Leupold FX-II Scout IER 2.5 x 28mm.
It's light weight, bright and has the right eye relief to mount on a scout rifle. I have them on a 10/22, Mini 14, Ruger GSR and an M1A.
Long eye relief - 12"+ only work for handguns. The Leupold will mount just ahead of the bolt and be balanced over your support hand.
I also have a couple Weaver 4 x 28mm Scout scopes. They are ok, but not near as bright as the Leupolds.

 

Why so much eye relief? I have a Leatherwood LER scope and its ok for a cheap LER scope. If I had to do it again, I would spend the money and get the Leupold.

LER scopes add the extra variable of eye relief to the "good scope equation" and that makes finding an inexpensive one that also works well that much harder.

 

The Leatherwood 2-7x on my Ruger Scout .308 is mounted right in front of the action, about 12 inches from my eyes and has adequate eye relief, a whole lot more than 3 1/2" to 5". The Nikon Encore 2.5-8x pistol scope has 12 to 30 inches of eye relief, I have it forward of the action and also have it around 12 inches from my eye. It also has two BDC circles that I can aim with at 200 and 300 yards and the post at bottom is on at 545 yards. Leatherwood and Burris now make a BDC model in 2-7x power. You were looking for a scope with 12 plus inches of eye relief, 12-30 inches with the Nikon isn't enough for you ?

 

You were looking for a scope with 12 plus inches of eye relief, 12-30 inches with the Nikon isn't enough for you ?

Actually, I have a scope with 12" of eye relief (the Hammers 2-7x32), but I'd like to reduce the weight and the size. The hammers is a nice bright scope, and an exceptional value, but with rings weighs ~13oz. I'm willing to give up some power, even the variable option for a nice compact light weight scope with the 12" of eye relief. Also, I don't want to pay $300 for the scope. I've had Leupold products before, and while they were decent scopes, I felt that 50% of my money was going for the brand name, and in one case, I felt literally deceived by leupold when I bought their Leupold/Gilmore reddot. Lets just say that time I learned that paying a lot of money and buying a brand name does not guarantee quality.

For starters, I'm willing to spend up to $150, but want to get everything I can, in terms of features, for that $150. Ideally, I want everything, 7oz or less, compact 2-7x28mm, bright, reliable, and hell yes, firedot. I'm just looking to get the best scout scope I can for the miserly $150 that I have to spend. If I'm to look at this realistically, considering the Ultimak rail, and the Warne QD rings, I've already got $175 invested in optics on this rifle, before I even purchase a scope.

Most people do a lot of research, when buying optics, and we have a lot of of mini-14 enthusiasts building scout rifles that they're obviously proud of. I'd just like to benefit from that vast pool of knowledge and experience and hear what they've come up with for optics on their Mini-14 scout rifles.

 

Whofarted, the Hi-Lux Leatherwood has been great. And mine was only $120 from Midway a couple years ago. Wish they'd have had the BDC one available then.
dohcacr, don't think you'll find a 2-7x variable that weighs 7 oz. The Leatherwood and my Nikon are 13 oz. plus. For under $150 you have the choice of the Leatherwood and the Hammers you already have, which I'm not familar with. Most other scout scopes are a fixed 2 3/4 power and those, from Weaver, Burris and Leupold will run at least $300.
I wish Leupold would drop the price of their $600 VXR FireDot Scout by one third and make it half as light, but that's probably not going to happen. If they could make it half as light, it would probably triple the price to $1800 or so. Even if you are willing to spend a heck of a lot more than $150, your goals of a 7 oz. variable are a bit unrealistic. The Nikon 2.5-8x is pretty compact, bright and very clear, but for them to make it half as light and sell it for half of what it sells for now ?

 

dohcacr, don't think you'll find a 2-7x variable that weighs 7 oz.

Sanddog, common sense tells me that your probably correct, and then I find this;BSA 2-7X32 Edge Series Pistol Scope As usual, Amazons specs are lacking detail, but if you follow this to the BSA website, you'll find these specs:

Magnification 2 - 7X
Obj. Lens Diameter (mm) 32
Exit Pupil Range (mm) 15.07-5.23
Field of View @100 Yds 60-16
Optimum Eye Relief (in) 12-20

Parallax Setting 50 yds.
Click Adjustment Value 1/4
Adjustment Range 45 - 45
Transmission(%) Day/Night
Weight (ounces) 7.50

Time and technology conquers all! BSA also lists a 2-7x28 scope Of course, I'll have to look deeper into this option, before I risk buying it. I'm not saying that I believe the specs, but it is interesting, and another possible option for a scout rifle. BSA lists the length at 12", so is a 7.5 oz weight even reasonable?

Here is a brief review from The Firearms Blog

Of course, the reality of buying cheap scopes is that sometimes you get a bargain, and sometimes you get a turkey. Reviews are generally favorable though.

I asked the Amazon reviewers of this scope, what the actual weight is.

 

Yeah, it's hard to imagine a perspective that would call a 7.5 ounce scope heavy.

 

I asked BSA Customer Service to verify the actual weight of both the 2-7x28 and the 2-7x32. With a little luck I should know in a couple of days.

 

Sort of the same answer I received. To quote "Thanks for contacting us. The only spec we have is the one on the website that lists it at 7.5 ounces." Which means to me, were not going to get off our duffs and actually weigh one, we'll just parrot the spec we have listed on the site. I will continue to be skeptical until I see one weighed.Guess that make me a blockhead. There are other avenues I can pursue.

 

I'm guessing Chuck didn't get off his duff to weigh one either, but it's a nice write up.

BSA Edge 2-7x32 Pistol Scope

 

Found a cooperative ebayer with a 2-7x28 BSA Edge and got him to weigh it. According to him it's 11 oz.

 

Was that with the packaging?

 

That's my guess too.

 

Don't you know BSA stands for Brother Stay Away ? !!!

 

Two possibilities

Simmons Pistol Scopes - Pro Hunter 4x 32: $69.99 Silver/$87.49 Black @ Opticsplanet
Description: 4x32
Field of View (ft. @ 100 yds): 15
Eye Relief (in): 20" or 11.8" - 11.6"
Exit Pupil (mm): 8
Weight (oz): 8
Click Value (MOA): 1/4
Adjustment (Range): 75/75
Reticle: Truplex
Parallax Settings: 50 yd

Simmons Pistol Scopes - Pro Hunter 2-6x 32: $99.99 @ Opticsplanet
Field of View (ft. @ 100 yds): 14/4.5
Eye Relief (in): 20"
Exit Pupil (mm): 15.8 - 5.2
Weight (oz): 9.7
Click Value (MOA): 1/2
Adjustment (Range): 70/70
Reticle: Truplex
Parallax Settings: 50 yds

Get a $30.00 rebate when either of these products are purchased by July 31st, 2014 and the rebate form is postmarked by August 15th, 2014

 

Have you put an eye to those Simmons scopes, Doh? I haven't, but the 20" eye relief gives me pause. The rear objectives on my scout rifles run in the 9" to 13" range and I wonder if mounting that Simmons pistol scope with 20" of ER would reduce the exit pupil (if that's the correct optic parameter to describe a full picture at the rear objective)?

 

headedtotexas, I have no personal experience with these scopes at all. The specs for the 4x32 as listed on opticsplanet showed the eye relief as 11.8 - 11.6. I made that 20 in my post because that's what the Simmons website stated. The only scout scope I've ever used is the Hammers 2-7x32 with a eye relief of 13"-17". That works out very well on my mini.

 

Me neither, Doh. My experience is with a similar 2-7x32; the Leatherwood version. Works great. My concern about the Simmons pistol scope and the Nikon Force XR 2.5-8 is exactly what Star observed above. As that exit pupil shrinks, the requirement for your eye to be in the perfect position for the image to fill the rear objective grows and grows, perhaps to the point of impracticality.

 

The eye-relief spec leaves a lot to be desired, in the way it is expressed for most LER scopes. Take for instance the Hammers 2-7x32 with a eye-relief of 13"-17". Those numbers , I believe, are expressing the maximum distance the scope can be positioned from the eye and still have a full field view. They can actually be placed much closer to the eye and have a full field. at 7x I can have my Hammers as close as 7" and have a full field view. At that distance all other powers will have a full field as well. In reality, the closest I can configure the scope on my mini is about 11" from my eye, which is pretty ideal since scout rifle lore says that the perfect distance is 8"-14".

What I'm saying is that the 20" spec for the Simmons is probably the max eye relief, and the scope can probably be mounted much closer to the eye. Of course, every thing I know about scout scopes I learned on the internet.:lol:

 

It is confusing, and especially so for zoom scopes. Does the eye relief range differ at each zoom setting? It certainly could. And it appears that there is no consistency among manufacturers in the way they communicate eye relief. A range is helpful; a single number is not.

 

It is confusing, and especially so for zoom scopes. Does the eye relief range differ at each zoom setting?

Yes! The lower the power, the broader the eye-relief range.

 

The Leatherwood is more forgiving of eye relief than the Nikon Force XR. With the Nikon set on the "middle powers", say 3.5 to 5.5x, you can have your head just about anywhere on the stock and get a full sight picture. At the high and low extremes it is a bit more critical, but not a whole lot. At 2.5x I find I have to move my head back away from the scope slightly, not even an inch. and at 8x I have to move my head forward slightly about the same amount. You can "tweak" the eye relief by moving the fast focus ring in or out to compensate for the high and low magnification extremes. I learned that from a review I read on the Nikon before I purchased it. You can also play with mounting position, either mounting the scope slightly forward or back to suit. I usually just leave the scope on 3.5x and it''s good to go if I have to shoot fast.

 

I didn't understand how good I had it with the Hammers, until I read your comment sandog. I had it mounted on a ATI aluminum rail, on an ATI stock and had the full range of power(2-7) available with a full field. I recently installed an Ultimak rail, and I'm waiting for some new Warne QD rings to be delivered. Hope the new setup works as well. I'll be the first to admit that there many higher quality scopes on the market, but having the full range of power available is certainly a plus.

 

Here is a new scout scope from UTG to consider. Has an eye relief of up to 14" and is illuminated. I think it's pretty new so it will take a while for the price to come down. Cheapest I found it was at Cheaperthandirt for $118 and about $17 shipping on top of that. Comes with Mil Dot or Circle Dot reticles, and some nice features.

 

BSA, Simmons, and UTG are not good quality overall. You will spend the money to get your first one, then, spend it again to replace it with the samething (if you didnt learn the first time), or get something else. People get so hung up on spending money on glass. There are some great bargains out there. The Bushnell TRS-25 Trophy red dot, and Bushnell Elite 3200 10x mil-dot scope are two great examples. The Bushnell Elite line, is what would be a Bausch&Lomb optic, if they were still around in scopes. The Mini-14 is a scope killer, so choose wisely.

 

Scorpion, there are plenty of good red-dots around if the buyer is interested. I have a Primary Arms MD08 that I use on my scout mini. The challenge is finding a decent scope with 4x+ magnification and the 12-14" of eye relief that is needed for a scout mini. They are few and far between, even when your looking among the "good" scopes. When you add reticle illumination like this UTG and they are even scarcer yet. Those features make this UTG scope very unusual and worth mentioning. BTW, that's why the thread is captioned "LER & EER Scout Scopes "

 

I was speaking as to examples of scopes that are a great buy for the money, i.e., affordable and very durable. I was not directly speaking of LER/EER scopes. I do read, though. It was the idea, that dont buy optics that may not last long, or survive on the Mini.

My experience with UTG/Leapers scopes has been very negative. Based on that, bells and whistles dont do it for me.

IMO, FWIW, YMMV.

 

Good article if your interested in scout rifles and their optics.

http://hi-luxoptics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/SGNScopingScout-1.pdf

 

NCStar 2-7x32mm LER Pistol Scope

Ive bought two NCStar LER pistol scopes for my '44 Lee Enfield No4 mk1 scout rifle. I got them both from Amazon for about $42ea. I bent the tube on the first one when my rifle slid off the foot of my bed, and the second one at the BOL when my rifle slid into the passenger door.
They held their zero thru the full range of zoom while shooting .303 British rounds, so they'll definitely withstand the plink of a .223/5.56. Until I can afford a Leupold...

 

I had a scout scope on a Ruger GSR and hated it. They have extremely limited field of view and magnification due to being mounted so far away and so much eye relief. A lot of light transmission and image sharpness is lost in this distance as well. I found that both eyes kept wanting to focus on the reticle which made quick target acquisition frustrating. Parallax is a nightmare with these scopes.

Scout scopes weigh just as much as regular scopes but have less magnification and field of view. The only justification I can see for it was COL Cooper's original concept of a scout rifle action that could be topped up with stripped clips. Since that is not possible with a Mini, what's the point? A traditional scope has way more advantages for the same weight and money.

 

The purpose of the scout scope is to allow you to see the full area in front of you, unmagnified, with a magnified circle and cross hair in the center of your field of view. This allows awareness of everything in front of you and any movement that occurs. It is the opposite of being closed in by the scope and seeing only a limited field of view.
I don't understand the complaint about parallax. When I shoulder my rifle the scope is directly in front of my eye. With a proper cheek weld, the left eye cannot see through the scope. The parallax of the scope is set at 100 yards; that's good enough for closer distances and is where most hunting scopes are set.

It takes a little getting used to, but seeing everything in front of you with your natural vision, except your magnified aiming point, increases situational awareness.

 

Plus you do add some more weight toward the front of the gun.