Looking for  a illuminated 4-16x40 with a 1in tube . planning on spending $100-150, but can't decide on what to get.
I have no experience with barska, are they o.k.? Decent lens, clear on high power?
I like my other bushnell but not sure about these "banner dusk-dawn" models because of the reticle in it. To much extra crap in view.

Anyone have experience with either scope, good or bad? Or maybe another option in this range?
Mostly used as a range shooter but might be a ground hog killer this summer.

Barska is junk. Save a little more and buy a lower end Vortex. It comes with a warranty that is worth the extra hundred bucks. Find one of these lightly used or new old stock. They were $250 new.


http://www.vortexoptics.com/discontinued/vortex-crossfire-4-16x50-ao-riflescope-mil-dot-illuminated-reticle

Ditch the illumination in favor of better glass and mechanics.  You can't have usable glass and illumination at that price point.

As magnification increases glass quality becomes more important and the higher magnification blurs.  Stick to a 2-7x or 3-9x scope.  A big blob is useless.  I can see more detail with a high end 2-7x scope than lesser scopes with twice the magnification.

Barska is heavy, poorly made junk.

I was quite surprised by the new Bushnell AR series scope I zero'd on an AR for a friend.

It was a 3-9x version, I think they come in a 3-12x and 4-18x.  Definitely better than any Barska I've seen.

Between those two, the Bushnell. Not sure about the warranty.

Budget minded, you bight look at the Weaver Kaspa scopes. At least the have the Weaver warranty backing them. Another decent option is Primary Arms but they have only a one year warranty. I personally like illumination for dusk shooting.

+1

I see Nikon 3x9s on sale for that price point, maybe try one of those.

Also look for the Leopold VX1 3x9x40, I see these for around $175 a lot. 

VX-1 and Vortex Diamondback are good basic choices.  So would be the Weaver Classic.  Avoid Kaspa Weaver which is Chinese, as is the Vortex Crossfire.

Optics when on a budget can be decent.  You have to give up the frills, higher magnification, and get the best glass you can.  It's resolution -- the ability to see fine detail with a sharp image, that is far more important that absolute magnification.  And complexity such as illumination, exposed turrets and fancy reticles forces compromise to keep cost down.  That means bad glass and shoddy construction.

Thanks for the input guys. I considered the nikkon but really preferred illumination which doesn't fall with in this price point.
The primary arms looked good but looks like all there tubes are  30mm,  I have a half dozen scope mounts lay'n around all in 1in and in different hieghts, sometimes I shuffle scopes around rifle to rifle till I'm happy, or if I upgrade 1 rifle the others sometime get my left overs. So I preferred the 1in tubes.

Anyhow, I got the Bushnell tonight. So far I like it pretty good, finger adjustable turrets with caps, clear lens covers, cross hairs only light up @ the center of the cross, interesting looking reticle, light switch is offset 45' on the tube, and seems pretty clear on 16x.  Although its 2in longer than my tasco 4-16x40. I'll know more in a week or 2 after a range trip.
I had a hard time hitting a pop bottle cap @150yds with the 3-9x I was using, I couldn't even see the cap when the reticle covered it, we'll see what happens now.....

Thanks.