scope not sharp at 100 yds

[coondogger]

I have a 3 x 9 power scope mounted on a Savage Axis. The reticles are sharply focused but at 100 yds, even at 9x, the picture is not sharp. In fact it's a little blurry. This is a BSA scope. I have not had problems with BSA scopes before and have generally found them to be a decent scope for the money.

 

[brasscollector]

Have you tried adjusting the eyepiece?

 

[wiscoaster]

The eyepiece adjustment only adjusts the reticle focus, not the objective focus, doesn't it? He says the reticle is sharp but the image is blurry. That would be an objective out of focus, and on that scope the objective is fixed, isn't it?

 

[12Bravo20]

We definitely need more info on the scope. Is the parallax fixed or adjustable?

Most fixed parallax scopes are set to 100 yards but his could need adjusted (if it is fixed)

 

[bihj]

All of my problems with BSA scopes vanished when I quit buying them.

 

[entropy]

scope not sharp at 100 yds

This is a BSA scope.

Case solved.

All of my problems with BSA scopes vanished when I quit buying them.

So did all my friends'. All it took was a look through a few BSA scopes to convince me. I work in the optical field, I know bad glass when I see it.

The eyepiece adjustment only adjusts the reticle focus, not the objective focus, doesn't it? He says the reticle is sharp but the image is blurry. That would be an objective out of focus, and on that scope the objective is fixed, isn't it?

Actually, the diopter adjustment can sharpen the target image also, depending on the viewers Rx. But it doesn't for everyone.

 

[wiscoaster]

Actually, the diopter adjustment can sharpen the target image also, depending on the viewers Rx. But it doesn't for everyone.

OK, good, then ... coondogger: try that first!!

 

[wiscoaster]

The other possibility: it's an inexpensive scope, perhaps the tube seal was breached and dust collected on the inner surface of the objective. In that case, the scope isn't worth keeping. For $50 or so you can get another of equal quality and function brand new.

 

[Txhillbilly]

The easy answer is, Don't Buy Cheap Optics!

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

BSA scopes preform best sitting on a shelf in the gun safe, as a reminder never to buy another one.

 

[doubleh]

I thing BSA stands for Better Stay Away.

 

[WestKentucky]

Y’all are hard on cheap scopes. I do admit freely though that you generally get what you pay for, and BSA is not one know to be the exception.

It is a cheap scope. It’s acting up now, so the answer is to replace it. When and with what are at the discretion of the guns owner. I am inclined to start buying glass with lifetime warranty. You pay dearly for it, but its a buy-once cry-once situation.

 

[wiscoaster]

Fit the scope to the rifle. You don't need to buy a $500 scope for a $300 rifle. I've got a $50 Simmons scope (about as cheap as you can get) and it works just fine for hitting two-inch steel targets at 100 yds mounted on my Savage B22.

 

[kmw1954]

I experienced the same thing on my last range trip. After about 1.5hrs the target started getting fuzzy and not sharp. Shortly there after I quit for the day. Later I again picked up the rifle and spotted with it and all was clear again so I put that off as a case of eye fatigue. That also was an inexpensive scope, KonusPro 275. I now have a new Burris Fullfield E1 on it's way to me. But then this gun is used for hunting paper and not living beings and the magnification went from a 3-9 to 4.5-14. Don't know if the new scope will help but it certainly won't hurt.

 

[LoonWulf]

Fit the scope to the rifle. You don't need to buy a $500 scope for a $300 rifle. I've got a $50 Simmons scope (about as cheap as you can get) and it works just fine for hitting two-inch steel targets at 100 yds mounted on my Savage B22.

You do need the right cheap scope tho. Optically I find BSAs to be about the worst, and generally been unhappy with them. I really like the old Simmons, or at least certain lines, but haven't tried a new one. Same for Tasco.

Now if buying a "cheap" scope it's Athlon or Bushnell.


I hate to say it but, put me in "dump" it group on the BSA.

 

[redneck2]

When I worked at the LGS, we had scopes of all price ranges. We had some “refurbished” Tasco that we were selling for something like $15 each. If one was returned as bad, we would just throw it away and give the guy a new one. I think we paid $3-4 for each one

I asked the store owner about the difference in returns and performance of cheap versus expensive scopes. He said something like Swift, BSA, etc. would have maybe a 30-40% failure rate if used very much. Something like Simmons maybe 10-15%. Leupold maybe 2-3%. Didn’t sell enough Swarovski to get a good feel.

This was 20+ years ago, so the numbers are may no longer valid, but the point remains. If you buy a scope thar comes in a blister pack, I wouldn’t have high expectations

Quite honestly, when you can get a Burris Fullfield for around $200, I see no reason to go lower.

 

[cdb1]

You don't need to buy a $500 scope for a $300 rifle.

I would.

 

[entropy]

Fit the scope to the rifle. You don't need to buy a $500 scope for a $300 rifle. I've got a $50 Simmons scope (about as cheap as you can get) and it works just fine for hitting two-inch steel targets at 100 yds mounted on my Savage B22.

I paid $29 for my Axis, with the scope, and when I replace the scope, it will be with one that costs quite a bit more than $29.

You don't need to buy a $500 scope for a $300 rifle.

Better that than a $50 scope on a $1000 rifle. I've seen that far too many times. It's like with glasses. Better a $9 frame and the best lenses, than a $200 frame and cheap lenses. Yes, for a plinker .22, a $50 scope (unless it's a BSA) will probably be adequate. For a Winchester 52 D, well it's got to be a Unertl, or the Hi-lux copy, at least. I've had some cheap scopes on rifles. but then, with my background in optics, I know what to look for (and what to look out for!) so I pick out the good cheap ones. But it doesn't always just go by brand, I have looked through passable BSA scopes, just too few that I don't bother with them anymore. I've had several Barskas, and people used to rip on them all the time. Bushnell's Sportview line was never stellar optics, but I brought home venison with them on several rifles and shotguns. Nikons, at all the price points, were excellent bargains for the money, I wish they still made them, and I regret giving my last one to my son on the AR I gave back to him.

 

[Txhillbilly]

After using scopes that range from $700 - $3k, I find it very hard to even look at scopes that cost less because I know the quality of optics that I've become accustom to using over the past 15-20 years.
If you ever use a quality scope, you probably won't buy the cheap stuff anymore.

 

[redneck2]

If you ever use a quality scope, you probably won't buy the cheap stuff anymore

In the 60’s, power car windows and A/C were considered luxuries. Once consumers got accustomed to them, they’re now necessary. Once you use something of higher quality, you’ll notice the difference

There are multiple areas that higher end scopes seem to shine. Holding zero is perhaps the #1 priority.

I literally missed the opportunity of a lifetime on what would have been the state record deer because of a scope that fogged

If you sit for hours scanning a Prairie dog colony, the difference in eye strain may be significant

Clarity and light transmission typically varies with scope quality (price point).

The guys that grind on continually about their cheap scopes being adequate or even “just as good” are simply trying to justify their choices

My personal opinion is that I’d rather have a few really nice rifle/scope combos rather than a safe or safes full of mediocre ones

 

[wiscoaster]

I paid $29 for my Axis, with the scope

Where and when was that, Dan? At a garage sale in 1966??

 

[entropy]

No, at Walmart in August. We cleared out the old inventory of Savages and Remington 700's, and even a few Henrys. It usually happens on a small scale every year, this year it was bigger. They were replaced with some new models and chamberings, like more 6.5's and .350 legend. Most of these are gone now, too, with the election panic buying. The gun display is looking a little scarce right now.

I figure since I only spent $29 on the gun, I can afford to put a good stock and scope on it in time.

 

[jmr40]

It's a 3-9X scope, no one makes a 3X9 scope.

A better quality scope will probably be a little better, but one issue you may not be considering is YOUR eyesight. Everyone's eyes are a little different and sometimes it can be hard to get both the reticle in perfect focus and the view through the scope, even with a quality scope.

My left eye is still 20/20 at distance. My right eye is less than perfect and I'm at the age where I need readers to focus on anything closer than about 2-3'. With both eyes open my brain uses the image from my good left eye and i see normally. If I close my left eye distant objects are slightly out of focus.

Which causes issues since I shoot right handed and my right eye ( the bad one) is the one looking through the scope. I can focus the scopes eyepiece to see clearly without needing glasses. But once my scopes are focused for me, they are way out of focus for others. This makes it a little harder for me to get both the view, and reticle in focus.

I've found that scopes with a fast focus feature help me.

 

[kmw1954]

Txhillbilly and redneck2 I have no doubts that the high end scopes are much superior to anything I have looked at but I also know enough to realize that I am not ready take advantage of that level of optics. Working at the rifle range 300yd range I have seen a good number of high end scopes on some very nice competition rifles and that this point both gun and scope are way above my league.

As an avid fisherman I also have rods and reels that are quite expensive (above $500.00) and still find myself mostly using the ones that cost less than $150.00 and I catch just as many fish. But maybe someday I may reach that level of competence with a rifle.

 

[entropy]

It's a 3-9X scope, no one makes a 3X9 scope.

If they did it would be a specialty scope for hunting non-typical bull elk. <rim shot>

coondogger, all brand bashing aside, read this article by Tom Beckstrand on setting a scope's optics. It may clear things up a bit. (pun intended)

https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/how-to-eliminate-parallax-riflescope/376273

If your scope doesn't have an adjustable objective, just use the part about adjusting the diopter.