gun.deals
Depends on the scope Imo. Many scopes and red dots are the same optic andsold under many brand names such as sig, vortex, bushnell, crimson, trace, and maybe 1-20 Chinese names. "Cheap" by itself doesn't mean anything, could be same quality as a vortex that costs 3-4 times more because it's the same scope, or it could be total trash. Research or owning one is often the only way to tell. Obviously not for serious hunting use etc. jackrabbits on a .22? Hell yeah!
Bad eye relief is damned annoying also! I might order one for a 22 just for giggles. I would have to research that eye relief thing first though.
It certainly tempted me enough to go check it out. If only I had a 22lr to shtick it on....
Interesting. $30 is darn near disposable $ when it comes to optics. I swear by these $26 red dots. I have 6 of them and none have lost zero even rapid fire on 12 gauge. Not a go to war optic but for most things works awesome.
www.northwestfirearms.com
I bought a couple of those too, when they were $12. I have to say they have been doing a lot better than I expected and really no complaints. One on an AR22 and one on a basic 5.56 carbine. Mainly shooters for the youngins and they all really like being able to choose their preferred reticle and color so easily. Big, boxy and on the heavy side, but durable and provides a nice open sight picture.
Yeah all the cheap optics in this price range are made by the same Chinese companies. To compare sig and vortex to this garbage is entirely false. Even bushnell isn't on the same level as cvlife
I've learned over time to buy optics commensurate with their intended use, suitable for the maximum range you will shoot that firearm and in-line with the shooters abilities.
I've never understood how people can rationalize buying cheap, garbage optics to "save money." Have better spending habits, or save your money to buy a better optic. Plenty of options that won't break the bank. Good, reliable red dots start around $100 (Romeo 5 and the Holosun dots) and LPVOs start around $200-$250.I've learned over time to buy optics commensurate with their intended use, suitable for the maximum range you will shoot that firearm and in-line with the shooters abilities.
A $500-$1000+ optic on a range toy where 95%+ of your shooting will be at static targets within no more than 100yrds, and only rarely at 300yrds for gits and shiggles, won't make you a better shooter.
If an optic is suitable to the task, it also never hurts to save money and make buying better for the firearms that actually "matter" a more reasonable expenditure.
After all. It's not necessary to see the real life color and skin texture of a target to put a seed up their nose.
*Before I get railed. Obviously I'm talking about the vast majority of hobbyists and occasional hunters. Not competition enthusiasts trying to eke out a hairline bit of accuracy over their opponents.
I think it's a matter of recognizing that one persons perspectives and needs are not a one size fits all for everyone. If you only own a couple (or small handful) that are all uniquely purposed, relied upon to put meat on the table or for self defense then it makes more sense to stick with only higher quality optics. Although I would still argue that many folks buy optics FAR above their pay grades thinking it somehow make them a better shooter... and that simply ain't the case.
I don't completely disagree, but just because something comes out of the same factory does not mean the product is the same or of the same quality. Visually they may appear so but it's quite common for... say... "2nds" from a production run for a brand name optic that doesn't meet QC standards may be sold under a generic brand name. Often swapping out cheaper components as well to meet a bargain brand customers target price point.
