Hi everyone! I am new owner of 10/22 tactical and I want to enhance it with a scope, but I don't know which one to choose as the market is overflowing with offers and when I seem to have already settled on one option, another appears and I am no longer sure about the first.. Before I only used red dots for pistol, this is my first own rifle. Hope for your experienced opinion🙏
Chengui
Joined
·
21,153 Posts
There's a lot more to "which scope is best" than the brand name or magnification. Most people judge scopes by what they can see and feel yet don't consider internal construction or other important things such as eye relief, zoom range, adjustable objective lens or side focus dial. Even some of the simple things such as eyepiece focus, the type of reticule, objective lens diameter, length, and weight can be important factors. There's no such thing as a perfect rifle scope so you choose the one best suited for your intended use.
There are so many things to consider, especially for a rimfire scope .... so, I wrote an article about 10 years ago and posted it in the Forum E-Library, titled "Scope Dope". Here's a link: Scope Dope | Ruger Forum I think you need at least 25 posts to access the Forum Library.
There are so many things to consider, especially for a rimfire scope .... so, I wrote an article about 10 years ago and posted it in the Forum E-Library, titled "Scope Dope". Here's a link: Scope Dope | Ruger Forum I think you need at least 25 posts to access the Forum Library.
Joined
·
21,153 Posts
Chengui, I made a statement in my Scope Dope article that is really true .... "The best scope in the world cannot deliver better accuracy than the gun is capable of." 10/22s are one of those rifles that are not known for precision accuracy unless you spend a lot of money on a match grade barrel, stock, and internal parts. They shoot pretty decent plinker grade groups out to 50 yards. which is what they are designed to do. Point being .... a $100 scope will serve your needs just fine and will probably be more precision than the rifle. I favor a 2~7X rimfire scope on a 10/22 ... Vortex or similar brand.
Joined
·
21,153 Posts
yrunvs, I guess we all have our own definition of accuracy for a 22LR rifle. 1 MOA is pretty good at 100 yards but MOA (1/2" groups) at 50 yards, not so much. I have an older CZ 452-2E bolt action rifle (I paid $200 at the time) and have a Nikon 3~9x EFR scope on it. The scope was about $100. This gun pretty much defines accuracy and is the least ammo fussy rifle I have ever seen. At 50 yards with most any ammo, it will print 1/4" groups .... even better with match grade ammo .... basically one tiny tattered hole. At 100 yards, it will print well under an inch with normal 22 LR ammo or about 1/2 MOA with match grade 22 LRs. , providing the winds are calm.
![Image]()
I built a 10/22 using a 20" match grade Green Mountain barrel with a Bentz chamber. It has a Fajen target stock, a bolt that has been machined for minimal headspace, 2 lb trigger pull, and a Niko Sterling Night Eater 3~10X50 scope. The scope has a side dial for parallax correction. With match grade ammo, I can squeeze about 1 MOA at 100 yards or under 1/2" at 50 yards. Pretty good but not in the same ball park as my CZ. I got about a grand invested in my build versus about $300 for my CZ.
My point is .... both of these rifles have decent scopes but neither are very expensive and neither are anywhere close to your 36X.
![Image]()
I built a 10/22 using a 20" match grade Green Mountain barrel with a Bentz chamber. It has a Fajen target stock, a bolt that has been machined for minimal headspace, 2 lb trigger pull, and a Niko Sterling Night Eater 3~10X50 scope. The scope has a side dial for parallax correction. With match grade ammo, I can squeeze about 1 MOA at 100 yards or under 1/2" at 50 yards. Pretty good but not in the same ball park as my CZ. I got about a grand invested in my build versus about $300 for my CZ.
My point is .... both of these rifles have decent scopes but neither are very expensive and neither are anywhere close to your 36X.
Joined
·
21,153 Posts
yrunvs, I guess I didn't make my point very well. If you want really good accuracy, you need to start with a better rifle than a factory 10/22. As I noted above, "The best scope in the world cannot deliver better accuracy than the gun is capable of."
I really enjoy 10/22s .... got 4 of them but I didn't buy them for benchrest accuracy, except for my above build. They are plinkers and do a very good job of it. It's hard to beat a day at the farm with the grandkids, a brick of 22s, and a couple 10/22s.
My first 10/22 Carbine was made in 1974. I still have it and it still shoots great.
![Image]()
The next one is my favorite ... a Mannlicher stainless. I've had several different scopes on this gun to include a $700 4.5~14X Leupold VX III and it wouldn't group any better than with a $100 Nikon 2~7x at 50 yards. My granddaughter has laid claim to this gun and prefers iron sights.
![Image]()
Last is my TD stainless, still a fun gun. It has a Ruger 4x32mm scope and kills bean cans @ 50 yards every time:
![Image]()
I really enjoy 10/22s .... got 4 of them but I didn't buy them for benchrest accuracy, except for my above build. They are plinkers and do a very good job of it. It's hard to beat a day at the farm with the grandkids, a brick of 22s, and a couple 10/22s.
My first 10/22 Carbine was made in 1974. I still have it and it still shoots great.
The next one is my favorite ... a Mannlicher stainless. I've had several different scopes on this gun to include a $700 4.5~14X Leupold VX III and it wouldn't group any better than with a $100 Nikon 2~7x at 50 yards. My granddaughter has laid claim to this gun and prefers iron sights.
Last is my TD stainless, still a fun gun. It has a Ruger 4x32mm scope and kills bean cans @ 50 yards every time:
Joined
·
21,153 Posts
Spitdog & HarrisJr, It's not as bad as you might think. Back in the 60s, a Weaver K4 was state of the art for scopes. There have been dramatic improvements in optical quality since polymer molded lenses started being used. Now, even cheap Chinese made scopes have remarkable optical quality, compared to the older Weaver scopes.
A good quality rifle scope .... meaning excellent optical quality, color corrected lens coatings, rugged internal recoil proof components (erector tube, and pivot joint), and easy-to-use controls (turret screws, focus adjustment, and parallax adjustments) will start at about $150. Unless you have exceptional vision, chances are you can't tell a $150 scope from a $1000 scope. This assumes the scopes you compare have the same magnification, the same diameter objective lens, and are properly focused to your eye. A slight optical improvement can easily double the cost of a scope but it barely makes a difference to a person with normal vision. Case in point: I have a Swarovsky 5~15X 50mm that I paid over $1500. It is a superb scope but in all honesty, I can't tell any optical difference between it and my Nikon Monarch that cost 1/4 as much.
A good quality rifle scope .... meaning excellent optical quality, color corrected lens coatings, rugged internal recoil proof components (erector tube, and pivot joint), and easy-to-use controls (turret screws, focus adjustment, and parallax adjustments) will start at about $150. Unless you have exceptional vision, chances are you can't tell a $150 scope from a $1000 scope. This assumes the scopes you compare have the same magnification, the same diameter objective lens, and are properly focused to your eye. A slight optical improvement can easily double the cost of a scope but it barely makes a difference to a person with normal vision. Case in point: I have a Swarovsky 5~15X 50mm that I paid over $1500. It is a superb scope but in all honesty, I can't tell any optical difference between it and my Nikon Monarch that cost 1/4 as much.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
