# Scope for a .22



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Looking for a good scope for my ruger 10/22 rifle. Doesn't have to be top drawer, but not bottom either. Hopefully someone here has my set-up and can give feedback, thanks guys!


----------



## Boxerboxer (Aug 6, 2015)

Are you more interested in killing paper or game?


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Boxerboxer said:


> Are you more interested in killing paper or game?


LOL--- Imma paper killin, critter shootin mosheen. I try for absolute perfection regardless of what receives my efforts lol!


----------



## Boxerboxer (Aug 6, 2015)

And of course the all important detail: budget?


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Boxerboxer said:


> And of course the all important detail: budget?


Yes indeed, for the cost and range of a 10/22 overboard is easily achieved. Forgot that overlooked fact. Having said that, 200$ would be an acceptable cut-off. Not too much, not too cheap.


----------



## Boxerboxer (Aug 6, 2015)

Vortex makes a rimfire-specific 2-7x in both the Crossfire and Diamondback lines that should do nicely. I should note that I've looked through them but not shot with them so YMMV.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

Nikon makes a very clear .22 scope for that kind of cash. I have one in fixed 4x on a 10/22 and have no complaints.


----------



## Boxerboxer (Aug 6, 2015)

glenway said:


> Nikon makes a very clear .22 scope for that kind of cash. I have one in fixed 4x on a 10/22 and have no complaints.


That's a good point. A 4x ought to cover the usable hunting range of the rifle quite nicely.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

I have a few rimfire rifles and this Ruger is set up for hunting with the Nikon Prostaff, although it performs beyond expectations at the range, as well. Very clear and the crosshairs are easy to find in the woods. (The picture may be deceiving but there is about 3/16s of an inch clearance under the scope cap.)

I like the simplicity of the fixed powers for hunting, and yes, the 4 power magnification is suitable for the typical range of a .22 long rifle.

I have rimfire scopes that cost less than the Nikon and others that cost more. However, for the money, mine is on the Nikon.

The beauty of the little Ruger is that it can be modified like a Mustang or small block Chevy, if you ever decide to lighten your wallet. Mine's been massaged a bit on that note.

Good luck in your quest.


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

glenway said:


> I have a few rimfire rifles and this Ruger is set up for hunting with the Nikon Prostaff, although it performs beyond expectations at the range, as well. Very clear and the crosshairs are easy to find in the woods. (The picture may be deceiving but there is about 3/16s of an inch clearance under the scope cap.)
> 
> I like the simplicity of the fixed powers for hunting, and yes, the 4 power magnification is suitable for the typical range of a .22 long rifle.
> 
> ...


Okay now you went and threw a monkey wrench in the gears! I hadn't considered a fixed power nor what power would be best. Going to have to physically look through them at the store (fixed powers), as variables are simple enough to know what you have/get. Fixed however matters as in how much fov up close and to also get an idea of view offered at distance as well since its fixed. Thanks you rascal LOL!


----------



## 220swift (Mar 2, 2011)

Good to see you back around Antlerz22!


----------



## hassell (Feb 9, 2010)

Nice.


----------



## knapper (Feb 5, 2010)

Short223 said:


> I have a fixed 4x Burris Short Mag on my Marlin 80. Has enough magnification for taking squirrels and rabbits.
> 
> Sling was made by FB.


good choice


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

glenway said:


> Nikon makes a very clear .22 scope for that kind of cash. I have one in fixed 4x on a 10/22 and have no complaints.


What's the lowest fixed power in a decent scope/brand? Other than mentioned. Trying to hear from actual use/application vs looking through one in a scope-stock in the store at walls etc... And of the field of view if something were up close and personal.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

You may want to go with a low-power variable (like 2x7), if you are concerned with close-up work. I am not aware of any rimfire models with fixed power below 4, but there may be some. You might look at air gun scopes, too. They are built tougher than typical scopes, because of the reverse recoil that occurs with air guns; however, once again, don't know what's available.

If you go to www.MidwayUSA.com, the site has the specs with the scopes as far as field of view, etc.


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

glenway said:


> You may want to go with a low-power variable (like 2x7), if you are concerned with close-up work. I am not aware of any rimfire models with fixed power below 4, but there may be some. You might look at air gun scopes, too. They are built tougher than typical scopes, because of the reverse recoil that occurs with air guns; however, once again, don't know what's available.
> 
> If you go to www.MidwayUSA.com, the site has the specs with the scopes as far as field of view, etc.


Thanks glenway, didn't know air power scopes were tougher.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

Another plus with air gun scopes is that many are parallax adjustable to very close range.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

"What is the difference between a rifle scope and an air gun scope?" The answer is "It really all depends on who the manufacturer is." In the case of Bushnell there is essentially no difference between the two types. In the case of Burris and Leupold, there's no difference in construction, but there is in optics. In the case of other manufacturers like Weaver, and Simmons, there is a definite difference in both construction and optics.

Here is the link containing the above text: http://www.lasc.us/rangingshotrifleairgunscopes.htm

Short: The scope you linked to is well beyond his price point, because he wanted to stay under $200.

The extra toughness of some airgun scopes should have no bearing anyway, unless he wants to switch the scope to an airgun sometime in the future. But, they do have the feature of being able to dial out parallax close up - again, maybe not a concern unless target shooting at close range. For hunting, a bit of parallax at such close range is irrelevant unless he intends to hunt flies.


----------



## Indiana Jones (Aug 28, 2014)

Short223 said:


> I have a fixed 4x Burris Short Mag on my Marlin 80. Has enough magnification for taking squirrels and rabbits.
> 
> Sling was made by FB.


I've seen this setup kill plenty of small game. Solid for sure. I want a 4x like that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

Is that Burris an actual rimfire model?


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Okay I got me the p-rimfire from Nikon. It has a bdc reticle and is set parallax free for 50 yds. The click movement is 1/4 inch at 50 yds----not 100. Got her dialed in but was very frustrating at first, wasn't anywhere on paper at 50 yds even after I had found mechanical zero against the mirror (verified by counting clicks as well). Deliberately started shooting the dirt berm aiming at clumps of dirt on it---found my splash and 3 rounds later was within 3 inches of bullseye. Didn't take pictures at the range as it was hectic because of hunting season and everybody and their sisters were at the range geezzzzzz. Grouping was okay but I guess I expect too much. if my grouping had of been at 100 yds I would have been extremely happy--but at 50 it was decent but not a real tack driver. Maybe the ammo....who knows--wasn't me that much I'm sure of. Used CCI mini-mags at 1260 fps, maybe will try lower velocity match grade ammo in it. Anybody know of real good match grade .22 ammo?


----------



## youngdon (Mar 10, 2010)

Eley and norma both make good match ammo.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

I wouldn't be concerned about groups with CCI Mini Mags, because quality control is questionable. Best bet is to check velocities with a chronograph and then you will see what I mean. If you want to get serious you'll have to get some serious ammo.

One way to check quality is by weighing each round. Typical production stuff varies quite a bit; the good stuff doesn't.

Like YD indicates, Eley and Norma are good choices and the ammo is available. My favorite is Lapua but it is costly and may be hard to locate. (Heck, just about anything is expensive now.)

Norma link is here: http://www.brownells.com/ammunition/rimfire-ammo/tac-22-rimfire-ammo-prod78089.aspx?avs%7cCartridge_1=AFF_22+Long+Rifle

You'll have to learn trajectory - especially, if you shoot longer ranges. Your reticle will not come close to being exact, but with a cheat sheet, you can make it work just fine.

Another option may be Aguila Interceptor shooting a 40-grain bullet at 1470 fps - fast and accurate in 40-grain offering: http://www.brownells.com/ammunition/rimfire-ammo/22lr-40gr-interceptor-ammo-prod82594.aspx?avs%7cCartridge_1=AFF_22+Long+Rifle


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Thanks guys, think I'll try some eley and some aguilas as well. Might even try some wolf match, read some decent reviews on it as well.


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Short223 said:


> Match ammo will help you quite a bit. Aguila is what I use. If I am understanding the correct model you have, you should have 2 separate elevation turrets. One for 1200 -1300 fps ammo and another for 1500-1600 fps ammo. I had a chance to mess with one of these scopes. Once you understand how the reticle works ( Nikon has a ballistic calculator for it), it's actually kinda nice. The only problem we had with it, is that there weren't any good calculations for subsonic ammo. I'm sure with some practice, it can be figured out though. Congrats on your new scope.


The bdc reticle one/scope doesn't have but the one turret labeled 1500~1640 fps. The Nikon-plex reticle scope has the dual turrets with it as you said.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

You'll need a cheat sheet, because standard (aka sub-sonic) ammo will be something less than 1120 fps - usually 1050 to 1080 fps.

It'll be fun when you get it dialed in. You can really mess with folks and their typical supersonic, milk carton ammo. Just keep it a secret how you kick their tails every time. My friends won't play anymore.

To tell you the truth, any .22 rimfire I have will shoot better with the slower stuff. However, I have found some ammo labeled "target" (like CCI Green Tag) is just lower power charges with poor quality control and will still leave you questioning your gear.


----------



## Antlerz22 (Apr 18, 2011)

Mmm.. never gave it much thought, slower might be the ticket --just have a sheet with the current speed of the ammo I'm using from Nikon spot on-- on the butt stock as reference.


----------



## glenway (Mar 27, 2011)

Right. A chronograph coupled with ballistic program (available free online at most ammo manufacturers) can save ammo, but you'll still be verifying in the field.

Without a chrony, you can get the job done by shooting at the distances you want. Then, write down the corresponding reticle points at various distances for mounting on the buttstock or other convenient place.

It'll all be worth it, if you want to go beyond mere plinking.


----------



## prairiewolf (Feb 19, 2012)

A good program for phones is the Strelok one, very easy to use and its free just goggle it. You can use published velocities or use a chronograph if available. Once info is punched in it will give you wind and elevation for what ever rifles and calibers you put in it.


----------

