M&P 15-22 optics

[ground chuck]

Suggestions on optics for this? I am new to this all input is welcome, thanks. My daughter shot well using just the iron sights. For example, I'm not sure if I'd like a red dot vs a scope without trying it.

 

[Udon]

Burris Fullfield II 2x-7x-35mm matte Ballistic Plex
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0019FG82O/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_3?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Any Redfield Revenge Rifle Scope
http://www.amazon.com/Redfield-1152...007VFHXWU/ref=psdc27_t2_B007VFHYLU_B007VFHXWU

Burris 3-9x40 Fullfield E1™ Riflescope Plex Reticle Matte
http://www.natchezss.com/brand.cfm?...0 Fullfield E1™ Riflescope Plex Reticle Matte

Leupold® Rifleman® 3-9x40mm
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/leupold-rifleman-3-9x40mm-waterproof-scope.aspx?a=1332935

 

[Dino]

I bought a cheap ACOG replica scope from eBay and I couldn't be happier.
I've had it for about 3 years now and it still holds zero as the day I sighted it in.

 

[ground chuck]

Found this, I'd just be pissed to drop a hundo on it and not be happy with it

http://www.amazon.com/Sightmark-Ult...TF8&colid=2XBNQ1EPKR14E&coliid=I33C85543EEH58

 

[Tactics]

Primary arms. Cheap but great red dot. Check them out!

 

[6t5Goat]

Why not just use the iron sites?

 

[Pinecone]

Go to the rifles section and look at the stick thread on 1-4x scopes for ARs. The same advice for a 15-22.

There are also a number of various types of red dot type sights.

 

[SuperMag]

If you're considering an optic because your vision "ain't what it used to be" and you have trouble clearly seeing the front sight post (very common), a red dot tube or holographic open sight will present the same issues for you: it will be fuzzy and imprecise to your eyeballs. Note also that most red dots and holographics don't offer any magnification at all.

For vision issues like this, a low-power (e.g., 3x) scope will make a huge improvement in your shooting at close-to-moderate ranges. If you're looking to use the rifle at near and far distances, consider one with zoom capability, such as a 3-9x. Look for high numbers (95%+) light transmission. If you seen no light transmission numbers in the description of a scope you're considering, chances are the number is low and the scope will be dark, even in daylight. The higher the number, the better you'll see the target during low-light conditions.

Be prepared to spend some $$ for quality. Inexpensive scopes abound. Some are pretty good, some not. Cheap stuff by brands like UTG and Aim Sports is literally hit and miss. Many have loose lenses/components; they rattle. If you choose to go cheap, make sure your vendor has a liberal return policy ("if for any reason you're unsatisfied..."). If you're a recreational shooter, $200-$250 is not too outrageous for a good scope.

I'm partial to the Nikon Prostaff range; huge value for the cost: waterproof, fogproof, 98% light transmission, turrets resettable to zero, detailed online ballistics support for their BDC-equipped scopes, etc.

 

[Dino]

If you're considering an optic because your vision "ain't what it used to be" and you have trouble clearly seeing the front sight post (very common), a red dot tube or holographic open sight will present the same issues for you: it will be fuzzy and imprecise to your eyeballs. Note also that most red dots and holographics don't offer any magnification at all.

For vision issues like this, a low-power (e.g., 3x) scope will make a huge improvement in your shooting at close-to-moderate ranges. If you're looking to use the rifle at near and far distances, consider one with zoom capability, such as a 3-9x. Look for high numbers (95%+) light transmission. If you seen no light transmission numbers in the description of a scope you're considering, chances are the number is low and the scope will be dark, even in daylight. The higher the number, the better you'll see the target during low-light conditions.

Be prepared to spend some $$ for quality. Inexpensive scopes abound. Some are pretty good, some not. Cheap stuff by brands like UTG and Aim Sports is literally hit and miss. Many have loose lenses/components; they rattle. If you choose to go cheap, make sure your vendor has a liberal return policy ("if for any reason you're unsatisfied..."). If you're a recreational shooter, $200-$250 is not too outrageous for a good scope.

I'm partial to the Nikon Prostaff range; huge value for the cost: waterproof, fogproof, 98% light transmission, turrets resettable to zero, detailed online ballistics support for their BDC-equipped scopes, etc.

I'm a firm believer in "you get what you pay for" but I can also say from my own personal experience that not all inexpensive scopes are junk. Obviously, if it "rattles", don't buy it. And if it doesn't rattle, I'm pretty sure the recoil of a .22 would cause it to rattle over time. I'm guessing the scopes you speak of are designed to hold zero under the recoil of a high powered rifle, not a .22. Am I missing something or did I just luck out and get really good scope at a really good price?

 

[mbz300sdl]

Nikon 22 BDC

 

[ColonelHurtz]

I have a PA 1x3 illum. on my Spike's ST-22.
Turn it up for targets and down for CQB drills.

 

[JailHouseLiar]

I second the Primary Arms offerings.

 

[Udon]

Found this, I'd just be pissed to drop a hundo on it and not be happy with it

http://www.amazon.com/Sightmark-Ult...TF8&colid=2XBNQ1EPKR14E&coliid=I33C85543EEH58

Don't spend that much on the Sightmark

Both Primary Arm and the Bushnell TR-25 are 2 better Red Dot for the Money.
As good as the more expensive brand. Have not have any problem using in .22 and 223 / 5.56 Hold Zero well and very bright...

Bushnell TRS-25
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00200E0HM/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Primary Arms <= need to get a Riser
https://www.primaryarms.com/Red-Dot-Sights-Primary-Arms-s/903.htm


Here is using the Bushnell TRS-25 red dot after 25 yards sight in using Tactical Solutions AR-22 SB-X

 

[El_flasko]

IF you decide to go the red dot route I like vortex as well for mid range priced dots. Strikefire or sparc. Just another option or two.

 

[TomisinMd]

Found this, I'd just be pissed to drop a hundo on it and not be happy with it

http://www.amazon.com/Sightmark-Ult...TF8&colid=2XBNQ1EPKR14E&coliid=I33C85543EEH58

Sightmark makes a less expensive ($60-$70) version of this vight vision one that I've used on my 416 for a year now.

http://www.amazon.com/Sightmark-Ult...UTF8&qid=1382445992&sr=1-2&keywords=sightmark

Held zero with no problem and love it. Just don't change the reticle type or be ready to rezero. Oh, I haven't changed the battery either with about 20 or more trips to the range on it.

I do want to try one of those other ones mentioned too! My opinion, these "cheap" chinese sights do just fine on a 22 up to 100 yds. I haven't had the chance to shoot farther.

 

[Dirichlet]

Great deal on this BSA red dot. Yeah, it's a cheapie to start ($99). But, for use on a .22, and for only $25, how wrong can you go?

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Hunt...le-Sight/1286316.uts?WTz_l=EML%3Bcat104526180

 

[photoracer]

Think about this instead.

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/bsa-sweet-22-3-9x40-mm-scope-matte-black.aspx?a=644012

More than adequate for any .22. I used one to win a metallic silhouette club title with a near stock Rem 597. Also used it later to win the NRA Marksmanship Program Distinguished Expert certificate in Rimfire Benchrest. Spending more than that is just that not getting much more considering the rifle.
On my 15-22s I use either a TruGlo Red/Green reflex red dot ($50) or a Sniper, Inc. 1-4x28 ($140)(uses the same reticle as the PA 1-6x24 at $250). I have used the TruGlo in the last three Ruger Rimfire World Championships and it has never let me down. I have never failed to finish in the top 20's in open division against between 120-150 shooters.
Spending more money does not mean you will getting anymore tangible benefits out of it, it just means you will be spending more money. If you plan on later putting the scope on a real AR that is another issue entirely.

 

[Dino]

Think about this instead.

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/bsa-sweet-22-3-9x40-mm-scope-matte-black.aspx?a=644012

More than adequate for any .22. I used one to win a metallic silhouette club title with a near stock Rem 597. Also used it later to win the NRA Marksmanship Program Distinguished Expert certificate in Rimfire Benchrest. Spending more than that is just that not getting much more considering the rifle.
On my 15-22s I use either a TruGlo Red/Green reflex red dot ($50) or a Sniper, Inc. 1-4x28 ($140)(uses the same reticle as the PA 1-6x24 at $250). I have used the TruGlo in the last three Ruger Rimfire World Championships and it has never let me down. I have never failed to finish in the top 20's in open division against between 120-150 shooters.
Spending more money does not mean you will getting anymore tangible benefits out of it, it just means you will be spending more money. If you plan on later putting the scope on a real AR that is another issue entirely.

Finally. someone who understands.
Well said.

 

[BenL]

Nikon P-22 is a great little scope for the money. For .22LR, it works great. It works perfectly with Nikon's 20 MoA base.

 

[covertpanda]

Suggestions on optics for this? I am new to this all input is welcome, thanks. My daughter shot well using just the iron sights. For example, I'm not sure if I'd like a red dot vs a scope without trying it.

You could try a c-more railway.