Scope Recomendation

  • 993 Views
  • Last Post 22 April 2020
David Reiss CBA Membership Director posted this 12 May 2017

I am looking to buy an inexpensive target scope and have been looking at a couple scopes and need feedback on them. 

----Vortex Crossfire II, 6-24x50mm AO, Dead-Hold BDC, Rifle Scope  

----Mueller 8-32x44mm Side Focus Rifle Scope

Don't own either brand, but I can get either for about $250-275

David Reiss - NRA Life Member & PSC Range Member Retired Police Firearms Instructor/Armorer
-Services: Wars Fought, Uprisings Quelled, Bars Emptied, Revolutions Started, Tigers Tamed, Assassinations Plotted, Women Seduced, Governments Run, Gun Appraisals, Lost Treasure Found.
- Also deal in: Land, Banjos, Nails, Firearms, Manure, Fly Swatters, Used Cars, Whisky, Racing Forms, Rare Antiquities, Lead, Used Keyboard Keys, Good Dogs, Pith Helmets & Zulu Headdresses. .

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Bud Hyett posted this 12 May 2017

Both scope appear to be able to do the job; however, the Vortex seems the better choice.

  • Crosshairs favor the older eyes
  • Dots get easily lost in the grass and brush  

There are several factors that people seldom consider when purchasing scopes

  • Brightness - Cloudy day matches are common here in the Pacific Northwest
  • Field of view at highest power 
  • Manufacturer's response to warranty claims
  • Manufacturer's speed of response to warranty claims
  • Repeat-ability of zero - Can only be tested after purchase

I have a rule for scope power on rifles; 2X per each one hundred yards expected maximum range for large game and coyote, 4X per each one hundred yards expected maximum range for varmint, and whatever the budget will allow for target.

Examples are below:

Usage           Caliber    Yardage   Rifle                       Scope

Deer/Coyote  .30-‘06      300          Ruger #1               Weaver 6X

Deer/Coyote  .243          300          Savage 99              Weaver 6X

Target          .22 LR       200           BSA Intern'l            Unertl 24X

Target          .25-20       200           Stevens 44½          Leupold 36X

Target          .32-20       200           Stevens 44½          Leupold 36X

Varmint        .218 Bee    250           Ruger #1               Weaver 12X

Varmint        .22 Hornet  150          Ruger #1               Weaver 8X

Varmint        .220 Swift   350          Ruger #1/FN 400    Leupold 6.5 x 20

Farm boy from Western Illinois, living in the Magical Pacific Northwest

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • M3 Mitch
  • mpsawyer
BigMan54 posted this 13 May 2017

David, 

Not familiar with Mueller.  But heard good things about Vortex from my Idaho nephew. He speaks highly of Vortex clarity. 

Rog

Long time Caster/Reloader, Getting back into it after almost 10yrs. Life Member NRA 40+yrs, Life S.A.S.S. #375. Does this mean a description of me as a fumble-fingered knuckle-draggin' baboon. I also drool in my sleep. I firmly believe that true happiness is a warm gun. Did I mention how much I HATE auto-correct on this blasted tablet.

Attached Files

David Reiss CBA Membership Director posted this 13 May 2017

Last year when looking for a new scope for a 7mm-08, I was looking at a Vortex & a Nikon. I own other Nikons and have been happy with them. In comparing the two, the Nikon was the winner hands down, it was so much clearer than the Vortex. But I know you can't judge a whole scope line by just one model. 

David Reiss - NRA Life Member & PSC Range Member Retired Police Firearms Instructor/Armorer
-Services: Wars Fought, Uprisings Quelled, Bars Emptied, Revolutions Started, Tigers Tamed, Assassinations Plotted, Women Seduced, Governments Run, Gun Appraisals, Lost Treasure Found.
- Also deal in: Land, Banjos, Nails, Firearms, Manure, Fly Swatters, Used Cars, Whisky, Racing Forms, Rare Antiquities, Lead, Used Keyboard Keys, Good Dogs, Pith Helmets & Zulu Headdresses. .

Attached Files

SierraHunter posted this 13 May 2017

I love vortex. The crossfire is their lowest line though. I have one on my blackout and it is good for the range of the rifle (200 yards).

When you say target scope, I'm thinking something with second focal plane and adjustable paralax, plus click turrets. I have clicked in shots out to 570 yards on my blackout with the 3-9x42 crossfire 2 on it, and returned it to zero, but I do not consider that line to be a target scope unless you are not shooting past 200 yards.

SWFA scopes are good for the money, and have all the features of more expensive scopes, and very dependable clicks.

Attached Files

calinb posted this 16 May 2017

I've put-off posting to this thread, because I recently received two new warranty replacement 6-24x50 Crossfire II scopes in exchange for two old 6-24 Crossfire scopes. Vortex received my scopes for service on Monday and I received the replacements on Friday of the same week via FedEx with a note that my old scopes were being replaced for internal mechanical problems. Wow--talk about great service! I have not had time to test the new scopes but I will do so soon and post the results here.

 

So even before I do any testing, I can report that, based on this experience, Vortex has the best warranty service in the business. I own dozens of scopes and I've paid anywhere from $30 to $2500 for them. I have more Vortex scopes than anything else--eight of them, including one Strikefire red dot sight. This was my first warranty return to Vortex and I returned the scopes because the reticles in them have always exhibited reticle image shift (POI shift) with AO adjustment. Even though the error was small, compared to other lower-priced scopes, I finally decided to return them to Vortex and see if they could do better. I've had extensive discussions with Vortex technical staff at SHOT show about this problem too. After my initial report to Vortex, the topic because a subject in a staff meeting, I was told, and Vortex admitted that the error can be a problem--particularly in AO scopes. I've found it to be a typically less severe problem in side adjust scopes too.

I have also returned scopes with this malady to BSA, Bushnell, UTG/Leapers, and Hawke. Sadly, Hawke was the ONLY manufacturer that did not address the problem at all. In fact, Hawke returned my two original scopes (exhibiting relatively high magnitudes of error), un-serviced, and included copies of its own inconsistent test data and report. Hawke completely denied that the problem existed in the scopes. For this reason, I no longer purchase Hawke scopes. BTW, I spent considerably time doing research in an optics lab in engineering grad school. My Masters degree thesis was titled, "A Microcomputer-Based Controller for a Liquid Crystal Lens." The lab had an automatically locking access doors and externally facing flashing red light, for when we powered-up our high power LASERs. The sign on the lab entrance warned, "Do not look at LASER beam with remaining good eye!" So although I've never had any relationship with the optics industry, I can still find my way around an optics bench.

Mel at Sniper Central now tests for this problem, but he tends to review higher end scopes. Nonetheless, Mel is one of the few people who is addressing this dirty little secret within the scope industry.

I don't have time to recount the entire history of my discovery so I will have to post links here, for anyone who is interested.

You can learn more about my initial discovery here:

<My initial discovery>

Please search for my comments (Calin Brabandt) in the following Sniper Central comment sections:

<Initial report to Sniper Central>

<Followup comment to Mel/Sniper Central>

Mel's recent scope reviews include the results of reticle shift testing. Here is his method:

<How We Test>

This is one of my favorite online forums, but I've not had time to post often. I hope you find this information to be useful.

 

-Cal

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 17 May 2017

 Those are impressive zero changes found when focusing from short range to long range, but do they have a practical effect for a target shooter shooting at fixed ranges where where any refocusing would involve only a few degrees turn of a OA ring at any one range?

John

Attached Files

calinb posted this 17 May 2017

That's a good question. Yes--small changes in a parallax adjuster tend to result in small errors that are roughly proportional to the angular displacement of the adjuster. However, the situations where one tends to worry about parallax tend to be the situations where the adjuster induced reticle shift error becomes significant too. Often the potential parallax error (which can be mitigated by keeping one's eye aligned with the optic axis of the scope) is less than the mechanical error introduced by the parallax adjustment. so one must ask, why bother with a parallax focus adjuster at all? (And in many cases when they are available, I recommend setting them and never touching them without re-checking one's zero!)

When a high level of accuracy is desired over ranges spanning a few or several multiples, the parallax mechanism mechanical error becomes significant.  A factor of five or even ten-fold variation in range, (typical of varmint shooting from something like 20 yards to 100 or even 200 yards or perhaps a five fold range variance in air rifle field target competition) results in significant error in most AO scopes, if they are focused for range. Even some side adjust scopes can sometimes produce significant errors in these applications. As with parallax, the adjuster induced error is rarely a problem in big game hunting, except perhaps in some "long range" hunting situations.

I originally discovered the problem with one of my Vortex scopes (which only exhibit 1 or 2 MOA of error and I've since learned this performance is actually exceptionally good for an extended focus range AO scope). I was sighting-in a new Savage 93 in 17 HMR. When I went from 25 yards to 100 yards, I noticed a windage shift, but the air was dead calm and I shoot with a bubble level to minimize cant. The rifle shoots five or even ten shot groups under an inch at 100 yards but the groups would move very consistently back and forth when I moved the AO adjuster from 25 to 100 yards and back again. When I'm shooting a rifle that shoots sub-MOA, I get kind of picky about my scopes--even when I'm punching holes in paper!

Attached Files

David Reiss CBA Membership Director posted this 17 May 2017

Went to local Cabela's to peruse the scopes again. Compared Vortex, Nikon, Leupold, Burris & Mueller. Found models with similar magnification levels to compare. Cost varied as much as $700. All had similar lifetime warranty. Since I am not a scope expert, I can only check for a few things which I will rate below:

Positive click adjustments: All had audible clicks & positive stops. Not all scopes had a locking stop, but all were easy to zero. 

Adjustments: All scopes adjustments were tight & smooth.

Fit & Finish: Good on all scopes, but I have always thought Burris & Nikon have always went a little above. 

Clarity: All scopes showed good clarity through the entire magnification range. The Leupold & Mueller showed a slight edge.

Light gathering: The Burris, Nikon & Mueller appeared to have better light gathering capability, with the Leupold right there, probably just as good as the first three named, but I was getting tired and that may have had something to do with my opinion. However when looking through the Vortex at the same spot, it was definitely not as bright. I even asked the clerk to look through Nikon & Vortex and tell me what he thought, his comment was, "The Vortex seems darker". 

Most of my scopes are Leupold, Nikon & Burris. I am always looking for a bargain on a scope, so I choose the Mueller. I definitely will not buy a Vortex until they improve their light gathering capabilities. I could have spent much more on a Leupold, Burris or Nikon and would have been happy. But if the Mueller performs well on a light recoiling CB bench rifle, then I will really be happy because I will have more money in my pocket.    

 

David Reiss - NRA Life Member & PSC Range Member Retired Police Firearms Instructor/Armorer
-Services: Wars Fought, Uprisings Quelled, Bars Emptied, Revolutions Started, Tigers Tamed, Assassinations Plotted, Women Seduced, Governments Run, Gun Appraisals, Lost Treasure Found.
- Also deal in: Land, Banjos, Nails, Firearms, Manure, Fly Swatters, Used Cars, Whisky, Racing Forms, Rare Antiquities, Lead, Used Keyboard Keys, Good Dogs, Pith Helmets & Zulu Headdresses. .

Attached Files

calinb posted this 17 May 2017

I definitely will not buy a Vortex until they improve their light gathering capabilities. 

Please don't write-off all Vortex scopes for this reason, David. Like all manufacturers, the brightness varies, even within product lines.

Most cheap Chinese lenses are pretty good these days. Personally, I've never been in a situation where I've not had a successful shot opportunity on a game animal or even a varmint pest because the image was too dim or fuzzy, but then I tend to not hunt in dark forests on dark and cloudy days in the early AM and late PM. I have found glare on sunny days to be a factor, however so I try to induce glare in a scope that I'm evaluating, which generally requires the right outdoor sun and sky conditions. I have also found mechanical errors to be a factor for some kinds of hunting and I tend to look for well-calibrated and accurate adjustments that are repeatable and do not induce error, like elevation coupling to windage (or vice-versa) control hysteresis, parallax adjuster and zoom induced reticle shift, and hold-over reticle inaccuracy. Most of these problems are common.

Good luck with your Mueller. I know a lot of people think very highly of them. I just haven't run into one that I'd buy yet, but I have looked and tested one or two of them. Manufacturing quality variability is significant between identical SKUs in most of the lower end scopes--particularly those of Chinese of manufacture compared to the few remaining low priced SKUs that are made or assembled in the Philippines. Even the Vortex technical rep agreed that the only way I would be likely to get a perfect AO scope (not side adjust scope) with error under "1-click" (commensurate with a scope's E/W dial precision) would be to hand pick it!

I still haven't tested my new Crossfire II scopes but I did a quick check of my new Nikon 3-9x40 EFR to be mounted on a springer airgun. I was fairly impressed for an AO scope. Maximum AO reticle shift from 10' focus to infinity was about 3 MOA in elevation, which not exceptional, but the windage shifted only about a single "click's" worth, which is 1/2 MOA on this scope. Dealing with elevation-shifts is easier, because the error gets buried in one's elevation dope. Elevation-only error is the typical error mode in side adjust scopes but AO scopes usual exhibit nearly equal maximum shifts in both elevation and windage along a circular arc reticle error path. There is no discernible zoom induced error and the E/W dials are well calibrated in half-MOA (but marked in inches per 50 yards, which is not quite the equivalent). You'd be surprised how many dials are labeled in IPHY (inches per hundred yards), vs. MOA, that get it backwards or vice-versa (or are off more significantly altogether).

 

-Cal

Attached Files

David Reiss CBA Membership Director posted this 18 May 2017

Cal,

I guess I should rephrase my comment to "I will not buy a Vortex as long as I am comparing a like model to another brand and the Vortex just isn't bright enough". That is what has happened on two recent comparisons. Since I was including a Vortex in my comparison, that speaks to the fact that I am open minded about Vortex scopes. I will probably consider them again next time I am in the market for a new scope. 

David Reiss - NRA Life Member & PSC Range Member Retired Police Firearms Instructor/Armorer
-Services: Wars Fought, Uprisings Quelled, Bars Emptied, Revolutions Started, Tigers Tamed, Assassinations Plotted, Women Seduced, Governments Run, Gun Appraisals, Lost Treasure Found.
- Also deal in: Land, Banjos, Nails, Firearms, Manure, Fly Swatters, Used Cars, Whisky, Racing Forms, Rare Antiquities, Lead, Used Keyboard Keys, Good Dogs, Pith Helmets & Zulu Headdresses. .

Attached Files

calinb posted this 02 June 2017

A/B comparisons are tough to beat, David. If one scope is brighter than the other and it comes down to this difference, I understand your preference.

Attached Files

BigMan54 posted this 03 June 2017

Leupold MURDERED my faith in Lifetime Warranties & Honesty about 12yrs ago.

1st, My 2X7 VARI-2,  the OCULAR Bell came loose. I sent it back to Leupold under warranty, they called & told me it would  be $100. Replacement fee. I pitched  a fit. So they sent me a "Rifleman" scope. I paid $120. New for my scope in 1975. They replaced it with a scope retailing for $185. 30yrs later.  What a ripoff.  

2nd, at the same time My Wife bought me a new Leupold spotting scope as  gift. She had checked the Leupold catalog that I had  & their website. Found a 25X60.  Bought it off Ebay.  When I opened the box I found a tiny gold sticker on the bottom of the scope that said "CHINA". NO WHERE IN THE CATALOG OR WEBSITE DOES IT SAY ANY OF THEIR OPTICS WERE NOT BUILT IN THE U.STILL. of A.

I called the factory,  they said the catalog says "ENGINEERED BY LEUPOLD"  , I replied their advertising states " made in USA". They replied that was last year's catalog.  Dishonest. Untrustworthy.  By NIKON or VORTEX.  At least they're Honest about where their stuff is made. 

H**L I'm still pissed !

Long time Caster/Reloader, Getting back into it after almost 10yrs. Life Member NRA 40+yrs, Life S.A.S.S. #375. Does this mean a description of me as a fumble-fingered knuckle-draggin' baboon. I also drool in my sleep. I firmly believe that true happiness is a warm gun. Did I mention how much I HATE auto-correct on this blasted tablet.

Attached Files

Scearcy posted this 03 June 2017

I do need to defend Leupold a little here. I have a 6X target version that I used to use when I shot military mod scope. It seemed to me the zero was wandering so I sent the scope in. What came back was in essence a brand new scope. They transfered the lenses to a new tube  with all new internals - under 10 days - no dialogue at all.

I also drove over a deer rifle and scope with my pickup. You know the drill. Lean it on the rear tire, crawl in the cab for a cup of coffee, decide to move, have a brain fart, etc. No one replaced the rifles stock but Leupold sent me a new scope. I am sure there have been bad experiences but I still buy almost every used VXIII that I find which is not many.

Jim

Attached Files

Wheel Weights posted this 17 April 2020

If you spend more money on the rifle than the scope you screwed up.

Case in point, $1700 rifle, $2600 scope.

Attached Files

Wheel Weights posted this 17 April 2020

Hate to say it but BigMan got conned by Ebay not Leupold. there are many "Leupold" optics on Ebay that are Chinese fakes. The scope he bought was not a Leupold. If he still has it, he should check the serial number w/Leupold.

NO Leupold scopes have EVER been assembled in China.

Seem to be Leupold bashers all over the net spreading wild accusations with no proof.

As Scearcy says I buy every bargain "Leupie" I run across. They all work fine and if they don't Leupold fixes/replaces them. Had a horse crush an ancient M8 6X. Leupold sent me a brand new FX II 6X.

Here's a typical fake Leupold from China !

https://www.ebay.com/itm/2020-Top-Leupold-1-5-5x20mm-VX-3i-Duplex-Reticle-Rifle-Scope-ADJUSTMENT-WHEEL/401923829665?hash=item5d9486efa1:m:mPcru_U78n883GUhfzTEVEw

Attached Files

Qc Pistolero posted this 18 April 2020

For hunting I agree that an exceptional definition might be an asset.But I don't hunt,only shoot at paper tigers and at my age,I won't see the difference between a $700 and a $2500 scope.I've tried both and the mental photo of my wife's face while I am trying to explain the difference convinces me that I better stick with the $700 option.

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 18 April 2020

I agree.  Even modest priced modern optics are so good that it is next to impossible for a non optical expert to tell the difference. I think almost all the difference between a $700 scope and a $2,000 scope is between our ears and without knowing the price tag we couldn't tell the difference. i will admit to falling for the hype for both a rifle scope and a spotting scope. I have tried many times to see the difference with my $700 equivalent scopes under a variety of conditions with optical resolution charts. I would really like to see what I bought with my extra money but if I'm honest, which is hard because it is a lot of money for a depression baby,  I can't.

I think the fairly recent skyrocketing in price of the upper end of rifle scopes is much more a matter of successful marketing than superior performance for either hunting or target shooting. 

The old saw that "you get what your pay for" is true only part of the time at best.

John

Attached Files

John Carlson posted this 19 April 2020

Another player I don't see mentioned here is Sightron.  I have an SI TAC 4-12, 2 SII 4-16, and an SIIb 6-24.  I've found them to be quite clear and the clicks are very crisp.  I bought one off e-bay and when I received it found the turrets were loose.  Don't know just how I'd go about wearIng out the turrets but there they were.  Sent it to Sightron for repair.  Don't remember just how many days but I was very pleased with the turn around.  Had I not written down the serial number I would have sworn they sent me back a new scope.

I also have a VISM (NC Star?) 4-16.  Very nice scope, good clarity, illuminated dot reticle (wanted to try one of those), tactical turrets with nice crisp clicks.  Trouble is the second time I took it to the range the POI shifted about 4 inches.  Haven't sent it back yet.  Also they discontinued the model.

Holding public office should be viewed as an obligation to serve, not an opportunity to rule.

Attached Files

Wheel Weights posted this 20 April 2020

inexpensive target scope is an oxymoron.

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 20 April 2020

The Weaver 36X ($400) has probably won more at our nationals then any other scope. Most of the rest have used the Leupold 36X that cost about twice that.  That isn't exactly inexpensive for most of us but almost always far less than the attached rifle.

If somebody thinks a $2,500 scope will give them an edge they should come out and give it a try.

John 

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 20 April 2020

CBA matches are one of the few games where it is very hard to buy your way into first place.

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 21 April 2020

... oh oh ... i am on my 3rd Simmons 22 Mag scope ... 3-9 with AO ...  and 2nd RWS Airgun scope ... 3-9 with AO ...  all about $60 each ...  all still working after about 20 years ... oh oh ... i am embarrassed  ...

seem to work just fine on anything at least up to cast in a 30-06 ...

*********

but then i also still shoot an old Herter's non-adjustable scope in funky Loophold adjust-o mounts ... and of course an old ( Ed's) B&L Balvar in those funky B&L mounts in my funky Rem 722 in 300 Savage ...

**************

while my B&L 36X target and my spiffy Weaver 6-24 varmint sight lay forlorn somewhere in my stash ...  i like funky ...

*************

anyway, those little sparks thrown off by the sun bounce off the target and if the target is a long distance, the sparks go through the front lens ( the rated * focal length * ) and are bent into a coherent ( focused ) image down the scope tube ... this has to be right on top of the crosshairs to avoid aiming error.  the eyepiece is only to see a pretty picture, so just focus it on the crosshair ...  ( aim it at the sky so you don't get distracted by the target image )   .

if the target then comes closer than real real far away, the front lens can't get the sparks bent in time, so the coherent image is behind the crosshairs .. so you need to move the lens forward to bring the image back up to the crosshairs.  ( note the crosshair is still in focus through the rear eyepiece so that doesn't need more adjustment unless your eyes change. )

*************

a funny thing ... about 6 years ago i was shooting my ruger 22 auto with a weaver 1.5 scope .. i thought the crosshair was bent in the middle ... dang !! ... lucky for me i found i had a detached retina in my shootin eye ! ... Great ... , no need to fix that great micro-trac scope !

ken

 

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • John Alexander
mashburn posted this 21 April 2020

Ken,

Congratulations. You just wrote a very good thesis on  scopeology  You have now earned your PHD, and can now be the authority on scopes and other related fields. I'll watch the national newscasts to keep up with your future releases.  KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

Mashburn

David a. Cogburn

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 22 April 2020

Iowa didn't have cowboys. They had Dragoons and Herders. Iowa was the promised land between 1832 and 1850. By the end of the Mexican American War they were founding colleges and religious utopias all over the state. Still one of my favorite states to visit.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bud Hyett
mashburn posted this 22 April 2020

Hello Searcy,

I did the same thing by buying up VX111 years ago and am very glad I did, like you said, there isn't many out there now days. I've never had one bit of trouble with any of them in all the years that I have owned and used them, of course, I haven't ran over one with my pickup YET.

Mashburn

David a. Cogburn

Attached Files

mashburn posted this 22 April 2020

Hello John,

I agree whole heartedly with you in all of your posts in this discussion. Well said.

Mashburn

David a. Cogburn

Attached Files

Shopdog posted this 22 April 2020

Two of my nicest scopes were $15 total for both. Bought,if you can call it that.... "broken". One is a late model 3-9X40 B$L,the other a 3-12X52 Euro class Tasco. Sure,we "fixed" them and that might be out of the question for some but I wouldn't take $200 for either.

A lot of what goes into high $$$ scopes is,hand fitting.... like so many things shooting related. If you can get to the place where you're the "fitter" instead of the fit'ee,well the money is better spent on more equipment.

I do enjoy a sport where money isn't the "driver"..... watch out for that guy with just one gun(scope?),he may know how to use it?

Attached Files

Shopdog posted this 22 April 2020

Wait,got a first year issue 3-9X40 Weaver with an adjustable objective(which was an industry "first") for beer money at a gunshow. Some knucklehead had turned the objective lense too far. I picked it up,looked through it.... obviously wacked when viewed. Then never took my eyes off the seller whilst confirming what I thought happened.....

Beat him down on the price saying it was "broken",which he already "knew".

By this time,still with eyes locked on seller..... I had the objective "problem" fixed,gave a quick nuther glance through and started to put it back in the pile and the guy says.... "yeah,I'll take that".

That scope is also a prize,wouldn't take serious $$$ for it either. Cost less than a case of beer.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bud Hyett
delmarskid posted this 22 April 2020

I shot the best wallet group of my life with a scope that cost 15 bucks It was some off brand 3x9. The reticle broke and I repaired it with a gob of epoxy and a cut down seeing needle.

Attached Files

mashburn posted this 22 April 2020

Hello delmarskid,

I found out, years and years ago, that human head hair is much to coarse  for cross hairs. I've got some old Tasco scopes from back when they were made in El Paso, Texas. I like old classic rifles and refuse to put a big ugly, high tech scope on them. I use the old Tascos  to put on this type rifle. I don't plan on winning a national target championship with them but they look right, are good and clear and hold their zero .When I'm serious, I put VX111's on. I also like the older Burris scopes.

Mashburn

David a. Cogburn

Attached Files

mashburn posted this 22 April 2020

Hello again Ken,

I can say one thing for sure about Iowa and their cowboys They produced one heck of a saddle bronc rider. He won the PRCA saddle bronc championship a couple of years ago. His name was Swindell. But he found a Oklahoma cowgirl and now they are raising and training barrel horse on a Oklahoma ranch. Nice picture.

Mashburn 

David a. Cogburn

Attached Files

Close