Scope opinions

[Saltwater60]

I’ve been looking for a scope for my 6.8spc for hunting deer and probably some coyotes. Maybe once or reinvent in my life some hogs because hey why not right?
I came across this company called Athlon and they just seem too good to be true honestly. For $300 you get parallax form 10 to infinity, FFP, and good magnification. The scope on optics planet gets good reviews and Althing overall seems to get very good reviews.
Let me know what you all think.
Athlon Optics Talos BTR 4-14x44 Side Focus Riflescope 215028, Color: Black, Tube Diameter: 30 mm, $30.00 Off — Free 2 Day Shipping w/ code 2DAYAIR

 

[DAFzipper]

I would look at Primary Arms 4 X 14. They have different reticle options and ones without illumination. I own 3 of them and for the price are excellent. Love the ACSS reticle. But also have cross hair if that is what you want. I would recommend trying the ACSS.

Primary Arms SLx3.5 4-14x44mm FFP Rifle Scope - Illuminated ACSS-HUD-DMR-308 Reticle PA4-14XFFP308


Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk

 

[Jaywmustang]

They have a deal going on, the ares is a more expensive scope but if u can get deal why not. I got this in my email, u have to buy from one of the dealers on the list. That is not the complete list, I can forward my email to you if you are interested

 

[JamieZ]

This is what is on my 6.8 for deer hunting,,,,,,,its a cheaply priced scope but it is an excellent scope and as far as power goes I wouldnt want or need anything higher for deer hunting. Shot a deer that was in a full blast run with it at 200yds,,,,its clear glass

https://www.amazon.com/Redfield-67085-Revolution-2-7x33mm-Accu-Range/dp/B0034L8XW4

 

[Podmonkey]

I wouldn't at all be suprised if the same factory that produces Primary Arms and Vortex's budget line optics also produce the Athalon branded ones. If so that is a good thing since both those lines are well received.

 

[Wraith]

Athlon is a well-known brand in the long-range optics community. They’re a sister company of a larger manufacturer whose name eludes me.

I’ve not gotten behind one, but the reviews and many long range shooting forums speak highly of them.

 

[Saltwater60]

Athlon is a well-known brand in the long-range optics community. They’re a sister company of a larger manufacturer whose name eludes me.

I’ve not gotten behind one, but the reviews and many long range shooting forums speak highly of them.

That’s what I saw as well. That’s what drew me to them then I saw the price of the FFP with low parallax setting and was like wow that sounds too good to be true.

 

[505PIR]

I'd go with a SWFA fixed power.

 

[Vapor]

What ranges are you looking at? What hunting conditions?

If you're not dialing in fire solutions and shooting at targets 500 yards, I see little advantage to un capped turrets.

For sporting optics, I do like simple leupolds in 2-7 or 3-9 with tri moa or duplex reticles. I have a few vx2s and a freedom.

For long range I have an SWFA 3-15. It is a cut above anything I have for the internals. Built like an absolute tank. The glass is so-so. Its not what you buy that optic for. You buy it for the internals and tracking. They track better than almost anything under $1k


My favorite for the money was the weaver grand slam tactical 3-10. Excellent turrets, great glass, just no ao and sfp. I would highly reccomend weaver classics or grand slams made in japan by low.


I'm wary of the athalon, pa, and vortex scopes. I had an acss 1-6 and a vortex diamondback. The PA acss was built like a tank but had glass fit for a simmons with turrets as vague and mushy as soupy mash potatoes. The vortex was so-so but sub par in build quality to even something like a nikon prostaff. Its the only scope i had that was bady crushed by a ring manufacturers torque specs. They replaced it, and i passed on the replacement. The running joke is that vortex needs that vip warranty, with failures on turrets, glass, etc being common even on the viper line. Just Google it.

 

[Saltwater60]

What ranges are you looking at? What hunting conditions?

If you're not dialing in fire solutions and shooting at targets 500 yards, I see little advantage to un capped turrets.

For sporting optics, I do like simple leupolds in 2-7 or 3-9 with tri moa or duplex reticles. I have a few vx2s and a freedom.

For long range I have an SWFA 3-15. It is a cut above anything I have for the internals. Built like an absolute tank. The glass is so-so. Its not what you buy that optic for. You buy it for the internals and tracking. They track better than almost anything under $1k


My favorite for the money was the weaver grand slam tactical 3-10. Excellent turrets, great glass, just no ao and sfp. I would highly reccomend weaver classics or grand slams made in japan by low.


I'm wary of the athalon, pa, and vortex scopes. I had an acss 1-6 and a vortex diamondback. The PA acss was built like a tank but had glass fit for a simmons with turrets as vague and mushy as soupy mash potatoes. The vortex was so-so but sub par in build quality to even something like a nikon prostaff. Its the only scope i had that was bady crushed by a ring manufacturers torque specs. They replaced it, and i passed on the replacement. The running joke is that vortex needs that vip warranty, with failures on turrets, glass, etc being common even on the viper line. Just Google it.

Just general hunting in some wooded and field areas. I’d say 100-200 yard range would be my max for range.
I just want something descent for about $400. I’d like a low parallax setting and first focal plane but that might be asking too much. The Athlon has great reviews on many sights so that why I was looking at it. I have not purchased anything yet and won’t for a bit. Still doing some research.

 

[Jaywmustang]

Vortex has the diamondback tactical that fits your criteria. I have seen them as low as $275 on DVOR but they don’t last at that price.

 

[Vapor]

Just general hunting in some wooded and field areas. I’d say 100-200 yard range would be my max for range.
I just want something descent for about $400. I’d like a low parallax setting and first focal plane but that might be asking too much. The Athlon has great reviews on many sights so that why I was looking at it. I have not purchased anything yet and won’t for a bit. Still doing some research.

For those ranges indicated you could easily zero for 50 yards and be good out to 250 with even a simple cross hair. Focal plane would be irrelevant unless I'm missing something?


Right now, Leopold's mark ar mods are on sale. The 4-12 is sfp, but does have an AO.

Leupold 4-12x40 Mark AR MOD 1 Riflescope

They have a 6-18 too thats also on sale for under $400.

The other option if you want ffp, ao, and quality, is an swfa fixed 6x. It will be heavy however.

Let me know if you have question or feel free to pm me to bounce ideas.

 

[Jaywmustang]

If your max distance to shoot is 200 yards, a second focal plane would be better. On low maginifaction with a ffp, the reticle can be hard to see unless it is illuminated. You can still get a mildot type reticle in sfp, you just need to read the owners manual to see what magnifation it need to be set at for the true value of the reticle. Its normally on the highest power.

 

[PA Guns & Ammo]

Check out Hawke Optics. I have been dealing with them for two and a half years and have great luck with the scopes. Very clear and no hassle warranty.

 

[Jaywmustang]

I just ordered a Athlon ares btr from bluelineoptics. Never heard of bluelineoptics but I did check on Athlons site and they r listed on the $250 off ares promotion. They are also offering a additional 12% off for first time customers. $72 off a ares btr, plus blue line states it has the updates turrets. Some of the older turrets had some issues of being mushy. I do not own a Athlon scope but have read positive and negative reviews online. Lifetime warranty is a plus but it means nothing if your scope keeps breaking. It’s still over your budget but you are getting alot more scope for the money.


Home – Blue Line Optics

 

[Saltwater60]

So you think SFP is better at that range? If so there are many many options. I honestly don’t know much about scopes at all. That’s probably clear. I really liked the vortex and Nikon scopes I saw a cabelas. I was thinking like a 4x12 would be good.

 

[Jaywmustang]

If it’s just for hunting 200 yard max, I just get a sfp. Almost all my hunting rifles have sfp scopes.

 

[Jaywmustang]

most of my hunting property are 200 yards or less. But I do have a couple places that I could shoot 500 yards. Do you have access to shoot farther than 200 yards?

 

[Saltwater60]

most of my hunting property are 200 yards or less. But I do have a couple places that I could shoot 500 yards. Do you have access to shoot farther than 200 yards?

No. There are generally only 100 years ranges by me. I’d shoot a bit over that.

 

[Carlos Hathcock]

Picked up 2 Vortex Strike Eagles last month for under $400 each.

 

[Jaywmustang]

No. There are generally only 100 years ranges by me. I’d shoot a bit over that.

That stinks. My gun club has up to 200 yards. Was there a reason for wanting a ffp scope? U can get a sfp scope and still get a usable reticle. But to be honest, a sfp and regular reticle would be fine for hunting. At 200 yards, hold on top of the deer back.

 

[mca90guitar]

I like the 3.5-10x40 Leupold vx3i CDs on my Savage fcp-sr 308. Holding zero good, glass looks good, simple reticle.

Have the ultimate slam on my muzzleloader and it's also holding solid for 3 years now.

 

[Upstate43]

If it’s just for hunting 200 yard max, I just get a sfp. Almost all my hunting rifles have sfp scopes.

Truthfully, FFP scopes are better than SFP scopes in all aspects except cost and weight. Most hunting rifles use SFP scopes because they're light and cheap and most hunting shots aren't going much beyond 200 yards (so it’s hard to justify the extra cost).

With that said, I do agree a FFP is probably overkill for a general-purpose short range hunting rifle. I have heard of Athlon; they are considered the budget option, but I’ve seen a few people say they hold up surprisingly well given their price point. Personally, I’d look at getting a Vortex Diamond 2x-8x (or something in that ballpark). 4x-14x is more than what you’ll need for even 200-300 yard shots.

The main advantage of FFP is that the reticle hash marks maintain the same measurement (mils or MOA) regardless of magnification. This is especially relevant to long range target shooting and hunting where someone might need to conduct range estimation or use a hold-over or hold-under. For a 200 yard hunting shot, simply using some Kentucky windage and holding a bit high (depending on your zero and the load being shot) works just fine.

 

[Jaywmustang]

Truthfully, FFP scopes are better than SFP scopes in all aspects except cost and weight. Most hunting rifles use SFP scopes because they're light and cheap and most hunting shots aren't going much beyond 200 yards (so it’s hard to justify the extra cost).

With that said, I do agree a FFP is probably overkill for a general-purpose short range hunting rifle. I have heard of Athlon; they are considered the budget option, but I’ve seen a few people say they hold up surprisingly well given their price point. Personally, I’d look at getting a Vortex Diamond 2x-8x (or something in that ballpark). 4x-14x is more than what you’ll need for even 200-300 yard shots.

The main advantage of FFP is that the reticle hash marks maintain the same measurement (mils or MOA) regardless of magnification. This is especially relevant to long range target shooting and hunting where someone might need to conduct range estimation or use a hold-over or hold-under. For a 200 yard hunting shot, simply using some Kentucky windage and holding a bit high (depending on your zero and the load being shot) works just fine.

I agree with everything but ffp scopes are better. I think ffp and sfp just serve a different purpose. Used in the wrong situation, neither would be ideal.

 

[Saltwater60]

That stinks. My gun club has up to 200 yards. Was there a reason for wanting a ffp scope? U can get a sfp scope and still get a usable reticle. But to be honest, a sfp and regular reticle would be fine for hunting. At 200 yards, hold on top of the deer back.

I just thought FFP plane scopes were better but I’m pretty scope stupid so if you all think a SFP scopes is good enough I’m all game for that. I’d be happy to save $200-$300 and 200 yard shots are pushing it for my area. It’s pretty wooded.

 

[Jaywmustang]

I just thought FFP plane scopes were better but I’m pretty scope stupid so if you all think a SFP scopes is good enough I’m all game for that. I’d be happy to save $200-$300 and 200 yard shots are pushing it for my area. It’s pretty wooded.

Just practic your Kentucky holdover lol. Just to verify

 

[Upstate43]

I just thought FFP plane scopes were better but I’m pretty scope stupid so if you all think a SFP scopes is good enough I’m all game for that. I’d be happy to save $200-$300 and 200 yard shots are pushing it for my area. It’s pretty wooded.

A general rule of thumb that I go by for rifle scopes: the scope should at least be 1/2x the cost of the rifle.

For example, if you're putting together a dedicated long-range target rifle (~$900-$1100), you should spend at least spend $500-$600 on your scope....and look at FFP scopes as per our earlier discussion.

If you're putting together a cheap, no-frills hunting rifle (~$400-$500), you should spend at least $200-$300 on your scope. There are some FFP hunting-oriented scopes out there, but their main drawbacks will be added cost and added weight.

Obviously this is a general rule of thumb, and there are exceptions: guys and gals who compete professionally in PRS and other long-range venues will routinely spend thousands of $ on high-end scopes, sometimes almost as much as what they spend on the rifle itself. I think beyond a certain price point, you're looking at minor variations in glass quality....but that difference will only be truly appreciated by people who are competing or shooting at the extreme edge of the long-range spectrum.

Cost is usually somewhat indicative of the types of features that you can expect on a given scope. A basic and cheap hunting scope really doesn't need much: reticle, maybe a few hash-marks on the vertical axis, windage and elevation adjustment. A scope intended for dedicated long-range use will require a few more features: FFP, parallax adjustment, zero stop, a good illuminated reticle in MRAD or MOA, windage and elevation turrets in matching units. All those features make life a whole lot easier for long-range shots, but they add to the weight.

So I guess my point is: while you don't want to go with the cheapest scope possible, there is also a practical limit to how much you really need to spend on a scope depending on several factors (to include skill level and intended use).

 

[Saltwater60]

A general rule of thumb that I go by for rifle scopes: the scope should at least be 1/2x the cost of the rifle.

For example, if you're putting together a dedicated long-range target rifle (~$900-$1100), you should spend at least spend $500-$600 on your scope....and look at FFP scopes as per our earlier discussion.

If you're putting together a cheap, no-frills hunting rifle (~$400-$500), you should spend at least $200-$300 on your scope. There are some FFP hunting-oriented scopes out there, but their main drawbacks will be added cost and added weight.

Obviously this is a general rule of thumb, and there are exceptions: guys and gals who compete professionally in PRS and other long-range venues will routinely spend thousands of $ on high-end scopes, sometimes almost as much as what they spend on the rifle itself. I think beyond a certain price point, you're looking at minor variations in glass quality....but that difference will only be truly appreciated by people who are competing or shooting at the extreme edge of the long-range spectrum.

Cost is usually somewhat indicative of the types of features that you can expect on a given scope. A basic and cheap hunting scope really doesn't need much: reticle, maybe a few hash-marks on the vertical axis, windage and elevation adjustment. A scope intended for dedicated long-range use will require a few more features: FFP, parallax adjustment, zero stop, a good illuminated reticle in MRAD or MOA, windage and elevation turrets in matching units. All those features make life a whole lot easier for long-range shots, but they add to the weight.

So I guess my point is: while you don't want to go with the cheapest scope possible, there is also a practical limit to how much you really need to spend on a scope depending on several factors (to include skill level and intended use).

Agreed and that’s what I’m having trouble determining. Thanks.

 

[meketrefe]

buy a scope from an actual optics company and not OEM rebrands or retailers.

 

[Shoots100]

My Opinion, Scopes are good for shooting stuff at long distances.

SJC