[locutus]

[QUOTE=lucznik;1145296

But again, that's not really the question. What I'm trying to understand is the logic that dictates that the cost of the gun is a primary determinant for the cost of a scope.



The price tag of the rifle should have little or no bearing on the question.[/QUOTE]

Again, the point of the "rule of thumb," is if you want a top quality shooting rig, and you're willing to pay the premium prices such rifles command, why do you balk at paying for a premium quality sighting device????

And please do not insult my intelligence or experience by trying to tell me that your $300 Wal-Mart special is just as good as my $1200 Swarovski. I've owned both, so I know better.

Just like low octane gasoline in a Ferarri!

[lucznik]

You need to learn how to "quote" without assigning me (or whomever else your trying to quote) responsibility for your comments.

Now the only thing I may have insulted would be your PRIDE (and perhaps your pocketbook :-) ). The measurable differences between "premium" scopes and many of the "lesser" mid-priced scopes are not so great as you would pretend. Most of what you pay for in a "premium" scope is brand-name hauteur.

You still, however, have not read correctly what I wrote. I did not say that a high-dollar scope was not, in some way, better than a budget-class scope. I said only that it won't necessarily add any extra hunting time to your day. There are other factors besides optics at play that determine how long one can stay out hunting.

I'm not averse to buying high-quality scopes. Even a superficial reading of my posts bears that out. I just think your "rule of thumb" is pure sophistry as a guide.

[ShagNasty1001]

Originally Posted by lucznik

You need to learn how to "quote" without assigning me (or whomever else your trying to quote) responsibility for your comments.

Now the only thing I may have insulted would be your PRIDE (and perhaps your pocketbook :-) ). The measurable differences between "premium" scopes and many of the "lesser" mid-priced scopes are not so great as you would pretend. Most of what you pay for in a "premium" scope is brand-name hauteur.

You still, however, have not read correctly what I wrote. I did not say that a high-dollar scope was not, in some way, better than a budget-class scope. I said only that it won't necessarily add any extra hunting time to your day. There are other factors besides optics at play that determine how long one can stay out hunting.

I'm not averse to buying high-quality scopes. Even a superficial reading of my posts bears that out. I just think your "rule of thumb" is pure sophistry as a guide.

If they don't add any time then please...like I recommended earlier...go to your LGS and pull out a high dollar scope (Zeiss, Nightforce, etc) and pull out mid priced scope (Nikon, Bushnell, low end Leupold) and look through them pointing at the darkest corner in the store. You will notice that the higher end scopes are 1) much more clear 2) brighter 3) at magnification, the crosshairs won't be blurry. You are correct in there a brand name "hauteur" as you say but they are proven names in the field, and some others as well besides rifle scopes (cameras, binoculars) and are known for what they are and their quality. Excluding Leupold, who IMO is over priced for the most part, the higher end scopes are priced there for a reason

[locutus]

Originally Posted by lucznik

You need to learn how to "quote" without assigning me (or whomever else your trying to quote) responsibility for your comments.

Now the only thing I may have insulted would be your PRIDE (and perhaps your pocketbook :-) ). The measurable differences between "premium" scopes and many of the "lesser" mid-priced scopes are not so great as you would pretend. Most of what you pay for in a "premium" scope is brand-name hauteur.

You still, however, have not read correctly what I wrote. I did not say that a high-dollar scope was not, in some way, better than a budget-class scope. I said only that it won't necessarily add any extra hunting time to your day. There are other factors besides optics at play that determine how long one can stay out hunting.

I'm not averse to buying high-quality scopes. Even a superficial reading of my posts bears that out. I just think your "rule of thumb" is pure sophistry as a guide.

If you don't believe that a high end scope will give you 15-20 minutes of extra hunting time at dawn and dusk, then it is obvious to me that you've never used one.

[lucznik]

Originally Posted by treehugger49

Jimminey Christmas!

I think we're only talking about a general rule of thumb, here.

Yes that’s true but it’s a “rule of thumb” based on a fallacious logic. Besides, it’s an interesting topic that is fun to discuss and, unless I miss my guess, no one is being offended so; there’s no harm.

Besides, what else are you going to do? Work? I believe in employment, not work

Originally Posted by locutus

If you don't believe that a high end scope will give you 15-20 minutes of extra hunting time at dawn and dusk, then it is obvious to me that you've never used one.

Actually you would be wrong there. I certainly don’t own any as I don’t see their value but, some of my very good friends are dyed-in-the-wool Swaro and Zeiss fanboys (though oddly enough, no Leica fans in the group). I’ve used their stuff in the hunting fields as they’ve tried to convince me of their brand’s superiority. I’ve not been terribly impressed. I continue to routinely out-glass and out-hunt them with quality, though more mid-priced offerings.

Originally Posted by ShagNasty1001

…go to your LGS and pull out a high dollar scope (Zeiss, Nightforce, etc) and pull out mid priced scope (Nikon, Bushnell, low end Leupold) and look through them pointing at the darkest corner in the store. You will notice that the higher end scopes are 1) much more clear 2) brighter 3) at magnification, the crosshairs won't be blurry…

I would actually concede that they are objectively (slightly) brighter. They just don’t add any additional hunting time because of other factors that play into the question. More on this in a moment…

Also, just for the sake of information, this is actually one of the absolute worst ways to evaluate the optical merits of any given scope, spotting scope, rangefinder, or binocular. The unnatural fluorescent lighting that is ubiquitous in stores is uniquely incapable of reliably showing how an optic can be expected to perform “in the field” under natural light.

Besides the fact, that this is all still missing the point. Y’all seem to be fond of car analogies here so; I’ll try to oblige.

You’re going to buy a car. So, you choose a Ferrari 457 Spider with its $260,000 MSRP. I, on the other hand, am also buying a car and I will be choosing a Nissan Altima – at something like 1/10 the price.

Is your car “higher performance?” Technically yes. You can show on specs how your car offers more horse power, can go from 0 – 60 faster, etc. etc. etc.

However…

Assuming we both leave from the same location, are driving to the same location, on the same roads, on the same day, and at the same time of day; who is going to arrive at the chosen destination first? No one!! We will arrive at the same time because we are both constrained by the same speed limits. Your car may be capable of going 200+ MPH but, you aren’t ALLOWED to capitalize on that advantage.

Similarly, your “premium” optic may be (slightly) brighter and may offer a few (I’d concede maybe 3 – 5) more minutes at either end of the early and late hours but you’re not ALLOWED to capitalize on that advantage. The hunting hours are set in law based on the clock, not the amount of available light and even a cheapo Bushnell Elite 3200 can capitalize on all of the LEGAL hunting hours so; the extra time you get is just VIEWING time; NOT HUNTING time. Riflescopes are not VIEWING tools they are AIMING tools. If you want to VIEW things before or after legal hunting hours, you use binoculars and/or a spotting scope. If you choose to drive faster than the speed limit, you’re a criminal; subject to the penalties established by the law. If you choose to shoot even one moment before or after legal hunting time, irrespective of how well you can see through your scope, you’re no longer a hunter, you’re a poacher; subject to the penalties established by the law.

Now it could be argued that in Europe (and perhaps other places) they don’t subscribe to the same hunting hours. They also, on the Autobahn, don’t subscribe to speed limits so; in these places the extra amount of speed or light might prove useful. To this I will happily concede but, how many of the guys on this forum are out hunting in Europe? This then becomes a specialty optic, not a “general rule of thumb” hunting tool.

[lucznik]

Now the other side of the coin:

If I take my family to the Opera or the Symphony,… what?

Too high brow? O.K...

If I take my family to the movies in my Altima, when we park and get out of the car what are people who see us going to be thinking? That’s right; Nothing. They won’t even take notice. We’re too common to be remarked upon.

Now, if you take your family to the movies (or the Opera or the Symphony… I really don’t believe that’s too high brow for you guys) in your Ferrari 457 Spyder, are people going to notice? You bet. Will they be thinking, “Wow, there’s a guy who really values high performance?” or, “Wow, there’s a guy who really likes cars?” Probably not (unless perhaps they’re teenagers). No, more than likely they’ll be thinking, “Wow, there’s a middle-aged loser with more money than brains and suffering from an intense mid-life crisis.” It’s just not a car that is conducive to a normal, working guy having a wife and kids.

So it is also with the “premium” optic. When I see an otherwise normal family guy going into debt to get himself “the best,” I see a guy with a very poor sense of priorities and an overdeveloped sense of self-importance. Now I am not accusing any of you of being this guy. I DON’T KNOW YOU!! I don’t know your income or your debt load. If you can afford better without incurring unwise debt, then great! I do know that research has shown that we are the most obese, addicted, medicated, and in-debt adult cohort in US history. Much of this is due to the fallacious logic that “more is better,” that, “you get what you pay for,” or that “high cost = high value.”

Again I will suggest that the best “rule of thumb” to follow is; Buy the best optics you can afford while not incurring unwise debt.

You should make all such decisions based on a careful evaluation of the optic’s physical and optical properties, your needs, and your budget and without regard to the price tag on your rifle.

[ShagNasty1001]

Then I will ask you this since my test that I got from Ziess isn't proof enough (yes I am partial to them) if these mid range scopes are just as good or near the same quality as S&B, Ziess, US Optics, why doesn't the military use those instead? That would help cut down on spending for sure. The reason they cost more is they aren't as massed produced, giving higher quality control, are way more rugged, clearer at minimum to maximum magnification, use better glass, the cross hairs are clearer at magnification. I have a $1000 savage model 10 sitting in my room right now needing a new optic. You think I'm going to put on a $3-400 Nikon or Bushnell on it? Heck no I'm not. Maybe if it were a model 110 or something, yes, then I would but I'm going to save up and put some damn good glass on it so I can better my capabilities to maximize the rifle's at longer ranges. My philosophy, and I'm sure others here would agree, is "buy once, cry once". Why settle for okay when after an extra month of saving you could get the best and not have to replace it? Now I understand financial situations pop up and what not and that's completely unpredictable when those will happen so I do agree that you shouldn't put yourself in a debt, that you need to be patient and save. And for your car quip, my vehicle which is an Audi S4, is one of 4 in my town and I got it 1) because I'm extremely blessed and 2) so I could be different and have something not seen everyday (I made sure before I got it for this reason because I can get a big head) and it may turn one or two heads but that's not because of the car, rather because a male in their early 20s is getting out of it

[JTJ]

I for one am enjoying this thread and otherwise keeping my mouth shut.

[TheSadPanda]

Originally Posted by JTJ

I for one am enjoying this thread and otherwise keeping my mouth shut.

Lol no kidding. Pass the popcorn.

[locutus]

Let's make a deal. You hunt with your Bushnell and Tasco and tell all the newbies how great they are.

I'll hunt with my Swaroski and Nikon and tell all of the newbies how great they are.

And the newbies can choose for themselves.