Hand Gun Scopes

[Tony]

Which hand gun scopes do you recommend for general use: load development, informal target, plinking, etc?
I'm in my mid 60's and can still see the irons but that will not last forever. Is there a good quality pistol scope available at reasonable cost? While I do not object to paying $400 for a Leupold, something less expensive would be desirable if I had to buy 4 or 5 scopes in a short time span.

I am interested in good optics and mechanical characteristics. Most of my shooting will likely be informal bench rest for groups. I do not anticipate shooting a lot of high intensity loads. In .32 H&R, .38 Spl, .44 Spl. and .45 AR my anticipated loads would develop +/- 800 fps in a 4" or 6" revolver barrel.

Thanks and regards,

Tony

 

[Ian]

I prefer zero magnification, and "red dot" type sights for handguns. Burris makes some decent, mid-priced "reflex" sights which are lightweight, compact, and effective, or for full ring mounts and high recoil I like the Ultra Dot sights. I'd stay away from the cheapo reflex sights (<$100) for all but the most informal use.

 

[Brad]

A low magnification scope will be best for shorter ranges. A red dot, like Ian mentioned, is never a bad idea either.
I have a 2x Leupold that is quite nice but for 100 yard work I prefer my Weaver 2.5-8x scopes. The extra magnification makes eye relief more critical and all wobbles and shakes are magnified but for being able to really see an aim point it can't be beat.

Off hand and short range call for lower magnification, longer range bench work is best with more magnification.

 

[RicinYakima]

Being a cheapo type of guy, I have been using the older 1" Leupold pistol scopes for years. Most pawn shops seem to have the 2.5X for about $150. That is plenty for bench work at 50 yards and useable in the field two handed. At one time I have several variable Burris contender scopes, but I never used more than 3X, so they went away. As I approach 70, my grip and shakes make higher power harder to use. The old Leupold Gilmore 1" was a great red-dot, but you don't find them anymore. I have one still working on an AR that I really like. Like Ian, I don't think too much of reflex sights I have used, not any of the cheap ones. Also I have shoot some very good groups with laser sights off the bench, but it takes some practice and cloudy days.

 

[williamwaco]

I like 2x for hunting and 4x for targets and accuracy testing.

I use the Simmons for everything from .22LR to .44Mag.

They are cheap and not the best quality and once I had to send one back because it was faulty on delivery.
They (Cabellas) replaced it with no questions asked.

I have had good service from them.

If you want a variable, I have used the Weaver 2-8X and have good results but never crank it above 4x.

 

[Pistolero]

Nikon scopes are reliable, optically excellent and more affordable than
many. I also have had very good results with Simmons scopes, and they have
a unique internal design with slots in the rigidly end mounted reticle tube
rather than a spherical ball joint. Most cheap scopes have sticky or loose spherical
joints due to cost, so screwing it in solidly, and slotting crossways to make the
tube itself the spring makes a very reliable scope free from crosshair movement
without elevation or windage screw movement. I have not tried a Simmons pistol
scope, so can't speak to that, only rifle. Leupold or Nikon are my pistol scopes, and since
Nikon seems to be the equal in performance at lower price, I lean a bit towards
them.

2-6X Nikon is great, 2X for hunting and 6X for load development. IME, 6x is very
hard to use in the field, but good on a bench for testing ammo.

Bill

 

[9.3X62AL]

I don't recall ever firing a handgun with a scope. The idea is utterly foreign to me. Only 20% of my rifles sport glassware, also. I know I'm in the small minority these days, but to my mind a telescopic sight is a trade-off of enhancements for limitations that are very venue-specific. Only one of the deer I've ever taken in 48 years came from a scoped rifle, and both of my handgun-taken deer fell to open sights.

 

[Ben]

Allen,

As long as we can see those open sights, they will work great.

Problem is, what happens when you can't see them anymore ?

 

[Tony]

When shooting bench rest with a red dot what type of sight picture/aim point do you use. For example, when I shoot bench rest with a conventional scope and an IBS target, I aim at one corner of the square. Let's say I'm using the bottom left corner of the square. I place the intersection of my cross hair on the bottom left corner, the upper portion of the vertical cross hair snugs up to the left of the square and the right portion of my horizontal cross hair snugs up to the bottom of the square. The scope is adjusted so that bullet impact does not obliterate my aim point. I can shoot four groups on the score target and four groups on the sighter target for a total of eight groups on each piece of paper. For informal work I like to use the IBS 300 yard target because the square is 3". This provides a good aim point and works well with hunting rifle/scope combinations at 100 yards. Tony

 

[Rick]

A couple of things I cannot do. 1, shoot groups with a red dot and 2, shoot anything with a 2X scope.

I haven't found a red dot yet that's small enough to not cover up the entire bulls eye of the target making holding a consistent aim point impossible. The red dots will get me on target and I have them on a couple of revolvers but groups? Not so much. Many a 2X scope I've tried to use and every one I've looked through or attempted to use made the target appear twice as far away and half as big.

For revolver, XP-100, T/C Contender etc when grouping from the bench out to 200 meters I use a Burris 12X.

 

[9.3X62AL]

Not an argument AGAINST the idea at all. My eyesight has never been especially acute. I can still see well enough to place rounds on evildoers and malefactors on 2 feet to 100 yards with my carry guns 100% of the time with their OEM irons. Once that becomes problematic, I'll just get closer to make hits or create distance to enhance safety. None too creative, I know--but that's me.

 

[John]

I have a couple of Burris 2x, 2 Trascho Japanese 4x and a Burris variable on my contender bbls. Older Weavers were decent and should still be. A close friend was almost 100 % committed to no oriental products until he scoped his Super Redhawk. He blew threw three Leopolds before he went to a Simmons to handle recoil.

 

[Winelover]

Red dot's or reflexes, for 50 - 60 yards, or less. Conventional scopes for longer distances, providing adequate light and a solid rest. My hunting handguns wear red dots or reflexes. The smaller the dot, the more precise for aiming. Keep in mind, the dot size will vary depending on how far it is from your eye. For instance a 2 minute dot is suppose cover 2 inches at 100 yards, but they don't tell you at what eye relief. Hold that sight up close to your eye and it will cover up less of the target at 100 yards than it will when mounted on a handgun, at arms length.

 

[freebullet]

I just started this journey last summer. With a nikon xr2-8, burris 3-12, & an aimpoint.
The aimpoint w/2 moa dot is nice & very fast at target acquisition. Not so great at shooting groups & disadvantaged at range. I will very likely use this for close range hunting at some point.
The nikon is fantastic. At 8x from a bench it's like having a rifle scope. At 4-5x it is nice for offhand shooting & I feel like I'll sight it in for hunting in that setting & use higher power for load development.
The burris is nice but, it's the size of a rifle scope honestly. At 12x you can't hold it still at all. It is a very nice setup for longer ranges from the bench.
The higher the power the harder correct eye alignment becomes.
Wouldn't choose the burris over the nikon based on using both.
I would stick with open sights over the cheapo red dots. The aimpoint dot will go dim enough to not have any star burst/exaggerated dot size due to brightness and the battery lasts forever. I sight the top of the dot on at 30yds & wouldn't shoot that much past 50yd expecting to do more than ring a large gong.

 

[Rick]

Yeah, the Burris 3x12 isn't exactly small, not too good for your carry gun. I have two of them and they are used exclusively for bench shooting & working up loads. Here it is on a 9 inch FA 357.



And yes, the higher the power setting the more critical the eye relief becomes but for long range grouping and load development not a real problem. Hunting with it at 12X would make acquiring a sight picture mighty tough.