A Rational Look at Irrational Glass: Hunting Riflescopes

There is a strange allure to riflescopes; often technical details and real-world performance are ignored for our peculiar ideas of romancing a scope. How often have you heard "I love my xxxx scope?" Naturally, that tells nothing of what a scopes does, no more so than a meaningless "I use a xxx." So far, so what? It tells nothing, compares nothing, and often sounds like we are dating aluminum tubes rather than actually using them.

There are some fundamental areas of agreement that hold up regardless of the name slopped onto the side of our little aluminum glass holders, fundamental reasons why a riflescope is more appropriate for field use. If we can accept what all scope manufacturers of any recognition subscribe to, then perhaps a bit of progress can be made. Consensus, of course, is far too much to be hoped for.

One piece tubes are quite superior to multi or three piece main tubes. It is hardly just the extra potential leak paths-- anytime you machine threads into an area of a tube, you weaken it as the wall thickness is reduced. Threads have tolerances and "windage." If they did not, threaded components could not be hand assembled. There is only one reason multiple piece main tubes exist in scopeland today-- they are cheaper to assemble. From a design standpoint, they are inferior in strength. Multiple threaded joints introduce tolerance stack-up, and without precise alignment of lens elements scope performance suffers in concert. Not just initially, but over time as well. This is both basic and universally embraced. Insist on a one piece main tube.

Fully multicoated scopes are preferred over "coated" or "fully coated." The subject of the type of lens coatings is a broad topic in itself, however the composition of some multi-chemical multi-coatings are well-known. One example is as cited in a patent, "… one particular preferred embodiment includes 70 nanometers of aluminum oxide (Al2O3), 70 nanometers of ZrO3, 225 nanometers of MgF2 and 140 nanometers of SiO2 where it is desired that the wavelength of visible light at 550 nanometers be most clearly and completely transmitted through the lens." We have come a very long way from uncoated lenses, and the single coats of magnesium fluoride that were once as good as it gets, and that's a good thing. The light we care about, of course, is the light wavelength visible to the human eye-referred to as 550 nanometers. Insist on fully multi-coated lenses if you want a bright scope.

When adjusting a scope, it can be frustrating to turn reticle adjustments only to discover that what the scope does is unpredictable, as if it has a mind of its own. For that reason, friction adjustments are considered obsolete, and there is no reason to tolerate them these days.

Hunters are often horribly over-scoped. It is easy to name the super-high magnification big game hunting scopes that offer appeal-- that would be none of them. Consider that the favored military sniper scope has been the Unertl 10X fixed power. More than 12X magnification causes more problems than it is worth in many cases, and very few big game hunting applications call for more than 6X-- less, in most cases, if you happen to believe that Jack O'Connor knew what he was talking about. Over 7X or so, all the mysterious problems we love to gripe about may appear: of course field of view shrinks, the exit pupil shrinks, eye relief becomes more critical, target acquisition gets slower, and our scope may get out of focus without the benefit of the addition of the cost, weight and bulk of an adjustable objective. Internal adjustment range tends to shrink along with a large increase in potential magnification as well. That is a pile of negatives only to get a less forgiving scope, and less image quality for the dollar when all is said and done.

There are more important things to a riflescope than just brightness, of course-- one of the most important things a scope can do is hold its zero from shot to shot. Having a nice, crisp image of what we are missing is a blessing of limited appeal. No one I know could possibly look through a scope and tell you if it is a "91%" light transmission scope, or a "93%" light transmission scope. No manufacturer could tell you that on an individual scope, either-- the values are calculated for the most part-- not measured from your personal scope.

You don't get what you pay for, and you never have. The shrill "you get what you pay for" drivel seems to be the only answer left for those who have nothing else to offer. The snob appeal of expensive scopes, in some cases, is the only thing you are paying for. Of course we are paying for import duties, expensive advertising, expensive labor, and inefficient distribution of low volume scopes. Who else do we think does? My Panasonic three-CCD camcorder has a Leica lens; I have a Sony with a Carl Zeiss lens. Both lens are made in Japan, of course, by third parties such as Cosina. Still, we all too often are blinded by the commercial magnetism of "branding," and prefer simplistic answers to complex questions. There is no "best," but it won't keep us from asking a myopic question like that. We also like to ask is something is "worth it," when obviously any notion of worth and value is a personal impression not neatly categorized. We don't get what we pay for, we never have: we get what we bother to research, investigate, and compare and define in terms of our own personal needs and applications.

Unfortunately, some of the nuances of scopes are unlikely be readily accessible at all, much less to the level of being reliably compared. Wouldn't you like to know which scopes, of any brand, have the highest return rate from that brand's line? Wouldn't you like to know what deviation from scope to scope is considered "within normal tolerances?" What level of polish is the minimum allowed on your scope? With a riflescope often being comprised of some seventy parts, it doesn't take close scrutiny to understand the opportunity for a wide spread of performance in product that comes from the same box. At one time, "labeling" was considered a damnable paint brush. It is, of course, convention in the branding and the attempted generation of pseudo-loyalty today. Choosy mothers choose "JIF."

We are actually quite fortunate today, as a two hundred dollar bill can give us build quality, precise machining, and better coatings than available to the customer at any price fifteen years ago. There is little dispute that a couple of hundred dollars can give us a lot of image quality, durability, and features just not accessible in the recent past.

I'll mention a few scopes (and companies) that I have had outstanding experiences with, in far more demanding applications than creating a hole in a piece of paper. Naturally, the only person you need please is yourself. Hands on comparison, preferably not on in a well-lit retail store, will help you hone it on your own preferences. These scopes are quite worthy of your attention. All comport the to basic, preferable attributes of one-piece tubes, metal click adjustments, fully multi-coated lenses, non-critical eye relief, edge to edge clarity, general affordability, adequate eye relief, lifetime warranties, and overall build quality.

Sightron SII 3-9 x 42mm: this is the scope that defines "Sightron," and a scope that came out just right. I've used a variety of Sightron scopes for some time now-they can take a lot of recoil, exhibit good machining quality, with excellent tracking and their "ExacTrack" adjustment system has proven merit. The internal adjustment of 95 inches is over 50% more than you find in most scopes of this configuration. The 42mm objective offers a large exit pupil, yet the size and weight of this scope is not compromised. I have yet to be disappointed with a Sightron SII scope; and I have torture-tested and hunted with many configurations of them.

Bushnell Elite 4200 2.5-10 x 40mm: Rigid specifications, produced by Light Optical Works (considered Japan finest OEM facility), light transmission that no one has even claimed to have bettered, a true 4X power range, Bushnell "RainGuard" and an upscale titanium-enchanted tube makes this a scope anyone should be pleased with. The Bushnell 4200 1.5-6 x 36mm is an equally impressive offering.

Burris Fullfield II 2-7 x 35mm Ballistic Plex: The latest of the Burris Fullfield line is actually more of a 2-3/16 x 8 power scope based on exit pupil (2.1875 x 7.61) that offers double internal springs, quad ring seals, quick focus, Storm Queen scope covers, and a ballistic reticle to boot. All this, offered at a very surprisingly low price. The newly designed Burris Signature Select 3-10 x 40mm is an upscale scope that offers image quality I can readily see and appreciate.

With the time, effort, and cost of hunting and shooting these days-- it has never been easier to find a scope that you can place confidence in. These scopes, from three different companies, all do more in the field than most of us can use. None crack the $400 street price barrier; in fact the Burris FFII is in the $165 range, the Sightron is in the $200 range. We can be proud to trust our hunts to any of them. I have, and am.

Contact: Randy Wakeman, 12362 S. Oxford Lane, Plainfield, IL 60585

By phone: (815) 254-2135

Email: randymagic@aol.com

Copyright 2006 by Randy Wakeman. All Rights Reserved.