The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,007 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm shooting a remington 700 using a cheap simmons 3.5x10 scope and shooting cheap federal power-shok factory ammo. I can get 3 shots under 1" at 100 yards. Why on earth would I wanna go with the expensive scope and expensive ammo? It seems that every time somebody asks a question about what scope or ammo to buy lots of people wanna jump down somebodys throat cause they are using a cheap combo set up (like me). So I came up with this poll thingy. What set up do you use and what kinda groups do you get?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,285 Posts
I don't like to miss.

Leopold 3X9X40 Winchester 168gr Silvertips out of a Remington 700ADL 30-06 ... 1/2 groups at 100 yards.

Too many outside factors I can't control, so the one I can, I like to make sure it is in my favor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,635 Posts
Thing is...why spend several hundred on a gun and top it with a $30 scope? I mean there are a lot of good scopes out there under $200, you dont have to pay 300 or more for a scope to get a good one
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,007 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
But do you think that using the expensive scope/expensive ammo combo makes you shoot better groups? Or would you still be able to shoot just as good of groups if the shooter did there part? Not knocking you or your shooting, just asking a question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,007 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
171farm said:
Thing is...why spend several hundred on a gun and top it with a $30 scope? I mean there are a lot of good scopes out there under $200, you dont have to pay 300 or more for a scope to get a good one
Right but my point is if I can shoot under 1" with a $30 scope why would I wanna spend more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,285 Posts
Stogey said:
But do you think that using the expensive scope/expensive ammo combo makes you shoot better groups? Or would you still be able to shoot just as good of groups if the shooter did there part? Not knocking you or your shooting, just asking a question.
I was always taught you should spend as much on glass as you do the iron. That being said, I tried Remington Core Locs and did not group as well as the Winchester Silvertips.

My gun likes the Winchesters better, yours may like to eat federal or hornady better, I dunno. I just like to stack the cards in my favor as much as I can.

Also I have had cheapo Simmons and Tascos and BSA scopes ect and they did not bring in as much light as the Leopolds, were not as clear, and were fuzzy around the edges. I've also had the cheapo scopes fog on me and just plain break or fail to function. Never so with a Leopold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,635 Posts
Stogey said:
171farm said:
Thing is...why spend several hundred on a gun and top it with a $30 scope? I mean there are a lot of good scopes out there under $200, you dont have to pay 300 or more for a scope to get a good one
Right but my point is if I can shoot under 1" with a $30 scope why would I wanna spend more.
Clearly you do not have to nor is there an issue with it. However, to me it seems kind of funny to see people walking around with $900 Kimber and a $30 Tasco. Same can be said with someone carrying a $200 NEF with a $300 Leupold scope. Just seems odd to buy a top quality rifle to put less of a quality scope on and vise versa. Again you can do it and there really isnt anything wrong with it and your happy with the results. Just doesnt make sense
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,212 Posts
I said cheap scope and ammo because I would consider what I shoot expensive. I would say middle of the road.

Most of my scopes were around a hundred bucks. Some a little more, some a little less. Trust me I can tell the difference between the little more and little less. The most expsensive scope I have cost $200, and it gathers light like nothing else I have. I've looked through cheapo $40 specials, and they will no doubt hold zero, and they seem somewhat clear. Take a look through a little better scope, and you will see the difference.

Ammo? I normally load my own, but I don't buy premium bullets. Normally I use Seirra gamekings. In my field trials they seem to kill deer about as dead as Nosler BT's, and they cost close to half. Right now the biggest game I hunt is deer. Don't need premium ammo
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
26,979 Posts
The difference is that if you buy a good scope, not necessarily the most expensive but a good one, you will probably only have to buy it one time and you will have more confidence that it will hold zero and as someone else has stated, the better the scope, the better light gathering capabilities it will have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,344 Posts
Anything I hunt with is open sights and handloads, but my target/plinking rifles wear scopes that are in the $100-$150 range with handloads.

I don't buy premium bullets to handload with, my father gave me 500 or so Nosler BT's, and I do like those for my '06, and I shoot Midways cheap bullets(I think dogtown?) for my .223 and 22-250. I load cast or hardball for my handguns, the only thing I buy a premium bullet for is my 44-40, just because there arn't alot of choices for it.

As far as optics, as long as it holds a zero, and my eyes are good enough to see with it, I don't need too much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
Better bullets and better optics will make a difference it's just a matter of whether it's enough of a difference to justify the cost.

On my varmint rifles where I'm looking to shoot beyond 500yds and I'm using higher magnification optics it doesn't pay to skimp on bullets or scopes. If I'm investing in match grade parts for the firearm itself then to cut costs on the glass and bullets is kind of silly. As a reloader the added cost of premium bullets is fairly insignifigant in the overall cost, especially versus buying factory ammo. I expect consistent .5" or less 5 shot groups @ 100yds out of these rifles and the better components help acheive that.

Out of my big game rifles I demand a little more than is necessary. The better optics do help in low light with the added light transmission and generally are more rugged and reliable. And here again as a reloader the added cost of premium bullets is not that much of an issue as the overall cost is usually 1/2 as much (or less) than factory fodder. I'm typically looking for grouping to be .75" or less for 5 shots at 100yds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
171farm said:
Thing is...why spend several hundred on a gun and top it with a $30 scope? I mean there are a lot of good scopes out there under $200, you dont have to pay 300 or more for a scope to get a good one
I think you got it right on the money. A $200 scope is going to be much clearer and hold zero much better than a sub $100 scope but I also don't see the quality difference in a $500 from a $200 scope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
when you buy a scope you are paying for the glass, the clarity, the mirage, the light transfer.

I use different scopes my 30-30 simmons in it, dont do any low light shooting, dont shoot beyond 150 yards. there is no return to zero, simply shoot the top of the heart at 150 and dead center anywhere inside of there. as far as holding zero it has held zero for three years and running, humping through the woods, and in the tractors. no need to beat up an expensive scope.

I am currently getting a 30-06 set up that I am looking to use for longer range stuff. I am having my smith go over the action, bedding it and floating the barrel and when I put glass on top of it I will spend a little more, but I am still going to be putting a 200 dollar burris on it, no anyones definition of expensive glass but I am confident in my shooting abilities and I don't need to spend money for equipment that compensates for them.
I absolutely love the federal powershoks, I get MOA out of the 30-30 with a simmons scope and those bullets. so I am with the OP on that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
I have a remington 770 that came with a scope and use remington core locks in 168 gram 30-06 and at 100 yards I am 1/2 inch group. If I had the money I would def invest in a better scope to make it easier and quicker to adjust, then again I am use to using peep sights at a 100 yards in tournament.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,401 Posts
John S said:
The difference is that if you buy a good scope, not necessarily the most expensive but a good one, you will probably only have to buy it one time and you will have more confidence that it will hold zero and as someone else has stated, the better the scope, the better light gathering capabilities it will have.

+1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
496 Posts
Budget is the key word the kids are grown the homestead is paid for why not buy what I want 40 years ago different story
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,556 Posts
Ammo for all my rifles are handloads so cheaper than factory loads. All scopes are Bushnell or Tasco. Always shoot before season to check and nothing has moved on any of them, some for as many as 30 years. Maybe I'm lucky as I have friends that have had real expensive scopes go bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,044 Posts
That inexpesive scope may seem like a good deal now but what will it it be like after a few good rain storms or hunting in 15F weather? I put an 'el cheapo Tasco on an inline I bought to take advantage of the ealry anterless season. Scope seemed fine until I hunted with it in WV's muzzle season in Dec. Below freezing weather made the optics sort of gray up. Replaced it with a Nikon that i got a really godd deal on.

An expensive scope can go bad as well. Hope your gamble pays off. Mine did not.


WV Gino
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top