why??? are we looking for more glass magnification (scope) then the air gun will use
as an example the model 34 is a 60 yards max. air gun capable and people want a 100 yard scope on it to shoot 100 yards
at the beginning God created the open sights (just an analogy) and then men perfected those crude sights with the Peep sights
now we have scopes (glass) but do they do the job?? Howie (my friend) shoots with open sights and can do ¼ CTC at 20 feet with his Chinese air guns
you can only be accurate as you are capable to be and see, GLASS will NOT make your air gun more accurate beyond what the air gun is capable
put a $200.00 scope capable of 1,000 yards in a $100.00 air gun, capable of 60 yards and you have over scoped the air gun, it is still a 60 yard air gun and you WILL NOT make it a 1,000 yards with an expensive scope
magnification in a scope helps but does not give an once of accuracy, your air gun gives you accuracy not the scope
an inaccurate air gun with the best scope will still be inaccurate, the scope helps to extract the best of a good air gun, it just does not help the other way around
balance between that air gun and scope is the best option
dont expect miracles in your air gun because you put a $200 or $300 scope
and remember "it's 30% the gun and 70% the shooter"
The ones which come to my mind are those intended for centerfire rifles and parallax free at 100 yards. That is why scopes for rimfire and air gun shooting should be set at fifty yards or have an adjustable objective ("AO"). There are no decent $200 - $300 1,000 yard scopes. More like $1/yard for those types.
What you get in a $200 - $300 scope over a $100 scope are (hopefully) better lenses and internal design. That does make a difference, even at sixty yards. A cheap high magnification scope will have aberrations in the image quality and may not even be able to achieve the clarity or resolution they are advertised at due to poor internal light transmission.
Can a scope make you a "better shot"? I doubt it. Guys who do well with scopes can do equally well with iron sights. That comes from the gun and the shooting technique. What a scope will do, be it air gun or rimfire, is to give you a little more usable range. Someone who has difficulty hunting at fifty or sixty yards with iron sights may be successful with a 4X or 6X scope. And paper punchers generally can squeeze out tighter groups if they can master a steady hold. Me, I get sea sick at the higher magnifications, watching that crosshair bob and weave.
I don't know what a '100 yard scope' is, but there are some very legitimate reasons to put a powerful scope on an airgun. One example: shooting Field Target. The targets are placed at random, unkown distances between 10 and 50 or 55 yards. There is also, generally, a 20 ft-lb limit on the guns. Given those factors, the pellet is dropping quite rapidly beyond about 45 yards. To be successful at the longer distances, it is crucial to be able to estimate the distance very accurately. Given a 1.5" hole, if you guess it's 48 yards and it's really 51, then you just missed. A 32x AO scope, with practice, will allow the ranging accuracy you need. 24x is marginal, and as far as I can determine, anything much less is not adequate. Yes, I know about laser rangefinders - they are not permitted under FT rules.
Scopes do not enhance physical accuracy, but perceived accuracy. You may only be able to use iron sights to hit a 2" target at 35 yards, simply because you cannot see the target. There is also more movement with iron sights, because you have to align the sights and then put them on the target. Most people can not detect the slight error in the sight picture- resulting in loss of accuracy. Now if we assume the weapon is capable of hole-in-hole accuracy at X distance, then you should be able to do so with iron sights or a scope- wrong. At X distance your front blade is likely many times larger than the actual target, and you physically cannot see the target.
With even a 4x scope, you are giving yourself a smaller front blade (crosshair). You are also making the target 4x bigger. That combined, can result in much greater accuracy. Having an optical sighting device could also improve accuracy by aiding in the balance of the weapon, thus making it easier to control and in turn more accurate. One major fact is, a sh_ gun with a good scope is still a sh_ gun, the scope will not make it more accurate. Scopes will make the shooter more accurate (as I previously stated) by "moving the target closer" or "making it bigger", the finer sight picture will also give easier aiming (as I said before, you may not be able to see the target because of the sight blade).
And again, the bottom line is that scopes give greater perceived accuracy. If you can't shoot, a scope will do you no better than iron sights. If we assume the gun is capable of X sized groups at Y distance, a solid bench lock would result in the same size groups whether or not you aimed the weapon with a scope or not.
While it is true that a sight blade can obscure a target, this can be gotten around by either sighting position such as the "six o'clock hold" with the blade sighted just below the target, or through use of an open or hollow circular front sight as found on target guns. The real problem is that, with about a 7mm opening, the human eye cannot effectively see very small targets at ranges where a scope becomes useful. This applies to small variations in positioning iron sights, as well. You simply can't see that your sights are just a tad off this way or that, which becomes apparent when looking through a scope.
Regarding 32X scopes and FT, that really moves Field Target far away from actual field hunting which I suppose it was set up to emulate. The gear has become so purpose-specific that I should wonder if you wouldn't actually be severely hampered lugging a full FT rig out for a day's hunting. Does anyone shoot FT with iron sights these days?
When I was young, I used to shoot a 4x scope on a .22 rimfire and 1" diameter targets were "dead" at 50 yards. Now 6x is only good to 30 yards for that. 9x for 50, but 12x is a lot better view of the target. Granted, the 32x scope on the TX200 doesn't make for good lugging around, but you can see your targets DNA at 50 meters...
Reminds me of a gun writer who was on safari and using a variable scoped rifle. He had left it cranked all the way up. A lion came out of the bush and he quickly threw the gun up. All he could see was a lot of tan.
And if they are moving....use a shotgun with a bead sight
April 6 2009, 4:50 PM
That reminds me of my uncle who used to go rabbit hunting with a .22 revolver. He found them sitting. He always got plenty and you didn't have to be careful of chomping down on bb's!
PS - Neither one of us encountered any lions - did you hear that story from the guy with the variable power scope or one of the surviving gun bearers?
He, obviously, survived. Main point was that high mag scopes aren't exactly fast in the field. Too many folks sell a 2X or 4X fixed power scope short. Stationary game is ok but, when you need to mount a finding scope on your rifle scope, it's kind of gone too far.
Nobody can dictate what too much scope is. As you stated it has to do with seeing the target and no matter the scope, quality comes at a price. Just because a scope is uber expensive doesn't mean that all the magnification is used all the time. FT for instance is shot with relatively high magnification scopes, quality lenses with positive and repeatably clicks and rugged internals with A.O. cannot be had at a cheap price tag. (yes, even if made in China) The higher the magnification and any flaws in the glass or coating is observed, and these high magnifications are used to be absolutely SURE that when the shot is taken it is when you are as still as your going to get. I admit I used to think 10x was too much, every pulse through my arm and every beat of my heart showed through the cross hairs and with that being noticed I improved by breathing to make the movement very subtle. I then switched to a 36x scope and had to relearn things all over again, AND noticed that the image quality wasn't that great because the scope price tag wasn't outrageous justifying SUPERB lens grinding and coatings. For the 36x I traded off optical clarity for something I could afford to buy but with solid and repeatable adjustments, even with the somewhat expensive price tag when compared to less expensive scopes the optics were clearer and the internal adjustments were much better when doing a box test...
It's hard to cut corners in optic quality. I like to buy what I think I need and pay somewhere in the middle in hopes that what I get will serve my purposes. Which is probably what everyone else does. My cheapest scope is a $150 Hawke, my most expensive scope is a custom fixed power US Optics. I also don't think anyone here thinks that an expensive piece of glass will make them shoot better, but I DO think that it will give them quality optics that will be durable enough to live a long life with repeatable adjustments every time they turn the knobs. Some people are annoyed with poor optics with cheap scopes, I am definitely one of those and will pay a few more dollars in hopes that I don't have to deal with it when I make a purchase. Something about wanting to avoid the cheaper scopes breaking at inopportune times then dealing with the warranty issues.
IMHO for an airgun one has to look at the purpose, distances involved, the weight/length of the scope, features and price. I have a Hawke MAP6 4-12x40mmA.O. on a S410 in which I am completely happy with and enjoy the reticle at 10 meters at 12x. I have two RWS 34's in which I will be ordering Hawke 2-7x32mmA.O. scopes for as I don't want to add too much weight on but due to targets, distances and lighting conditions I wish to have A.O. and adjustable magnification. (plus $$$ becomes an issue which is why I am looking at Hawkes and NOT Nightforces, S&B's, USO's, etc...)
I have a Centerpoint (Crosman) 4-16x40AO illuminated mildot that weighs 17 ounces on my D34. She is really heavy, but I have no problem hauling her around all day. I keep it on 12x most of the time and that does me just perfect. Occasionally I put it down to 8 when I get up close to the furry tree lovers, but I try to not go above 12x so as to not get too dependent on higher mags.
John I have the same on my 34 and she is heavier, also have a 4-16x50 on the 52 and its a tank. I like the bright larger glass, also the weight helps with recoil and steadiness, worth the extra weight to me.
Definitely solid and steady. For some reason if I'm not shooting at a live target, I can't shoot offhand. Put a squirrel down range and it's head is good as gone, put a soda can and it won't get touched.
high mag helps show up your handling mistakes and your hart beat and 12x - 16x ao scopes can be set at say 40m and zeroed at 40m, when the target is in focus you know it is zeroed, i never adjust anything on a scope when hunting
