Post Your Guns

[Cole]

The C7 is a pretty decent rifle, for sure a killing machine, but it feels kinda like it wants to tip to the front all the time.

[couch]

Seven days in on my ten day wait. Come on Monday!

[couch]

I just need a scope and a bipod.

[B.E.N.]

Woah, what's that?

[couch]

Ruger 10/22LR with a blued 20" Green Mountain BBL and a Real Tree Hogue Stock.

[Birdmane]

10/2222222222


i want a 10/22 in .17hmr and .17mach2

[Birdmane]

This may have been posted as a joke before, but its not...guy from another forums toy.

[couch]

Ouch!

[human]

Kinda looks like he could be your dad, Dan.

[couch]

Wheelr, Neckbeard... anyone that knows anything about scopes... I want something nice, my budget is a few hundred bucks so I was looking into the Leupold Rimfire Scopes, specifically the VX-II 3-9x33mm Rimfire EFR. Seems like a nice scope.

I'm also very interested in the VX-3L 3.5-10x50mm Riflescope but it is OVERKILL for sure. Is there any drawback to having a scope of this awesomeness on a 10/22? I figure, if I can afford it, why not. I can always stick it on something bigger when I get it but for now I might as well go all out. Unless there's a solid reason not to. Too much power? Too awesome? Help me out guys.

[wheelr]

I haven't looked at scopes lately so I'm not familiar with any new models.  I agree with your line of thinking though.  If you're willing to spend a bit more for a nicer model you can always put it on a bigger rifle.

The biggest difference I see between the two scopes mentioned, besides the rimfire/centerfire deal, is the size of the objective lens (light gathering ability).  Also, if I was buying a scope that might be going on a large caliber rifle it would have "tactical" turrets for ease of adjustment.  Either way, Leupold makes quality optics and I hear they have great customer service.

[Birdmane]

This is for you, Couch.

.22 holes are small and hard to see at 100 yards, so you either get a high powered scope, or a low powered one with a high powered spotting scope.

First off lets get this straight.  The first one or two numbers are the power, the number after the x is the size in millimeters of the front of the scope.  The larger the front...the more light gets in so the clearer and easier it is to see.  The higher the power the further you can see, but a scope with shit glass and high power is not a clear image.

You should get a Nikon scope in 3-9x40  a prostaff would be in your range.  Nikon glass is realllllly nice...leupold is nice but for a 3x9 the nikon is comparable.

WIth 9 power at 100 yards you see 11 feet...so .22 holes are still kind of hard to see.  Unless you use shoot and see targets that kind of "explode" the yellow color.

So you either spend more money and get a nikon in 2.5x10, or you get the 3x9x40 or 50 and use shoot n c targets.

I would get the prostaff in 3-9x40 and call it a day, you will be satisfied with Nikon glass for sure.

[Birdmane]

Also a thing about power, I assume a .22 is for target shooting and not for hunting, so having an adjustable high powered scope is no problem, the more power the better.  I like low powered scopes for hunting but actually prefer iron sights for hunting.

I also don't like leupold at all, nikon is awesome and leupold just gets their nuts hung on because all the AR buffs jizz about it.

[Garrett.]

I own:

M1 Garand restored
SKS semi auto
.38 revolver
M-16 (since fl laws now allow assault rifles)

[couch]

This is for you, Couch.

.22 holes are small and hard to see at 100 yards, so you either get a high powered scope, or a low powered one with a high powered spotting scope.

First off lets get this straight.  The first one or two numbers are the power, the number after the x is the size in millimeters of the front of the scope.  The larger the front...the more light gets in so the clearer and easier it is to see.  The higher the power the further you can see, but a scope with shit glass and high power is not a clear image.

You should get a Nikon scope in 3-9x40  a prostaff would be in your range.  Nikon glass is realllllly nice...leupold is nice but for a 3x9 the nikon is comparable.

WIth 9 power at 100 yards you see 11 feet...so .22 holes are still kind of hard to see.  Unless you use shoot and see targets that kind of "explode" the yellow color.

So you either spend more money and get a nikon in 2.5x10, or you get the 3x9x40 or 50 and use shoot n c targets.

I would get the prostaff in 3-9x40 and call it a day, you will be satisfied with Nikon glass for sure.

Also a thing about power, I assume a .22 is for target shooting and not for hunting, so having an adjustable high powered scope is no problem, the more power the better.  I like low powered scopes for hunting but actually prefer iron sights for hunting.

I also don't like leupold at all, nikon is awesome and leupold just gets their nuts hung on because all the AR buffs jizz about it.

Thanks for all the information. I know about all the meanings of the numbers etc but wasn't 100% sure what was enough or too much. I'm not trying to shoot to the moon but tight groups at 100yrds would be nice. As for the Leupold scope I really like the lowered mount with the larger lense. In all honesty that's one of the main features that I like. That and the added light with the larger front. I mean, the gold ring and the tight q-factor are all I'm after really, duhhh.

The Prostaffs are pretty damn nice from what I've been reading and are my second choice if I don't go with one of the two Leupolds that I mentioned previously. Thanks again for all the information.