things you want to add to what you need to think about in buying your scope.
You already understand optical quality and low light visibility.
But what about rain or shock?

Rain from just having a leaky scope fog internally and becoming worthless or shock causing your internals to break loose inthe scope.
Either way, if you cant see it, you cant shoot it.

Ive tried inexpensive optics and they are usually a disappointment.
Burris Fullfield (the older Fullfield model) as well as older Pentax are good glass and often found used in good shape for low cost. Leupold used to be a great buy used but everyone seems to know now about them so used is going for very nearly new prices. With their Forever Warranty, its still a good buy. But $200 will get you a brand new VX-1 and thats a great scope in either the 2-7x33 or 3-9x40 for your money.
Bushnell, Weaver, Sightron are all good too.

Spend some time looking through a handful of them, then pick the one you like best.