Scopes with the best resale value

[Buzzsaw]

I'm known to buy and sell often. Build a gun / scope, shoot it a bit, decide I want something else, then sell .Vicious cycle but It's an addiction. As far as scopes, which will be easiest to sell at max value. As far as conditions, my stuff is usually in pristine condition.

In this case, I will be buying a scope for a long range F-Class type rifle

 

[swd]

NF Comp. You can find them new $2200-$2300 and $1999 for as new demo’s and they resale around $1900

 

[R.Morehouse]

Sightron 10-50x60......Good scope, won't break the bank and holds its value pretty well.

Regards
Rick

 

[FNSafari]

Scopes with an unlimited time warranty that is transferable.

 

[rijndael]

It's a lot like cars, don't be the guy to buy it new and you'll get a higher % of your investment back when it's time to sell.

 

[joshb]

Sightron 10-50, like R.Moorehouse said. I own 7 or 8 that I bought used. I’ve been watching them rise in value. If I sell any, I might just make $50!

 

[Sandstorm]

Love my Sightrons...even more than my NF Comp.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

Love my Sightrons...even more than my NF Comp.

Is your Sightron an SV? I’m really close to snagging one of them. I like the S3 but I’m really curious about the new glass. I’ve heard amazing things. Also hear the zero stop leaves a little to be desired though. Starting to wonder more and more if beauty is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to glass.

 

[LA50SHOOTER]

Is your Sightron an SV? I’m really close to snagging one of them. I like the S3 but I’m really curious about the new glass. I’ve heard amazing things. Also hear the zero stop leaves a little to be desired though. Starting to wonder more and more if beauty is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to glass.

Glass is "eye-specific" IMO. - The SVSS and the SVSSED are some of my favorites. - I have 5 total and Zero regrets. - Is a step up from the SIII which I also have three 8-32x and two 10-50x. - The only down side on the SVSS & ED is weight as they are heavy and if your a comp. shooter weight is a consideration unless your running HVY gun or Unlimited. - IMO, the SVSSED is up there with the NF 15-55x comp scope and the March High-Master Series scopes. - For European I like IOR Valdada (12-52x Terminator).

 

[Sandstorm]

Glass is "eye-specific" IMO

This...From my experience it all in how your eyes see the target , the Mirage and the different conditions
during a Match. I prefer the Glass in the Sightron SIII that I use and Im in the process of getting the SVSSED
here pretty soon. Dont get me wrong the NF Comp glass is excellent,...its just the eye box is a little less forgiving for me and my application.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

Love my Sightrons...even more than my NF Comp.

You just made my day!
I have 4 SIII’s now although I always admired a NF, just never stepped up to their price point.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

Glass is "eye-specific" IMO. - The SVSS and the SVSSED are some of my favorites. - I have 5 total and Zero regrets. - Is a step up from the SIII which I also have three 8-32x and two 10-50x. - The only down side on the SVSS & ED is weight as they are heavy and if your a comp. shooter weight is a consideration unless your running HVY gun or Unlimited. - IMO, the SVSSED is up there with the NF 15-55x comp scope and the March High-Master Series scopes. - For European I like IOR Valdada (12-52x Terminator).

What about the zero stop? Everything seems to be perfect except that according to reviews. Weight is not a problem for me, if it’s better than S3 glass that’s impressive, I like the parallax dual knob thing, priced a good bit better than nightforce, never heard bad tracking or zero holding stories, I am okay with reticles offered, warranty is great, seems to check all the boxes. Maybe I should just try one....... thanks sir.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

What about the zero stop? Everything seems to be perfect except that according to reviews. Weight is not a problem for me, if it’s better than S3 glass that’s impressive, I like the parallax dual knob thing, priced a good bit better than nightforce, never heard bad tracking or zero holding stories, I am okay with reticles offered, warranty is great, seems to check all the boxes. Maybe I should just try one....... thanks sir.

The new SIII PLR scopes are supposed to have a internal hard stop like a NF.
I have three of the outside siii zero stop that your referring to, and they work fine. They may not be visual appealing to some, and you have to tighten three set screws on the lock ring when you get it set where you want it.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

The new SIII PLR scopes are supposed to have a internal hard stop like a NF.
I have three of the outside siii zero stop that your referring to, and they work fine. They may not be visual appealing to some, and you have to tighten three set screws on the lock ring when you get it set where you want it.

Setting 3 set screws in the threads I have to think is sketchy? Aluminum I’m sure? It’d be great if it was a one time thing but I’m continually changing stuff. It’s a concern to me but maybe I’m overthinking it. Any thoughts?

 

[Kracken McGraw]

Setting 3 set screws in the threads I have to think is sketchy? Aluminum I’m sure? It’d be great if it was a one time thing but I’m continually changing stuff. It’s a concern to me but maybe I’m overthinking it. Any thoughts?

The little set screws are so small and take so little tension, don’t see it to ever be a problem. A call to a Sightron Tech might clear up your question.

 

[LA50SHOOTER]

What about the zero stop? Everything seems to be perfect except that according to reviews. Weight is not a problem for me, if it’s better than S3 glass that’s impressive, I like the parallax dual knob thing, priced a good bit better than nightforce, never heard bad tracking or zero holding stories, I am okay with reticles offered, warranty is great, seems to check all the boxes. Maybe I should just try one....... thanks sir.

I have No experience with a Zero Stop Model. - i have models 27000, 27001 and 27008. - I have also heard that the zero stop model leaves something to be desired regarding the actual turret setting.

 

[Darwin]

That 45x Sightron with ED glass seems to be a good deal. Never looked through more than 32. Curious how often the 45x minimum would come back to bite you.

 

[KY_Windage]

Setting 3 set screws in the threads I have to think is sketchy? Aluminum I’m sure? It’d be great if it was a one time thing but I’m continually changing stuff. It’s a concern to me but maybe I’m overthinking it. Any thoughts?

I have NF's with ZS that I have never even gone to the trouble to set, easy as it is. ZS may be important to the PRS guys, but for me it is a waste of money, because of how I mount my scopes, which is a few MOA above rock-bottom sighted in at 100 yards and my turret cap set to show "0" there. If I crank up 30 moa to shoot LR, I can just look at my turret to see that I am back on the lowest revolution when I crank back down. Or I can just crank down to rock-bottom and back up to "0". I don't need to urgently spin it down to a ZS to get back on at 100.

That said, as interesting as the high-end Sightrons sound, I'm not buying one because I ran out of patience with dot reticles years ago. I mean, they're okay, I can make one work, I just don't see the point, and don't want to put up with "reticle blockage." I want a very thin SFP reticle, and what NF makes seems perfect, whether it is the FCR-1 in the Comp or the MOAR-T in the ATACR.

EYE BOX: A lot of times with my NF's I just keep shooting and adjusting the power "to suit," without looking at the number, and then later when I do look I see that I have been happily shooting at 50X (with the Comp), or at 35x with the 7-35 ATACR. Now, was my "eye box" bad? Yeah, I suppose, but I'm not shooting PRS, I'm sitting at a bench. My NF's have plenty of eye-relief, and that is what matters to me. I don't want to be pulling the trigger when my eye issn't perfectly centered in the scope anyway, do I don't care that the tight eye-box at high mag forces me to do that.

Finally, while I like a heavy setup, I prefer to have most of the weight in the rifle, not in the scope where it is constantly trying to tip the rifle right and left. I can't see going from my 28-oz Comp to a 43-oz Sightron just to get a slightly larger mag range (10-60 over 15-55) and a goofy dual-ring parallax adjustment. I'm sure it is really cool, but it adds weight, no doubt, and I have zero complaints about the single-ring adjustment on my NF's.

I buy a high-end scope to use for years, possibly for the rest of my life. A $200 - 400 price difference is not something I am going to factor in to the selection decision.

 

[J.d. Popkes]

I have NF's with ZS that I have never even gone to the trouble to set, easy as it is. ZS may be important to the PRS guys, but for me it is a waste of money, because of how I mount my scopes, which is a few MOA above rock-bottom sighted in at 100 yards and my turret cap set to show "0" there. If I crank up 30 moa to shoot LR, I can just look at my turret to see that I am back on the lowest revolution when I crank back down. Or I can just crank down to rock-bottom and back up to "0". I don't need to urgently spin it down to a ZS to get back on at 100.

That said, as interesting as the high-end Sightrons sound, I'm not buying one because I ran out of patience with dot reticles years ago. I mean, they're okay, I can make one work, I just don't see the point, and don't want to put up with "reticle blockage." I want a very thin SFP reticle, and what NF makes seems perfect, whether it is the FCR-1 in the Comp or the MOAR-T in the ATACR.

EYE BOX: A lot of times with my NF's I just keep shooting and adjusting the power "to suit," without looking at the number, and then later when I do look I see that I have been happily shooting at 50X (with the Comp), or at 35x with the 7-35 ATACR. Now, was my "eye box" bad? Yeah, I suppose, but I'm not shooting PRS, I'm sitting at a bench. My NF's have plenty of eye-relief, and that is what matters to me. I don't want to be pulling the trigger when my eye issn't perfectly centered in the scope anyway, do I don't care that the tight eye-box at high mag forces me to do that.

Finally, while I like a heavy setup, I prefer to have most of the weight in the rifle, not in the scope where it is constantly trying to tip the rifle right and left. I can't see going from my 28-oz Comp to a 43-oz Sightron just to get a slightly larger mag range (10-60 over 15-55) and a goofy dual-ring parallax adjustment. I'm sure it is really cool, but it adds weight, no doubt, and I have zero complaints about the single-ring adjustment on my NF's.

I buy a high-end scope to use for years, possibly for the rest of my life. A $200 - 400 price difference is not something I am going to factor in to the selection decision.

Good points. Everyone has slightly different needs. There’s some people at least early on reporting tracking and zero holding issues with the comps. Sounds like you aren’t one of them. I just picked up a Mark 5 HD I think I’ll be happy with but looking for another higher end one as well. Lots to consider and I don’t have any to test drive prior to buying. Thanks again for your take.

 

[KY_Windage]

Good points. Everyone has slightly different needs. There’s some people at least early on reporting tracking and zero holding issues with the comps. Sounds like you aren’t one of them.

Nor or any of my dozen or so other shooting buddies who are running them, which includes a fair number of the older ones. I will believe it when I get handed one, and can put it on a base and in rings that I installed.

Sometimes you even see someone claiming to have had two or more Comps in a row that would not track. BS, that guy had a problem with his base or his rings. It is easy to do.