I keep reading not to skimp on the optics for your rifle. Some even suggest not to spend under $200 for your scope. I suppose I've always had cheap optics...and my scope works fine. I shoot a .243 and don't miss what I am shooting at as long as I take my time and don't let buck fever get the best of me. (I'm certainly no marksman.) My length of shot is never more than 225 yards...most of the time around 100. (My deer this year were at 210 and 80.) i got my 6 year old a $40 scope on his Ruger 10/22 and he was nailing the bullseye right out of the gate.

What am I missing and why do I need to upgrade?

Hunt with a quality scope for a year and then go back to your cheap scopes. Thats the only way you will be able to see what you are missing.

If it is working for you do not worry about it. As you move up in optics some of the price is for the name of the manufacture on them.

The main thing you get is clearer view, more reliable tracking and light transmission to the eye as you go up in price range. There are sometimes less expensive scopes that can supprise you though. Had a cheap Simmons that was clearer than my cousins Pentax.

Hate to say it though these days some might call me an optics snob. JCB is correct in if you try some very good optics through a season you will not want to go back

I usually limit myself around $250-300

Durability goes way up with higher quality optics. My ar15 fell out of the truck the other day onto concreate. Landed right on its side and smaked the c**p out of my leupold scope. Took it to the range to check zero and it was still on. Other than a few scratches it was ok.

I have hunted and used optics, including very inexpensive ones
for more than 60yrs...Scopes probably for the last 50yrs or so.
Started when you could only get Weaver or like optics in East Texas when everyone else was hunting w/shotguns and buckshot and
30-30 Rifles...I've used everything including Zeiss, Leupould,
Simmons,Tasco,Buriss...both the mfgs higher and lower grade scopes. Most of the cheaper scopes have design flaw and optics
problems, especially if they every get banged around or placed on
a rifle with a lot of recoil...They also do not function nearly as well in low light situation..

There is nothing wrong with staying within your budget...but do not try to justify it with performance and quality...I currently
own a couple of Buriss Scopes...312 XTR, and 6x24 Signature that
is quite old..and has pressure wrinkles from a 300 Win Mag Browning that would litterally turn you around when fired...Both
are excellent scopes..I've installed Mark 4 Leupold's and find them to be and the quality of Zeiss and Swar. ect..

I have owned Simmons Whitetail and had them change veriable on each shot...made in the Phillipines...wonder when they went into
the optics business...

In the end, if it makes you happy, that's all you have to please.
But don't try and compare Apples to Oranges....Not the same

Don Dial, Pipe Creek, Tx

I agree with JCB. You just have to use a higher quality scope to see the difference. I wouldn't say you need to upgrade, but if you do you will be wondering why you didn't do it sooner. The best way to see the difference would be to take two rifles to the stand with you, one with a cheap scope and one with a higher quality scope. When it gets too dark to see anything with your cheap scope, pick up the other one and all questions will be answered.

Some of the older Japanese Tascos had very good glass, but they were not very tough, mechanically so reliability was suspect. Had one fail on a 10-22 back in the days I couldn't afford a good scope. I learned my lesson and have pretty much stuck with Leupold since then. The optice are excellent and there's probably not a more reliable scope available at twice the price.

In ideal conditions a cheap will work. Not great, but it'll get the job done. It's in the extreme conditions that cheap scopes will fail you. Conditions such as low light, long distance, glaring sunlight at dusk/dawn, etc.

Try running a "Box" test on your cheap scopes and the reason for quality optics will become "crystal clear", but in the grand scheme of things, if it shoots good and you like it then thats all that matters.

Stay Safe
Charlie

What's a box test?

As for me, I only use loopies. I do have a Burris FF2 on my 30-06 but it came with the rifle I bought from my brother. I trust it completely but I can tell the difference in quality. I'd be willing to try another brand like Meopta, but I never see people using them even though they're priced as much as leupold.

This

I think with scopes there is definatly a difference between bargain and quality optics. I also think the further you go up the quality optic ladder the smaller your return for your dollar spent.

I have a simmons 3-10 44mag series scope on my 223. I bought it when I was young and didnt have alot of green to throw at it. It has done well for over 10 years, holds zero very well and the adjustments work well, and it doesnt fog up. It is far from how my leopolds perform in low light though even though it has a bigger objective.

Some day I plan on outfiting a rifle with a higher powered zeiss than the current scopes I have, but I am pretty sure I will be disapointed with the noticable "quality increase" over what I curently have and shoot.

matt

I will be the first to admitt that I was stuck on Leupold and didnt think there was enough difference between a Swaro and Leupold to warrent the price difference. Then one day I found a Swaro in my local pawn shop and bought it. There is no doubt in my mind that the Swaro reveals more detail at 300 yards on 16 power than my VX-III does at that same distance on 20 power. It kills me to admitt that my beloved Leo's aint up to par with the Swaro but they aint. BUT......I cant afford the cost of new Swaros so I have to step down the ladder a bit and use Leo's.

I have owned cheaper scopes, mid-range and expensive ones. I can tell you this if you use them daily and more as a tool then you will see a difference in the quality really fast. There is a difference in glass quality and lens coating to start with. The average hunter will not notice much difference in the cheaper scopes vs. the upper end. But those who use them in harsh conditions or tough hunts will not have a cheaper scope. I have had my rifle with a zeiss conquest fall out of a 12' tripod and land flat on its side. I can tell you that a Remington does not bounce from a 12' drop. I still hunt with the same rifle/scope today and it is 7 yrs old.

I have anywhere from cheap BSA and Tasco in the safe to Kahles, Ziess, Minox and Swaro. The upper end scopes are on the rifles I hunt with most and are more likely to need the better view those optics provide. The ones that just make it out ocassionally to the range or a nastalgic hunt every now and then have the lower priced optics on them.

I still have a few Leupolds but I am through buying them and have been since 2003 when one was dead on arrival in Montana. That was not the only scope that died on that trip. I have seen 3 scopes die in cold weather and all 3 were Leupolds.

i have the cabelas meopta bino's. i believe that they are called the EUROS. the glass is great! i wouldnt hesitate to buy a scope with meopta glass.

i have vortex viper pst ffp, zeiss on my scopes. when the other hunters at the camp look thru my scopes they are just floored. especially at dusk and dawn when your looking at a black pig against the tree line.

I have and use, 4 old Japan tasco target scopes on my .22's. love em
in the course of a day at the silhoutte range, I will run the elevation approx 60+ clicks.
they work as well a high $ loopy thats on my $$ .22
ok actually better since they focus closer.

for that matter, some scopes may also change POI with change in zoom.

I recently purchased my first decent scope. It ran me $248 shipped to my door. I got a Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14X40. This is the most expensive scope I've ever purchased. Normally I run Leupold VX-1's, or Bushnell's from Academy. All have served me well.

Looking through my new Nikon though I can clearly see the difference in quality. Everything is sharper & clearer. I would say you should buy at least one nice scope and use it for a season and then see how you feel about looking through your older/cheaper scopes.

i learned the hard way with cheap optics. I had a tasco "world class" (haha) on my 270 and missed a hog under a feeder at 40 yards! i knew something was going onso I took it to the range and was shooting 18" groups at 100 yards. After checking the rings and bases I determined that the reticle had just come lose.

Now I buy Nikon and nothing less. I have 4 of them and they have never failed.

IMO, unless its on a .22 or rifle that you just "plink" with cheapoptics are a waste of time and money.

Im not saying I think leopold is the best. I just think that once you get to a certain level it kinda plains out and you dont really get alot more for the quantity of dolars you spend on it.

My level in optic quality increased when my need for features increased. I was always just a "hunter" so a 3-9x40 served my purpose well. After I moved away from home, made my own money and began hunting on my own I upgraded my weapons. I got into reloading and precision shooting as well as night hunting an varmint hunting. The old simmons' I was used to just didn't fit the bill. After lots of research I bought a few higher magnification leupolds. Then I needed target turret, wanted illumination and 30mm tube. I began to shoot with more seasoned guys that had NF, S&B, USO and Mark 4 leupolds. I fell in love with the zerostop as high speed turrets that the NF offered. You can't get that good positive click engagement, zero stop, side focus, reticle and high speed turrets in a $300 scope. Then I purchased a vortex viper in 3.5-10x50 for my .243 hunting rifle. I had some vx and varix ll and lll's an those $3-600 scopes werent as good optically as my viper and I couldn't justify the extra money. I bought the viper solely based on reviews and the turrets. I purchased the NF for the zero stop an high speed turrets. I recently purchased a viper HS LR for the turrets, reticle, tube size and zero stop. Each scope on each rifle serves its purpose. That's why my .22 now wears the 3.5-10 viper and another .22 wears an old tapco world class and my pro hunter barrels wear pentaxs. All great scopes, but each serves it's purpose.

Yep
Quite a few actually.

Most recents to do that to me was pentax & vortex