TFB Poll: Have you ever spent more on the optics than on the gun?
I have. I am wondering what you all think.
5 Responses to “TFB Poll: Have you ever spent more on the optics than on the gun?”
Leave a Comment
Comment Policy: I reserve the right to remove comments at my discretion. Think of comment threads like a dinner party at someone's house. If you make the party unpleasant for others or me, you won't be invited back. I am happy to tolerate a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but I'm not going to tolerate nastiness, rudeness, trolling, vitriol, or excessive snarkiness toward the author(s) or other commenters. You may make your case passionately, but civility is expected. Please stay on topic and respect the technical nature of this blog.
Spam Filtering: To avoid spam, comments are filtered using Akismet and then manually approved. Do not be alarmed if you comment does not appear instantly. I do not check the spam folder more than once per day.
I have not, but that is only because I spent all of my firearms-related budget on the firearm.
I may yet flop over to “yes”, though…
Kind of, yes. A $200 K-31 with a $70 mount and a $150 scope. With the surplus GP-11 ammo, it shoots better than any other gun I own.
I haven’t yet but I’m about to. I have a K31 I bought several years ago at $130 that I’m going to get a mount for. And I’m considering an Aimpoint for a WASR which would be similar situation.
Almost every time.
Rem700 – .308 w / Zeiss Conquest 6.5x-20x (almost 2:1)
CZ527 – .223 w / Leupold VXIII 6.5-20x (Just barely)
Olympic Arms M-4 – .223 / Trijicon ACOG (almost 2:1)
CZ452 – .22 w / Leupold VXII 3-9x (Close)
It’s easier / cheaper to make a good reliable weapon than it is to make reliable optics.
Whoh. Statistical dead heat.
I haven’t spent more on a scope than a firearm. Yet. Mostly due to limited budget. Given my addiction to gadgets, it’s only a matter of time before I do.