Can’t seem to set my sights on a first .22LR Scope - thoughts?

[RocketMan]

Hello, and please forgive my entry level knowledge around firearms.

I moved into the rural country in Canada about 3 yrs ago and found a need for some firearms as tools. I opted for a .270, a Remington 870 and a 22LR without a scope. I felt that just a plain simple 22 (Savage mk2) would be best to learn on and use for close up small varmints and such. I have a good Leupold 3-9 on the .270 and thankfully I seem to be able to hit what I shoot at. But I quickly discovered it is a pretty big caliber for small beasties.

The problem with the 22LR - I have aging vision and really struggle sighting anything. If I wear glasses I can see the ball at the barrel end, but I can’t see the target. If I look at the target, which I cant see great, I can’t see the ball at all. As a result it is pretty stressful to use as I seem to have developed a “squint & hope” technique. This happened with a skunk, a marmot and a very sick calf. I try to get close and even then it is tough. I feel I owe these creatures a better plan.

I have spent a fair bit getting set up and dont wish to buy a different caliber rifle and am hoping to get better use from the 22. It is time to put optics on it but I need advice regarding what. My 3x9 is not good to shoot up close. The field of view is too small really and by the time I find the target it moves. Also I can’t really focus well.

I do want a glass optic and not a red dot or other. I also am hopeful that for a close up 10-100’ item I can go to a lower price range? I would love to drop a bundle on a new high end scope, but I have a razor habit to consider!

I looked through a 1.5-4.0 scope and am thinking that seems like it would work. But I honestly have no idea how to fix up this Savage so I can handle the creatures that want to take over my spot.

Thanks for any help or suggestions.

 

[ColtRevolver]

Leupold 2-7x33 rimfire would be my choice. Good glass is never a waste of money. Budget glass is often a disappointment. Besides the great lifetime warranty, a Leupold also gets you a scope that retains its value well. Used Leupolds are easy to sell.

I used a 2-7 rimfire for a few years. When I decided to sell it, the new ones had gone up a bit. I ended up selling mine for what I paid for it.

 

[Omega48]

Never used them with long guns, but they work extremely well with pistols at 25 meters. Gehmann shooting lenses. They allow to keep everything in focus, both iron sights and the target.
Probably you can make you own with some tape, to try before buying a set.

 

[ric164]

+1 for the Leupold 2-7x33 rimfire.

 

[Whisky]

I went with Bushnell and haven’t been disappointed.

 

[ColtRevolver]

Looks like that Bushnell has been discontinued

 

[RocketMan]

Leupold 2-7x33 rimfire would be my choice. Good glass is never a waste of money. Budget glass is often a disappointment. Besides the great lifetime warranty, a Leupold also gets you a scope that retains its value well. Used Leupolds are easy to sell.

I used a 2-7 rimfire for a few years. When I decided to sell it, the new ones had gone up a bit. I ended up selling mine for what I paid for it.

You make a great case for buying a good unit rather than go budget. I will likely have this rifle for a while and being ‘disappointed’ with the scope for years might suck. And I guess with vision being my concern, a quality one should give me the best chance to get it right. You are right on resale too. The used Leupold I put on my Remington 700 just seems to work for me and perhaps a portion of my confidence with that rifle belongs to the scope. Thanks, you helped push me away from budget. And I think I also like the idea of Leupold.

Can I ask then why you would pick 2-7 rather than 1.5-4? I have a hard time understanding the difference. It is like my early days with Gillettes and I struggled seeing the difference bw a Slim and a Fatboy (and once it sunk in, they are quite different).

And rings are confusing as a newbie - I’m not sure how to select rings for a Leupold on to a Savage Mk2. (I only have the original sliding sight and a ball And drilled holes) And that darn price issue - rings seem to have quite a price range. I do like quality stuff, but is there some spending room with rings?

 

[RocketMan]

Never used them with long guns, but they work extremely well with pistols at 25 meters. Gehmann shooting lenses. They allow to keep everything in focus, both iron sights and the target.
Probably you can make you own with some tape, to try before buying a set.



View attachment 1803197

Those are very cool! I’m going to read up on these to find out what they are all about. Look a bit like a Terminator in those! My concern with these lay with my ability to be organized enough to use them when the heat is on. I forgot my ear protection last week and needed two shots with the .270. Now I understand ringing ears. The first hour or two I was nervous because my R ear was making scratchy noises. I am hard to train! I’m pretty sure I should solve it using something screwed on if I can! I will check this out though. Thank you for posting it.

 

[RocketMan]

I went with Bushnell and haven’t been disappointed.
View attachment 1803227

Thank you. This is an important piece that folks seem to get good function out of Bushnell. This scope, if still selling, would be better than half the price of a Leupold. And if I found one used, it would be a significant saving. I wouldn’t want this much power I don’t think? Similar to my 3x9 which doesnt work for what I need. Could certainly look for lower power though.

 

[ric164]

You make a great case for buying a good unit rather than go budget. I will likely have this rifle for a while and being ‘disappointed’ with the scope for years might suck. And I guess with vision being my concern, a quality one should give me the best chance to get it right. You are right on resale too. The used Leupold I put on my Remington 700 just seems to work for me and perhaps a portion of my confidence with that rifle belongs to the scope. Thanks, you helped push me away from budget. And I think I also like the idea of Leupold.

Can I ask then why you would pick 2-7 rather than 1.5-4? I have a hard time understanding the difference. It is like my early days with Gillettes and I struggled seeing the difference bw a Slim and a Fatboy (and once it sunk in, they are quite different).

And rings are confusing as a newbie - I’m not sure how to select rings for a Leupold on to a Savage Mk2. (I only have the original sliding sight and a ball And drilled holes) And that darn price issue - rings seem to have quite a price range. I do like quality stuff, but is there some spending room with rings?

The 2-7x33 is a rimfire scope. That means that the parallax is set to 60 yards on a Leupold. The 1.5-4x20 has a parallax that is set to 150 yards. Leupold also makes a 4x28 fixed power rimfire scope. I have the 2-7 and the 4x and they are both great scopes.

 

[ColtRevolver]

Can I ask then why you would pick 2-7 rather than 1.5-4? I have a hard time understanding the difference. It is like my early days with Gillettes and I struggled seeing the difference bw a Slim and a Fatboy (and once it sunk in, they are quite different).

And rings are confusing as a newbie - I’m not sure how to select rings for a Leupold on to a Savage Mk2. (I only have the original sliding sight and a ball And drilled holes) And that darn price issue - rings seem to have quite a price range. I do like quality stuff, but is there some spending room with rings?

A 2-7 is the minimum power range I would choose. The sweetspot for shooting a .22lr is about 50 yards. I like shooting tiny objects with mine. Sometimes 4x just ain't enough.....I shoot rimfire benchrest twice a week. I use 36x scopes for that.

Rings? I prefer Burris Signature Zee rings. They have a polymer insert that prevents the marring of the scopes finish. In your case, you will have to figure out what kind of base your rifle takes and then buy the style base that fits the rings.

 

[nortac]

I'm a big fan of the Burris Signature rings. You can also buy the asymetric inserts and be able to correct all kinds of alignment issues. I agree with the choice of a quality 2-7X scope for a general purpose .22 LR rifle. I've learned that skimping on optics ALWAYS leaves you wishing you had not. Skimping on rings is also a bad idea.

 

[jkingrph]

The 2x7 and 4x Leupold rimfire scopes are good. I find the crosshairs a little too fine for my taste but that's just me. I still use a couple. Leupold also makes or made a 3-9 EFR(extended focus range) adjustable focus objective that will focus down as close as 10 yards or out to infinity. Downside is that it is larger and heavier than the regular rimfire scopes. I just set up a CZ Lux in .22 mag. have not shot it yet. I wanted the 3-9 but too large, the rear sight makes the scope sit too far back. I have a few other options. One is a 2-7 rimfire, the other is a straight tube 1.5-5 which focuses well across the ranges I will use, and last is an old 2.5x Weaver J model that was restored with a post and crosshair reticule. I have them all set up in Warne QD rings for a llmm dovetail mount and weather permitting hope to try it out in a couple of days.

 

[Omega48]

A 2-7 is the minimum power range I would choose. The sweetspot for shooting a .22lr is about 50 yards. I like shooting tiny objects with mine. Sometimes 4x just ain't enough.....I shoot rimfire benchrest twice a week. I use 36x scopes for that.

Rings? I prefer Burris Signature Zee rings. They have a polymer insert that prevents the marring of the scopes finish. In your case, you will have to figure out what kind of base your rifle takes and then buy the style base that fits the rings.

View attachment 1803446

I like Burris, but for my CZ 455 I used self centering scope rings. They are specifically made for rimfire and allow to align the scope perfectly with the barrel.

High: BKL-257 - 200 Series 1'' Scope Mounts - BKLTech.com - https://www.bkltech.com/BKL-6-Long-Dovetail-Rings-High-p/bkl-257h.htm

Low: BKL-257 - 200 Series 1'' Scope Mounts - BKLTech.com - https://www.bkltech.com/BKL-6-Long-Dovetail-Rings-p/bkl-257.htm

 

[RocketMan]

The 2-7x33 is a rimfire scope. That means that the parallax is set to 60 yards on a Leupold. The 1.5-4x20 has a parallax that is set to 150 yards. Leupold also makes a 4x28 fixed power rimfire scope. I have the 2-7 and the 4x and they are both great scopes.

That is perfect, thanks. I knew a little about this but your pointing it out made it come into focus, thanks. Clearly a rimfire scope intended for the shorter range makes a lot of sense and I wasn’t paying attention to that.

It sounds like a 2-7*33 would be a fine choice for me.

 

[Lightcs1776]

You make a great case for buying a good unit rather than go budget. I will likely have this rifle for a while and being ‘disappointed’ with the scope for years might suck. And I guess with vision being my concern, a quality one should give me the best chance to get it right. You are right on resale too. The used Leupold I put on my Remington 700 just seems to work for me and perhaps a portion of my confidence with that rifle belongs to the scope. Thanks, you helped push me away from budget. And I think I also like the idea of Leupold.

Can I ask then why you would pick 2-7 rather than 1.5-4? I have a hard time understanding the difference. It is like my early days with Gillettes and I struggled seeing the difference bw a Slim and a Fatboy (and once it sunk in, they are quite different).

And rings are confusing as a newbie - I’m not sure how to select rings for a Leupold on to a Savage Mk2. (I only have the original sliding sight and a ball And drilled holes) And that darn price issue - rings seem to have quite a price range. I do like quality stuff, but is there some spending room with rings?

I always bought cheap until recent years and have always been disappointed unless it was a used item in good shape, but that is what was in the budget. If you can swing it, it is almost always better to go middle of the price range for a good experience. High end is nice, but not typically a big improvement over the middle priced items.

 

[RocketMan]

A 2-7 is the minimum power range I would choose. The sweetspot for shooting a .22lr is about 50 yards. I like shooting tiny objects with mine. Sometimes 4x just ain't enough.....I shoot rimfire benchrest twice a week. I use 36x scopes for that.

Rings? I prefer Burris Signature Zee rings. They have a polymer insert that prevents the marring of the scopes finish. In your case, you will have to figure out what kind of base your rifle takes and then buy the style base that fits the rings.

The extra power sounds useful. I think I’m sold on a Rimfire Leupold and the 2-7 seems right, thanks. I have seen the Burris bits and others seem to like them as well. I think what I will do - I have found a spot to order the scope from, they are a big gun vendor out of Quebec up here. He has offered free shipping, and I will take it further and supply him my model and serial # and see if he can recommend a matching rings and base (I didnt realize I needed a base till you wrote that! I thought the rings just bolt on, but I see it needs a base like a weaver sort of plate or some such.) I don’t want to get it too wrong so Ill see if the seller can fix it.

Sorry to keep pounding you with questions, but I see there are low/med/hi rings too - good lord - can you comment on that? So many bloody variables. Can I install this myself? I don’t really want to hire a gunsmith, but there is quite a bit to this it seems. Getting the reticle level, and …..

 

[RocketMan]

I like Burris, but for my CZ 455 I used self centering scope rings. They are specifically made for rimfire and allow to align the scope perfectly with the barrel.

High: BKL-257 - 200 Series 1'' Scope Mounts - BKLTech.com - https://www.bkltech.com/BKL-6-Long-Dovetail-Rings-High-p/bkl-257h.htm

Low: BKL-257 - 200 Series 1'' Scope Mounts - BKLTech.com - https://www.bkltech.com/BKL-6-Long-Dovetail-Rings-p/bkl-257.htm

Thanks! Those look like they would work too. This information is very helpful - much appreciated. I am going to ask about these as well.

 

[RocketMan]

I always bought cheap until recent years and have always been disappointed unless it was a used item in good shape, but that is what was in the budget. If you can swing it, it is almost always better to go middle of the price range for a good experience. High end is nice, but not typically a big improvement over the middle priced items.

I am grateful for several folks having this message - don’t cheap out I think I could call it. And in my case, useful, because I often default to less cost and not many times has it really worked out. And, this is an important tool for me. @nortac had a great way to frame it as a “general purpose 22LR”. Yes that is what I intend, and “skimping on optics” is staring to definately sound like a poor plan.

Ok, I’m going to go with the Leupold 2-7*33 and darn it all, rather than go cheap I am going to buy a brand new one! All my shooting gear is used, so screw it, something shiny to unbox for once. (Darn enablers, just like in the razor sections of the Forum!)

It may take a little time but I’ll post back here when I make some progress.

Thank you very much folks. The Canadian skunks will thank you!

 

[ColtRevolver]

That Leupold only has a 33mm objective. Low rings will work. You generally want your objective as close to the barrel as possible.

Mounting the bases and rings is easy. They usually come with the Torx or Allen wrench you need. You probably want to put Loctite or fingernail polish on the base screws. Loctite/fingernail polish on the ring clamp screws is often debated. It won't hurt, but usually isn't needed because there is tension in them.

Leveling the crosshairs is easy enough. You can eyeball it until you are happy or use tools. I use a small bubble level and plumb bob. I put the level on the top of the rifles receiver and level it. I hang a plumb bob off in the distance and turn the scope until the vertical crosshair is parallel with the plumb line. If I mount a scope at the range, I use a target frame to level the scope. I know the legs on the frame are plumb and the cross braces are level, because I built them...lol