I have owned 2 Tasco .22 rimfire scopes, 3 Simmons low cost 3 X 9's, and an airgun rated BSA (4 power with 32 bell). They have all worked just fine. :grin:
The BSA is probably the worst as the point of aim changes when the bell is adjusted from 7 feet outwards, so I just leave it at the 25 foot setting after site in. The adjustment knob on the windage part has to be pressed down to get it to click. This scope is on a hard recoiling (double type recoil prevalent to air rifles) side pump air rifle, RWS 52, and it works just fine for the occasional pest control use. The optics are nice and clear all for $60.00.
I think the use of a scope is the issue. If I was going to get a hard kicking magnum and go to a guided hunt in Alaska for thousands of dollars in cost, I would look at a much more expensive optic. But I have a low cost Simmons on my 30-06 that has been on several other guns for the last 8 years and it works just fine, I would see using it on an Alaska hunt as it has worked just fine so far, but I would bring an extra scope or a rifle backup just in case. Which is probably a good idea even with a top of the line Leopold or Zeiss for added insurance, as well.
My guns sit in a safe and are brought to the range regularly, and some see hunting use in good weather, sometimes a little rain, 2-3 times a year. I do have a 4.5 X 14 X 44 Nikon Buckmaster. Is it better than my cheapies? Yes, it is clearer and nice, but for the difference in cost over my Simmons 3 X 9 X 40, I have no problem using the low end equipment.
I am wondering if some/most of the complaints by people on the cheapies is because they knock their scopes agains rocks and trees while hunting? Look at alot of the used hunting guns at the local gunshop, see the worn finish and many dings, scratches, etc? I baby my guns on hunting trips despite doing alot of hard cross country hikes through swamps, undergrowth, rocky terrain, and they look excellent after years of use.
Just my experience and success on the cheapie scopes. :-)
