Blog Article - "How Much Is a Rifle Scope?"

We are trying to answer some fairly simple questions (yet they take a lot of explaining) in our new series of blog posts. They are mainly aimed at beginners or people who do not have much technical knowledge, but a good read for everyone hopefully!

Read it here: How much is a Rifle Scope?

There will be more to follow! We hope you like it.
 

CarlW

Well-Known Member
An excellent article. Thank you.

One piece of feedback: I am not sure comparing scopes with watches really works.

A scope generally tends to be more expensive because it is functionally better: expensive glass, generally-speaking, helps the user see better than does cheap glass.

However, this is not the case with watches. An expensive watch is rarely functionally better than a cheap one. In fact, a cheap £10 Casio will generally perform its function (telling the time) better than a £10,000 Rolex. With a watch, you are paying for something other than an improvement in function.

Kind regards,

Carl
 
Thanks Carl,

Glad you enjoyed it.

Not sure I agree with you entirely on the watches though. I would say Swiss watches are more accurate and lose less time than cheaper ones. Although certainly, they are more of a luxury (fashion) item versus scopes - I agree with that. Scopes are a much more functional product, yes.

Thanks,

Robbie
 
Last edited:

CarlW

Well-Known Member
Thanks Carl,

Glad you enjoyed it.

Not sure I agree with you entirely on the watches though. I would say Swiss watches are more accurate and lose less time than cheaper ones. Although certainly, they are more of a luxury (fashion) item versus scopes - I agree with that. Scopes are a much more functional product, yes.

Thanks,

Robbie
I have a Rolex Submariner, several Breitlings, and a £5 Casio. The latter keeps better time. Any quartz movement (and they are available for pennies) will beat a mechanical movement any day of the week.
 

bogtrotter

Well-Known Member
While I agree that top glass is better for me the question is how much better .
I'm a fan of Vortex optics have been ever since being first introduced to them a few years ago.
Recently had the opportunity to compare my Vortex binoculars alongside to German pairs at last light my Vortex were at
least as good as one pair the other pair was slightly better but only slightly there was very little in it other than the price
the German pair cost almost five times what mine cost ,they were certainly not five times better.
Don't have a Vortex scope at the moment but have looked through a few and if I ever need to replace a scope in the future it will be replaced with one from the Vortex range.
Performance for price plus the Vortex no quibble Warranty, for makes it a no brainer.
.
 
While I agree that top glass is better for me the question is how much better .
I'm a fan of Vortex optics have been ever since being first introduced to them a few years ago.
Recently had the opportunity to compare my Vortex binoculars alongside to German pairs at last light my Vortex were at
least as good as one pair the other pair was slightly better but only slightly there was very little in it other than the price
the German pair cost almost five times what mine cost ,they were certainly not five times better.
Don't have a Vortex scope at the moment but have looked through a few and if I ever need to replace a scope in the future it will be replaced with one from the Vortex range.
Performance for price plus the Vortex no quibble Warranty, for makes it a no brainer.
.
The issue is it is so hard to quantify quality, plus everyone sees through optics differently. But interesting to hear about your experiences with Vortex. It is not a brand we stock at the moment but we may look into it. Thank you
 
I have a Rolex Submariner, several Breitlings, and a £5 Casio. The latter keeps better time. Any quartz movement (and they are available for pennies) will beat a mechanical movement any day of the week.
Nice, and good choices! I am a Tudor man and can only say that it has been nothing but perfect - night and day compared to old cheaper watches (for keeping time). Hence my comparisons.
 

CarlW

Well-Known Member
Nice, and good choices! I am a Tudor man and can only say that it has been nothing but perfect - night and day compared to old cheaper watches (for keeping time). Hence my comparisons.
Like Rolex, Tudor meet COSC standards of -2 to +4 seconds per day. A £5 quartz casio will deviate by between 0.5 and 1 second per day. The hypothesis of paying for more functional performance (telling the time) fails for watches, whereas it broadly holds true for rifle scopes (better glass that helps you see better).
 

SDC7x57

Well-Known Member
It's not just function - it goes beyond that. My 30 yr old Swarovski on my old Mannlicher will always fetch more than the Nikko Stirling on my .22, which is the same age. I've also got an original Casio G-Shock belonging to one of the kids, but it will never fetch the same as my Submariner, which was manufactured in 1972, was bought by me in Edinburgh in March 1973 for £240, and sold last year for £5,500. Good luck with the Casio, functional or not....
 

CarlW

Well-Known Member
It's not just function - it goes beyond that. My 30 yr old Swarovski on my old Mannlicher will always fetch more than the Nikko Stirling on my .22, which is the same age. I've also got an original Casio G-Shock belonging to one of the kids, but it will never fetch the same as my Submariner, which was manufactured in 1972, was bought by me in Edinburgh in March 1973 for £240, and sold last year for £5,500. Good luck with the Casio, functional or not....
I agree. You have missed my point entirely.
 

SDC7x57

Well-Known Member
Sorry Carl, I was teasing a bit :norty:. Robbie's reference to watches vs optics was always going to open the door to all sorts of comment. What made me reply was that your point about 'function/cost' in optics vs watches is well made, and valid, but then you say in another post that you have a Submariner and Breitlings, as well as your Casio, which made me chuckle....hence my comments.

It has always seemed to me that people purchase items for a broad swathe of reasons - function, reliability and cost, probably being the three main reasons, followed by quality (or the perception of it..), and good old pride of ownership. Many, however, don't spend much time researching what they actually need, against what they think they want....but that's another discussion.

Over the decades, many scopes have come and gone. I confess that I've usually gone for the premium makes, but on occasion, I've used other brands, notably in Africa (usually American scopes due to availability vs cost). Some were good, others were just junk. Thus I think Robbie from Cluny has a point, although many of the more recent mid range scopes are now seriously good in performance terms, and also good value for money.

A big discussion, and respect to Cluny Country Store for starting it. Apologies again for ruffling feathers, Carl
 

CarlW

Well-Known Member
Sorry Carl, I was teasing a bit :norty:. Robbie's reference to watches vs optics was always going to open the door to all sorts of comment. What made me reply was that your point about 'function/cost' in optics vs watches is well made, and valid, but then you say in another post that you have a Submariner and Breitlings, as well as your Casio, which made me chuckle....hence my comments.

It has always seemed to me that people purchase items for a broad swathe of reasons - function, reliability and cost, probably being the three main reasons, followed by quality (or the perception of it..), and good old pride of ownership. Many, however, don't spend much time researching what they actually need, against what they think they want....but that's another discussion.

Over the decades, many scopes have come and gone. I confess that I've usually gone for the premium makes, but on occasion, I've used other brands, notably in Africa (usually American scopes due to availability vs cost). Some were good, others were just junk. Thus I think Robbie from Cluny has a point, although many of the more recent mid range scopes are now seriously good in performance terms, and also good value for money.

A big discussion, and respect to Cluny Country Store for starting it. Apologies again for ruffling feathers, Carl
I agree with you re scopes. However, again, Cluny's analogy doesn't work. Money does not buy you accuracy in a watch. The point is that simple.

PS I really love the Casio...!
 

Top