BSA panther scopes

[Justgotpaid]

The BSA panther line of scopes claims it has fully multi coated lenses. Anyone use BSA? Will they hold up to big caliber rifles and hold their zero?

[C. Schutte]

Justgotpaid,

I promise that I am not being a smart you-know-what here but I can't ever resist these kinds of threads so please don't take this the wrong way. The fact that you have to ask the question should provide the answer. Let me answer it by saying that a Kia automobile also has a full coat of paint on the exterior. So does Luxus or BMW.

Your question is never asked of Leupold, Nikon, Burris and other quality scopes. Why take a chance on a scope that feels the need to impose the face of a cat on it. Fully coated means nothing if the internal workings are garbage, the degree of engineering is suspect and the quality of glass is poor. You should also know that the cross hairs do not have to break off and fall to the bottom of the scope housing in order to fail. You may not realize that the scope is not holding zero; you may think that your rifle just shoots a 3" group. I am not saying that these bad things will happen with a BSA, just that I know that they won't with a good scope.

If you want a reliable piece of equipment for a reasonable price I would recommend looking at the entry level Nikon or Leupold scopes. They will hold zero. They won't give you any trouble and if by some fluke they did you can rest assured that Leupold or Nikon will stand behind their product.

I must admit that I do not own a BSA scope so my opinion is strictly based on my belief that well made scopes from dependable scope makers with excellent reputations are worth doing business with because that repuation was earned over many years by many hunters and shooters. If you are putting a scope on a rifle with some hefty recoil, consider Leupold because they set the bar for holding zero many years ago. Their entry level and VXII scopes are an excellent choice. Nikon will do the same thing for just a little less money. If you are going to spend over $300.00 I would suggest something else because Leupold is a little too expensive with their top line product. They are excellent scopes but for the money a Conquest would provide better optics. thanks................chs

[jimbires]

I do not own a BSA but I have seen a few . I shoot handgun 50 feet indoors through the winter months . A guy was having trouble with his good red dot so he bought a BSA to use while his good one was getting repaired . He used it one night and took it back . he said it was to hard to see through . I was at an outdoor range one day last summer a guy was there shooting a 9mm handgun with a BSA holographic (spelling??) sight . he was telling me that he just picked up his gun and was giving it a try . he shot about a box of bullets and the lens pooped out of the sight . I have read about problems with the "sweet 17" scopes too . my opinion on optics is you get what you pay for . save some money and get a good one . Jim

[justonemike]

I own two catseye scopes Ive had no problems with them whatsoever and I believe the catseye is a step down from the panther panthers are supposed to be better but if I could afford to I would stay with luepold just a better glass all around bsa is just good enuff if yur on a budget

[Phsnthntr]

Based on my experience with BSA would I put one on a 338 WM and up to use on an expensive hunt for something that could bite back? No. But I wouldn't buy a Leupold VXII either. I think that a Leupold would be a good choice for a heavy recoiling rifle, and being durable is the most important thing in the heavy recoiling calibers. My experience with Leupolds tells me that the law of diminishing returns sets in quite quickly with the price you pay for additional features. Leupold has great customer service that is second to none. You pay for that service up front in the cost of their scopes. In my experience the Elite series of scopes from Bushnell offers the best balance of durability, light transmission, and optical clarity at the price point they sell for.

This is my experience with BSA. I bought a BSA Contender a couple of years ago to put on a light recoiling rifle. It was a low cost temporary fix until I could afford something better. Before I bought it I asked a bunch of questions to the salesperson at Cabelas. One question was, how many were being returned because of failure? He recommended the Contender because he said that they were getting very few returns, and some other scopes costing twice as much were having a lot more problems. I've now had this scope on several Encore barrels including a 375 H&H. It isn't particularly bright compared to my Nikon Monarch UCC, but few scopes are. I like my Bushnell Banner 4-12 x 40 AO better because it is brighter and a little clearer. I've had both the BSA and Bushnell in some pretty adverse weather conditions and neither have failed. They have both held up to the recoil of a 375 H&H and 338 Ultra Mag. Granted they were only on those rifles for a hundred or so rounds not thousands, but the Contender and Banner had no problems holding a zero. I bought a VX I Leupold because I wasn't convinced that the VX II and III aren't overpriced. I'm not tempted to go higher up the Leupold model scale. I've never looked through any Leupold and thought wow is this bright and clear. But Leupold is the gold standard in customer service, an honor you don't get if your product never fails. If you shop around enough you will realize that there are a lot, and I mean a lot, of refurbished Nikons on the market. I don't think that you can get better combination of clarity and brightness for the price as you get from a Nikon Monarch UCC, but I worry about the durability. I know a guy that got rid of all his Zeiss glass and replaced it with Nikon Buckmasters because it was so much brighter and clearer. If I was going to hunt in the rain forests of SE Alaska I would put a Bushnell 4200 Elite on the rifle and pack a prezeroed Leupold Rifleman as a back-up scope, only because accidents happen. If you want a temporary fix so you can get shooting with your heavy recoiling rifle then the BSA Panther would probably be OK until you can get something with a better reputation for durability. If it fails right away you can always return it and get something else.

[Coyote Freak]

I have a BSA 3-12 power scope on my Ruger 10/22 and I love it. I can shoot pops easily from 100 yards. I think that it would be an awesome scope on a big game rifle. The clearity is great and it was onsale for 60 bucks originally 150. I don't know if I would have paid that much for it but it's a overall good scope.

[Mark]

I'm asking an honest question here.

Are the BSA lenses made of glass, or injection molded polycarbonate?

Mark

[iduckhunt]

BSA states Panther model scopes have "camera quality glass". Personally, I would look to spend my money on a better know product. There were times when I thought I was saving money and ended up spending more in the long run, and buying cheap scopes stands out as one of those times.

I have a new Bushnell Elite 4200 and the quality really stands out but it should given its cost. Good glass, coatings, quality materials, and workmenship all cost money. As they say . . . you get what you pay for.

For the $150 - $200 you would pay for the BSA I feel you could do better with Bushnell or Nikon, maybe a closeout Leupold.

[citori]

iduckhunt has it right, there are other better choices for the price. My first experience with BSA copes was on air rifles and they were some of the best for that purpose at that time. I used that experience to buy a red dot type sight. That was a waste of $20, it is very dark , even on the brightest days, and the adjustments are not consistent; sometimes one click barely moves the point of impact, other times it moves nearly an inch. I'm a slow learner and later bought a 2.5x pistol scope to use on a 30/30 Marlin I converted to a Scout rifle. I had heat particular scope go to pieces in less than 200 rounds. I will say BSA did great warranty work and sent me a new scope in less than 10 days. That scope is now sitting on a Browning Buckmark and has been adequate there. Clarity leaves a little to be desired but light gathering is sufficient for my use with this gun. For standard gus I have a 3-12x50 that came on a used rifle and first tried it on a .223 that I had recently bought. It worked fine at moderate ranges at midday but first or last light was darker than with the naked eye and the clarity was not all that good once ranges got past 150 yards. This is not acceptable for a coyote gun so I eventually switched this scope to a 17 HMR that I keep on hand for ground squirrels and red squirrels. As they mostly come out in the late morning until the late evening on sunny days, the light gathering of the BSA is adequate. That ranges are no more than 150 yards is also a factor. I have a second 4-16x40AO BSA scope that I picked up on sale that I tossed onto a 10/22 for now. It's optical brightness is not as good as my nephew's Tasco 2.5-10x Tactical scope but I do think the optical quality slightly better. I glued the AO to one postition as any movement of the bell would change the point of impact substantially. If I found one in the $50-$60 range I might spring for one to put on a .22 LR plinker but I would not rely on one for more serious use.
"Multi-coated" is rather misleading, much depends on what material/type of coating is used, not whether all sides are coated. The glass quality is also a factor, there are many different grades and one that is used on a top end Minolta lens is certainly not the same as used on a disposable Kodak. I would also be hesitant trusting the internal mechanism to hold up to repeated, heavy recoil; I have run into problems with a fixed power scope on a light recoiling gun and would suspect even greater likelihood with a variable on something that kicked harder. Maybe I go a lemon but then those who have had success may have found a peach, I can't say for sure. I do know that I do not trust them based on my experiences.

[garrymny]

A few years ago, I lost one of the dust covers off my 10 year old Leupold Vari-X II. I finally decided to call leupold for a replacement today. They are sending one at no charge. Reliability is the number one requirement. Customer service is number two. If your chance is blown on a trophy animal because of a poor quality scope, all the customer service and warranties in the world, won't give you that cahnce again. Go with Leupold or one of the other reputable manufacturers and plan on spending at least $200.

[tddeangelo]

If you want low cost and reliability, look to the Nikon ProStaff lineup or the Leupold VX-I. I prefer the ProStaff, personally, but that's opinion.

If you want to spend serious money (as mentioned before, $300+), give the Zeiss Conquest a serious look.

I argue this point on www.17hmr.net with guys (well, probably kids) all the time. They want the coolest looking, highest magnification scope they can get. The more it looks like it's a "sniper scope", the better. Ick. I mention Nikon, Leupold, Zeiss, and I'm told I spend too much money or don't get enough for my money. Huh. Funny thing is that I spend less on GOOD glass than they do on questionable glass. They worship at the alters of appearances and high magnification for target-shooting.

I do think it's funny when they say "I shot 1.5" at 200 yards" and they needed a 24x to do it. Then I do it with a measly 9x. I'll NEVER understand super-high magnification on a rimfire. NEVER.

Anyway, you can get a 2-7x Nikon ProStaff for right around $100 online or in a Cabela's Bargain Cave. They retail around $130-ish. I've been consistently impressed with the one I put on my .17HMR (3-9x40), and I just bought a 2-7x32 ProStaff for my 12ga. slug barrel for my 870. I would take one over a BSA any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[garrymny]

I have also noticed a large number of refurbished Nikon optics at several major outlets, and I also wonder about the quality since I don't see other manufacturers with alot of refurbished equipment for sale.