I know that's an obvious statement but I put together a cheap rifle, a NEF Sportster .22cal and a big ol' Weaver K 12 with a fine target reticle.





I have friends that think a CZ 22 with a Wal-Mart 4X scope is a fine set-up for target/hunting. I maintain that a good scope, even on a cheap rifle will shoot better.
This little H&R has taken many a' Starling and Grackle with Eley 40 gr standard velocity ammo, at distances out to 50 yrds & farther.

I think a lot of shooters buy a good gun and then skimp on a scope and then complain that the gun "won't shoot". I set this up to let them shoot a relatively inexpensive 22 ( $150 retail ) and a good old scope that cost me about what the gun did, to prove that it ain't all about the rifle.

Now it's not an Anschutz, but the point is that a currently mfg. gun, even a cheap one, can be very accurate with good glass on it.

What do you think?

GF

I agree 100 percent. All of my .22 rifles have good quality glass and rings on them. A nice crisp trigger also helps.
Even my air rifle has a high quality scope.

__________________
Regards, Ron
USASA 1965/69

I use leupold on everything from 22 on up. You only have to buy a scope once per gun if you get a good one.

While good optics on a 22lr are nice to have I'm not so sure I would consider it a necessity. On something that has some recoil then quality optics are a must, but .22s are not near as abusive to the scope, and a nice mid range will often do very well. Also with the effective range of a .22 being far less than that of a centerfire supreme clarity at 300 meters becomes less of an issue. I actually have a low end Phillipino Simmons 44mag on my good .22 that has done an admirable job for the 6 years it's been riding the rifle. I've often considered upgrading it but since it's working just fine I'm not going to fix something that isn't broken.

Kimber .22 Hunter w/Simmons 6x20x44


A few 100 yard groups from the nice rifle with a cheap scope.

__________________
Regards,
Guy-Harold Smith II