View Full Version : About scopes...

02-28-2012, 07:45 PM
I have these scopes:

1. NCStar 4X32 Pistol Scope/Blue Lens/Rings

2. NCStar 3-9X42 Compact-Red and Green Illuminated P4 Sniper/Green Lens/Quick Release

3. BARSKA 3-9x42 IR Contour Dual Color Reticle 30/30 IR Riflescope

The 3-9x42 scopes, while they are nice, don't feed my need for raw power!! I ordered a 4-16x50. It will be huge.

The 4x32 pistol scope is hard to use. The eye relief is really long which you need when holding a pistol with extended arms, but still narrow, so if you don't have it in just the right spot, things are fuzzy or cut off by a half-circle of black. And, I can't hold a pistol steady at arm's length to save my life, so the reticle is kinda all over the place and I just have to pull the trigger when I think it's more or less on target, which defeats the purpose of a scope.

I tried all three scopes I have while laying "prone" and found that the pistol scope, which I thought would be best for this, was actually worst for this. It worked out well in that I could stretch out my arms in front of me to work the gun, but I found it extremely difficult and painful (my neck) to acquire the target, which was higher than me, through the scope. I might work OK for something that was lower than me, but then there would be bipod issues. The Barska scope, with its medium-length eye relief and large eyepiece lens, worked well for this position.

I tried all three scopes with the gun resting on a table and me bending over/crouching down. The "Sniper" was good for getting my face close to the gun, but with its short eye relief and small eyepiece lens you have to get positioned just right to use it, and it has a tendency to try and cut out your field of vision. The Barska was best overall for that position too.

Holding them up (no bipod) produces about the same results as standing the bipod on a table. The "Sniper" one is good if I'm holding the gun up close and personal, but if I am extending it a little, which is more comfortable (less crampy), the Barska is the way to go.

So far, the best scope I have used is the BARSKA 3-9x42 IR Contour Dual Color Reticle 30/30 IR Riflescope, which has a good distance for the eye relief, has a good size for the eyepiece lens, is brightest and clearest, and has the least distortion. Also, I find that the 30/30 reticle is easiest to see the target through. The others get in the way more than they help. I understand that the crossbars on the mil-plex are for adjusting your shooting on the fly without dialing the adjustments, but I can still do that with the 30/30 reticle, without having the crossbars.

So I figured I'll just go up to that scope's big brother. The 50mm objective lens will hopefully capture enough light to use all of the 16x magnification. At the indoor range, with the 42mm objective, things get a little dark/blurry higher than 7x.

I'm struggling to think of some scenario in which this 4x32 pistol scope might still be useful.
Fortunately/unfortunately, the pistol scope isn't worth much to resell on eBay. The "fortunately" part of that is that I didn't pay much for it to begin with.

MW surveyor
02-29-2012, 03:50 AM
I have a 2x Millet that I use from time to time on either the Ruger Single Six or my S&W 422. You are right about having to get your eye in just the right place and any shakiness gets magnified a whole bunch. Can't imagine how bad the 4X would be but it has to be 4 times worse than the 2X.

Put the red dot on the Single Six to reduce the effects of the shakiness.

02-29-2012, 05:16 AM
I once built up a Beretta Model 76 - removing its aluminum hood and building a new one out of a huge piece of stainless bar stock. The thing weighed just over 5lbs. That pistol had a 4x scope, and I used it for "bench rest" pistol shooting - informal shooting of clay birds at 100 yards. It did well.

Hard to say, but I think a good ol' compact red-dot would be better for the vast majority of scope use on pistols

02-29-2012, 10:11 AM
These are good suggestions for fixing one problem: Shooting accurately with a target pistol when the scope is too shaky.

But I have the opposite problem: What to do with a scope that I have decided is too shaky. Maybe I will sell it on eBay after all.


I got a new target pistol for longer range stuff, and will be putting a better riflescope on it for that.

I decided to use the target pistol for closer-in shooting, and will probably use its built-in sights for that. Maybe I'll get a red dot eventually.

02-29-2012, 01:21 PM
Never liked the eye relief on NcStar scopes. Had one of their rifle scopes and returned it because eye relief was less than 2 inches. I am more partial to Bushnell, Burris and the new Redfield line. Quality glass makes the image crisp and clear and the eye relief is more forgiving. Work better at dusk and dawn, too.

03-01-2012, 05:36 PM
Update: Today I got the Barska 4-16x50 scope.

It was VOLUMINOUS. And LONG. I mean, I read the specs, so intellectually I knew how big it was going to be, but that did not prepare me for the enormity of it.

Anyway, took it to the range, and three things became apparent:

1. The eye relief was pickier than the Barska 3-9x42 that is on the 15/22.
2. It did not seem to me that 16x zoom was really that much better than 9x.
3. The elevation adjustment seems to be completely ineffective. I rolled that dial all of the way to one end of the threads, fired a few, and then rolled it all of the way to the other end, with no noticeable change.

If the elevation adjustment had worked, I probably would have kept the scope, big as it is and with the more finicky eye relief. But, since it was impossible to zero it in (defective), I sent it back.

I think really that in this price range ($75), the Barska 3-9x42 IR 30/30 model is the best that can be had.