Topic: New Scope for my "Tactical" rifle

If they sell it through sportsmansguide, that's your first hint that it's most likely marginal at best. Unfortunately with scopes you really do get what you pay for. I swear by Leupold, (it's good enough for our issue systems after all, 24s, 107s and our new 110s) Since you're on a budget though, you might look at their new VariX II Tactical, I believe it's called. Another inexpensive tube with a good rep. is the Burris Tactical, and you can get it with the ballistiplex reticle if you don't want to try to get your head around the mildot reticle. A good source many aren't familiar with is Bear Basin Outfitters; very competitive prices.

Normally I would agree with you, but Ogre speaks very highly of them so its making me think...

I'm a fan of Bausch and Lomb's Elite series, Meopta, and Trijicon,optics. But As elbuscador says Leupold has a great rep and all kinds of serious competitors use them.

Sportsman's guide also sells Nikon and Kahles... does that make them marginal too? Come on.

No, that Vortex is a great scope and you will love the easy return to zero turrets even though it isn't a "tactical" scope, you can run it like one and you wont have to count your clicks.

Sportsman's Guide sells Kahles? You're shittin' me! I always assume the only things not made in China that they sell is their surplus.
Ogre, I'm curious about the scope failures at LRI, especially the Leupold MIVs(Since that's what we have on all our systems)Didn't sound like a rough use course. Usually failures are because of Military type abuse, getting blown up, bad plf, whatever. They were going down from recoil? Or were there mechanical failures?(Figure this is the appropriate thread)

Mine failed on a heavy barreled .22-250.
The others failed on an EDM Windrunner .50. A big rifle, big caliber, but not a heavy recoiling combination.

Hmm. Thanks for the detailed analysis.

Well, it's hard to say what caused the scopes to fail without opening them up and pulling out the guts. But a failure is a failure and just because one failed on an EDM .50 BMG with an experimental/classified mounting system doesn't mean your scope is going to fail on your rifle. You could call those failures "mechanical because of recoil".
Now, my Leupold Vari-X III had a mechanical failure straight up... not recoil induced because my heavy barreled .22-250 just doesn't have any recoils in it. The clicks kept clicking but nothing inside the scope translated into a shifting of the points of impact on the target. This is probably Mechanical failure because of vintage. It's an old scope, an early Vari-X III, that has been shot a lot on my gun and before on a .30-06. That scope is now on its way back to Leupold for repair and a refreshening.
In it's place, I've mounted a Nikon Monarch 5.5 to 16.5. Simple plex reticle, but it has good turrets so I can make it quite workable. I'll have to zero it tomorrow at the range.

Hey guys, thanks for the input, I haven't had a chance to make a decision yet cause I had to bugger out of SETX for that little thunderstorm with a name, you know, Ike.

I got to koon finger some Leupold and Nikon scopes this weekend not much optical difference my untrained eye could detect. If anything the Nikon was better, clearer etc. but I did like the Reticule in the Leupold was defiantly superior.

I wish I could lay hands on the Vortex and compare it side by side.

Whatever I'm putting this decision till I'm back in my house.

Later on.

-DR

I've really been looking over the Burris tactical scopes. They have an olive colored fullfield II scope with tactical turrets that has really impressed me.
We had a couple of the Burris XTR scopes at LRI and they worked really well. One crapped out in a heavy recoiling cannon, but would do very well on a .308.

One of my guys has a Burris Tactical on his personal rifle. Has the mildot with the ballistiplex at the six o'clock. Badass, best of both worlds for the $, rangeing and BDC. I've shot the ballistiplex on four different paltforms in three different calibers and they work. I'm pretty much an optics snob, but for the $ they work.
(And the OD ones look cool.)