Inexpensive spotting scope

[pfunk]

I need to see a 223 holes in paper at 300 yards but I don’t want to spend a lot of money a spotting scope. Any suggestions???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Ive wondered the same thing and also need one. They're so pricey I wondered if I could beat the system and just sit a phone down there and do a live video when shooting and just make do that way lol.. seeing how I'd rarely use one anyways it's hard to justify the cost of a decent one. So I'm the same boat and would also like to know of a cheap route

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

[pfunk]

I would only use it when sighting in a new optic or seeing how different ammo does in different rifles. Outside that once I know those things I have steel targets for just range fun and staying sharp. I’ve always used a pair of binoculars for 100 yards but now I am going to stretch out so I need a spotting scope. I understand the difference in glass and how important that is in a weapon mounted optic, but one to see holes in paper with is just not that important to me. I do however want input from those who are experienced with lower quality spotting scopes for recommendations so I don’t buy something that’s totally trash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boardfeet]

Vintage Bausch & Lomb Spotting Scope 60x Eyepiece with Tripod | eBay

I bought this from a Vietnam veteran who I'm pretty sure was a sniper but an interesting guy anyway you put it. He has used it a lot as shown by the wear on it.

www.ebay.com

 

[BamaFaninMilton]

A few years ago, my wife bought me one of the cheap Barska spotting scopes as a Christmas gift, it works fine at 100 yards when shooting larger calibers than .223, but I've never used it out to 300 so I'm not sure if you would be able to see 223 holes with it.

 

[stage20]

I have a couple of cheap scopes I use. Also have a couple sets of binoculars. Some of them are junk. Ok a lot of them are junk. I have about 5 pair and only 2 are worth anything. Good pair cost more than a scope, so buy what will be put to use.

 

[M118LR]

Barska 7X42 WP Deep Sea Monocular w/ Internal Rangefinder & Compass, Waterproof, Fully Multi-Coated AA11442 51% Off w/ Free S&H

Shop Barska 7X42 WP Deep Sea Monocular w/ Internal Rangefinder & Compass, Waterproof, Fully Multi-Coated | 51% Off 4 Star Rating on 3 Reviews for Barska 7X42 WP Deep Sea Monocular w/ Internal...

shop.opticsplanet.com

Has so many more usages, at such a low price point. Think outside the box! JMHO.

 

[skipperbrown]

Seeing a 1/4" hole at 300yds with a cheap optic is a stretch even if your target is backlit. Your best bet is to find a used scope or make a trip downrange after 3 or 5 shots to give your barrel time to cool. My buddy has an older 80mm KOWA spotting scope with a 32x eyepiece. It's a fine scope but unless the lighting is really good, it's tough to see those tiny holes at 300. An alternative is to shoot bright painted steel at that range and you can definitely see the hits but it's sometimes tough to figure out just where the hit is due to the splatter especially with multiple hits. And there is the issue of ricochets. Oh, with mild steel you can tell if you hit it with high power rounds since there will be holes in it.

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Good points. I work alot in condos on the beach. And many times the condos will have telescopes for "bird watching".. wink.. wink lol. .. and they zoom in really good. I wonder if size and being compact isn't a big issue and if you're not planning on using it much anyways.. if a cheap telescope.. would be equivalent to a high dollar spotter scope. Just bulkier n bigger. May help to see the super long distances perhaps

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

[Baddog 0302]

Shoot-N-C
As "Skipperbrown" points out .25" holes in paper are very hard to see, even with $$$$$ dollar spotting scopes . Use something like one of these, size dependent on your skill level if you want something to collect and refer back to. Or use steel to check your rifle's zero.

 

[M118LR]

.22 caliber holes at 300 yards, it ain't a magnification thing. It's all about clarity. The cheaper the scope the worse the clarity. A pair of good 6X binoculars should be more than capable of seeing .22 caliber wholes on a piece of paper. IMO.

 

[fv22]

I've got a cheap Harbor Freight spotting scope. Works great at 75 or 100 yards without zooming it all the way to full magnification. Don't know if it would show those little holes at 300 yards. On sale it's usually about $40 so might be worth trying.

 

[M118LR]

Is there a reason that your rifle scope can't discern .22 caliber holes at 300 yards?
Prior Piss Poor Planning on your part ain't going to make up for proper planning prior to posting. JMHO.

 

[pfunk]

I actually have never shot the rifle or scope beyond 100 yards. I now will have the ability to shoot at 300 and I am concerned it won’t see the holes. I would be shooting the black and yellow reactive paper in hopes of seeing the holes. The optic is not cheap by any means but it is only 8 power. I want to see what I could do with that optic on a quality AR at 300 yards. The scope on my bolt gun will be much better. So I guess my question is to be clear, what is the least expensive thing I can use to spot as shooting and going looking isn’t practical at a range. I have shot farther with other rifles but the person I was with had a nice spotting scope that was like a $1000. I don’t want to spend that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pfunk]

I am going to give the barska a hard look. Thanks for the replies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[epointer]

Youre going to be throwing your money away. Ive had a few spotters Burris, Leupold Gold Ring HD, and a Nikon Fieldscope. With the Burris it would be hard to see .223 at 100 yds let alone 300. You need some good glass to see little holes at that distance.

 

[Rebel_Rider1969]

I actually have never shot the rifle or scope beyond 100 yards. I now will have the ability to shoot at 300 and I am concerned it won’t see the holes. I would be shooting the black and yellow reactive paper in hopes of seeing the holes. The optic is not cheap by any means but it is only 8 power. I want to see what I could do with that optic on a quality AR at 300 yards. The scope on my bolt gun will be much better. So I guess my question is to be clear, what is the least expensive thing I can use to spot as shooting and going looking isn’t practical at a range. I have shot farther with other rifles but the person I was with had a nice spotting scope that was like a $1000. I don’t want to spend that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

15-22 pistol at 50 yards. You should be ok. With the black/green reactive targets with a scoped rifle.

 

[pfunk]

Thanks Rebel!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Raven]

I've been spoiled up in Maine these last few years by having access to a national match range with pits at the target. Put the kids downrange in the pits and when call "cold" they could score the target, patch the target, send back pictures to my cell phone, etc. For free. Same set up we had on active duty at the known distance range, just on a smaller scale. There's no reason why we can't recreate this on a private range. Also, depending on how good of a shot you are, and if you have two smart phones that can "face time", set a phone up on a stand a couple feet off to the side and zoom in on the target. Just leave it down there and then all you have to do to check your target is glance at the phone. Maybe put the phone in a stand that has an AR500 box just for the phone. Hey, a cinder block and some pavers would stop 223. Put it in a $5 cinder block with a paver to each side of the block and zoom in. If it's stupid but works well then it's not stupid, it's special. As in "Special " W.A.T.

 

[reel_crazy]

one option not yet mentioned is a telescope.... you can generally find some pretty good deals on them ,, and when you are not punching paper use it to introduce the young-ins to views of planets , moon etc.. refractors will generally cost more though you might find a deal here and there.. you will generally get a much more stable tripod and the ability to fine tune position...

I have an 8 in meade reflector which might be fun to play with at a range ..