I've been looking at scopes and shit, and I've noticed

It is a scam, save your money for something that can hold a zero

as long as you don't go in with high expectations, or any expectations other than junk, it's your money dude.

maybe you might get lucky and get a winner, but the odds are certainly not in your favour, especially with magnified optics.

Don't do it bro

My friend bought a brand new at 15 last year and spent all his money on the tacticool shit and got one of those scope from amazon for like 260 bucks he ended up regretting it because it wouldn't zero and he was the laughing stock of the range when they saw him use a 1400 dollar DD rifle but a cheap ass scope.

>>33449596
Airshit tier. Literally the worst possible optics you can get.
Anything under $300 is almost guaranteed to be of dubious quality.
There's a reason most decent scope you see used on big game rifles or in combat situation run $600-$3000+.

>>33449596

If you're going to buy chinkshit, do it from a company that provides a good warranty like Trinity Force or Sightmark.

Trinity Force offers a similar bundle to what you're looking for.

>>33449656
>>33449660
>>33449639
>>33449621

Yeah, that's about what I was figuring. Deals like that are always too good to be true.

>>33449630

That's what I was figuring- if I end up with a sudden windfall of money, I might buy one on a whim, just on the off-chance that it'd end up being useful.

>>33449596
Didn't you post this last week? When we told you that you were looking at pure junk?

>>33449596
You really get what you pay for in optics land, especially with Chinese Optics. In chinese culture something inexpensive is expected to be cheaply made, it's true with all things made in China. Even products intended for domestic use.

>>33449696

Yea but if you pay Chinese make a good product.

I have a fake Burris AR scope that was more expensive than typical chinkshit prism scopes and the quality is telling. Quite literally could pass as an actual Burris and it's handled the abuse of up to .308 without issue.

I can tell you though, the biggest problem is that the chinese use whatever metal they can get cheapest to make this shit. so you end up with sights that use really soft aluminum, screws that literally come apart with any torquing, etc

>>33449691

Different guy, I'm afraid. I didn't see that thread.

>>33449690
Just don't buy one man, it'll never be useful. You can spend the $200 on something you'll actually use.

>>33449727
I agree entirely. Imo a big part of the problem is the ethics of some Chinese manufacturers, if a product is intended for a foreign market you can guarantee they didn't use the best possible resources of any kind.
Some Chinese companies, like Celestron, do deliver a decent product at a Chinese price. Tho it is much easier to make a decent cheap telescope opposed to a riflescope, which has critical internal mechanisms that render the product useable apon failure.

>>33449596
Anyone have any other optics questions? Optics thread?

>>33449596
>lasers
>ever

>>33449656
True that. Occasionally you'll find some Vortex stuff on sale for a good price though. I've got a SPARC 2 that I've used on my AR for a couple of years. Seems fine to me still.

>>33449596
Op check this out it isn't cheap but it will give what you are looking for minus the Lazer. My buddy bought one and I liked it so much I bought one for my self

https://youtu.be/TUL6KJ7QsuI

>>33449691
>>33449749
was it a truglo red dot sight? if it was, that was me :^)

>>33449596
i own a bushnell trs-25 and a vortex spitfire 3x.

thats what i own, so speaking for anything else would be arrogant of me.

but yeah those combos are generally trash

>>33451016

Looks nice, and I've heard people bring up Leupold before in a positive light. I'll look into it.