rimfire scope question

[greyling22]

I have a weaver 1-3x20 scope on my 10/22. I find that I never use much less than 2x power and often wish I had a bit more power. So I'm thinking of getting a little more scope.

I'm looking at 3 right now.

Weaver Classic Rimfire 2.5-7x 28mm ($150) 11.5" long, 9.5oz.
Vortex Diamondback 1.75-5x32mm ($170) 10.1" long 12.8oz
Leupold VX-1 Rimfire 2-7x28mm ($220) 10.1" long 8.1oz


Leupold would be a no-brainer if it was cheaper, but 50-70 bucks buys a lot of 22's. (though not as many as it used to) I would like something as small and cheap as possible that still has nice optics. It's a stock 10/22 so heavy scopes upset the balance and handling of the gun. I took a tasco 3-9x40 off it real fast. It is my walking around plinker gun. I have a cz452 for a target 22.

I'd love to hear opinions of anybody, especially those who has done head to head comparisons.

 

[skoro]

I have both the Weaver (on a Savage MkII BV) and the Leupold (on a Henry levergun). While the Leupold is a little nicer in some respects, I have to say that for the price, the Weaver is just about unbeatable.

 

[jmr40]

http://swfa.com/Burris-2-7x35-Fullfield-II-Rifle-Scope-P5972.aspx
http://swfa.com/Redfield-2-7x33-Revolution-Rifle-Scope-P44466.aspx
http://swfa.com/Leupold-2-7x33-VX-1-Riflescope-P51823.aspx

I'd be looking at one of these 3. I especially like the Burris scopes for the money.

 

[greyling22]

I have that burris, it sure is big on sitting a 22. Redfield and leupold are options I guess, but they're still big, for that price I could get the rimfire specific leupold.

I'm assuming that the parallax being set at 100 instead of 50 or so isn't a big issue at powers less than 7?

skoro, does the leupold rimfire have click or friction adjustable turrets?

 

[Haxby]

I'd go with the Weaver. Picked up a new Weaver 4x28 last year. Very nice scope.

 

[Outlaw Man]

I think any of those will work well for you. In your situation I'd make the decision based on weight and magnification range. Obviously cost is still a consideration, because I, too, would have trouble paying $220 for a scope on a 10/22...unless you've done or are planning to do some improvements.

Parallax can be an issue at all magnification levels. It's less of an "issue" at shorter distances, assuming you're not doing some ultra-precision work like benchrest. It's still there, it just doesn't have as much room to throw off your shot as far.

 

[SuedePflow]

I cannot comment on those three mentioned, but i can undoubtedly recommend the Nikon ProStaff Rimfire 4 x 32. I installed it a few months ago, and since have been shooting my 10/22 far more than I have in the past 15 years. It's an excellent scope and the size and magnification are perfect. The price is very reasonable too.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004MYBLXK/ref=oh_details_o03_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[skoro]

skoro, does the leupold rimfire have click or friction adjustable turrets?

It has finger-adjustable click-stops. One of the nicer features. The Weaver requires a coin. Optically, they're darn close, with a slight edge to the Leupold.

 

[sappyg]

Neat thread.

I've sported a Simmons 4x 8 point on a 10/22 for over a year now. For $30 this is not a bad deal IMO. It's very light weight and has held zero. No complaint here.

Installed a rimfire Nikon 4x Pro Staff on another 10/22 and it is a step up. Better adjustments by far but a good bit heavier than the Simmons. Slightly better optically but you will work to notice the difference between them.

I chose the Nikon over the others considered based on price, warranty, and usefulness. Didn't need more than 4x for my use and the warranty is as good as Leupold. Price pushed the choice for me in the end. Got mine for less than 100 clams and I call that money well spent compared to the choices available.

Still, the Simmons ain't bad. It's much lighter than the Nikon and 3 times cheaper. If it broke tomorrow I'd likely buy another.

 

[greyling22]

There are some adequate scopes in the fixed 4x range to be sure, but I really want to have something low power for quick shots at sticks in the creek etc. 1.5 to 2x on the low end.

 

[sappyg]

There are some adequate scopes in the fixed 4x range to be sure, but I really want to have something low power for quick shots at sticks in the creek etc. 1.5 to 2x on the low end.

For that I have another 10/22 set up with a Bushnell TRS-25. Can't go wrong there.

Sounds like you want a variable. Spend the money and get the Leupold. Never got a warm and fuzzy about the weaver offering... Or the Vortex for that matter in spite of the Regard some have for them.

Nikon makes a variable as well. Cheaper than the others listed. Far and away as good or better glass......

Simmons also has an AO 3x9x40 worth a good look. A strong bargain and I doubt you eye can tell the difference from 2 to 3 power.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Since I shoot my .22's a lot I decided I should have good glass on it just you you decided.

I went in a slightly different direction. I'm a fan of Nikon scopes so,
I bought: http://swfa.com/Nikon-3-9x40-ProStaff-Rimfire-Scope-P48766.aspx
This one is also nice: http://swfa.com/Nikon-3-9x40-ProStaff-Target-EFR-Rimfire-Scope-P51957.aspx

All 3 you listed are also good scopes IMO.

 

[frankenstein406]

They had nikon prostaff rimfire 3x9x40 for $120 on sale, Idk if to heavy.

 

[red rick]

I would add the Weaver 3-9x32 ao scope to the list.

 

[greyling22]

I really don't want a scope that has a low range of 3x. I want something lower. And my eyes have a bit of astigmatism of something going on because red dots look a little blurry. They didn't use to, but now they do.

I got to compare an older leupold vari-x1 2-7 scope to my burris timberline 2-7 monday afternoon. The burris was way better. The old leupy had a yellowish tint to it. I'm sure the modern leups have better optics, and there is no comparison, but it was not exactly inspiring as far as making me cough up the dough for a new leupold.