Mueller Optics Eradicator

[skipper]

I can't argue with Rick about Leupold scopes. I have owned many in my lifetime. I have never needed warranty work on any of them and that in itself says a lot.

I would like to offer another suggestion on a scope that is less well known and being less recognized might have a cost advantage. Mueller scopes are well made scopes. If you have ever read Chuck Hawks reviews you might have noticed his comments on them. You could get a lot of scope for a lot less money. Check out the link below. Here is a scope with all the bells and whistles for less than $300.

http://www.muelleroptics.com/products/MU852550IGR.html

I read someones comment a while back talking about if they had my money they could afford a Nightforce. Let me assure you that I am not rich my any stretch of the imagination. I will admit that I am a lot better off financially than I was years ago when I built my own house, furniture, etc. Let me also assure you that I worked very hard for many years to get where I am today. If I was looking for the best possible value I would seriously consider the Mueller or perhaps a Weaver. No flame on the other scopes mentioned here, just an affordable alternative.

Less well known to most consumers is the name Mueller. Mueller Extreme Sports Optics markets the Eraticator riflescope. This is a high power varmint scope with excellent features for its moderate price, including fully multi-coated optics, target type adjustment turrets with 1/8 MOA clicks, an illuminated reticle, a European style fast focus eyepiece, and more.

Chuck hawks rates the Leupold Rifleman, FX-I, VX-I lines and Nikon Buckmaster as Three Star out of Five scopes. He places the Mueller in the same catagory. Read it for yourself. I will agree that you get what you pay for but, if you're really looking for as much scope as you can for the money the Mueller might just be the ticket. I would also agree that you should compare them to other scopes side by side at a store if possible before laying down hard earned cash.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/optical_sights.htm

[janneuf]

I think it's pretty tough to take every scope out there and put them into 5 categories. Actually it's more like 4 since the 5 star contains so few scopes I have never seen him review a scope he didn't like. I often wonder if he takes any cash for his enorsements.

For example, he puts a Zeiss Conquest in the 4 star category with a Sightron SII. Not even in the same league. I would suspect the same from the 3-star category.

I have read plenty of praise for the Mueller, then I learned they're all paid endorsements. As for the Nikko, I can't remember ever seeing a Leupold, Nikon or Zeiss offered as a package deal with a rifle. That should tell you something.

[glenn asher]

I'm not a Chuck Hawks fan, either. Most of what little I've read on his website seemed more "Guns and Ammo" than perhaps "Rifle" or Handloader", if you get my meaning. I haven't been back since then.
I've only looked thru one Mueller, a lower powered model. It seemed okay to me, but time will tell. It's only on a rimfire, at that. I'll keep track of it, it belongs to a friend of mine.

[Hutch45]

.....I have never seen him review a scope he didn't like.

You are right on the money with that comment. Some of his other stuff is OK for "quick and dirty" answers, but not scopes.

Mueller's are OK scopes, certainly not junk, but they are not top quality scopes by any means.

[Hutch45]

.....I have never seen him review a scope he didn't like.

You are right on the money with that comment. Some of his other stuff is OK for "quick and dirty" answers, but not scopes.

Mueller's are OK scopes, certainly not junk, but they are not top quality scopes by any means.

[BRADFORDcoHUNTER]

I have had my share of better end scopes over the years. Other than clarity, the main differences between "cheaper" scopes and higher end scopes, seems to be functionality. Functionality to me, is a direct result of the parts used to make the scope, and or the process by which those parts are manufactured. ie- ever buy a cheap scope and be happy with it until you hit the woods on a hunting trip, only to have it fog up, or find it won't hold zero?


Now...I have owned and shot everything from Redfields, Leupolds, B&L Elites, Simmons, Tasco, etc. I can tell you right off the bat, that on rifles with decent recoil, you want an upper echelon scope. I have learned that from experience. Recoil does funny things to lesser scopes. They usually will NOT hold zero either.

All that stuff aside, I just mounted a Mueller 4x16 50mm AO Sport Dot on my new CZ 527 varmint in 204 Ruger. Without boresighting it, I went to the range and had it dialed in fairly quickly. I gotta tell ya, I'm quite happy with this scope so far. It's looks, feels, and shoots like scopes costing much more money. I'll be putting it through it's hunting paces in Feb, and I'll report back on how it holds up....Trust me, I'll hunt it hard!

Granted, I choose this scope mostly for night hunting predators on a rifle with almost no recoil. Had I been looking for a scope for a 30 cal deer rifle or something, I'd probably go the Leupold route.

[Bad Dad]

haskins02,
Just wondering if you bought the Mueller scope? If so what is your impresion?

[Hidalgo]

I had a Mueller Eradicator 4-16 on a Ruger #1 that lost a seal and had to be sent back. They replaced it promptly, with no hassle.

I have had TWO Mueller 3-9's that failed to hold zero on .17HMR rifles.

All three of these in the past 6 months.

While Mueller has given me commendable customer service with their products, I have to ask...Where do I stop? Would you take one of these into the woods to hunt with after having three of them crap out like that? I won't.

I have sold two of the Muellers and replaced them with Nikons. One more remains, and will also be replaced.

Buying cheap glass is kinda like the squirrel playing in the road.....If you do it often enough, sooner or later you're gonna take a hit.

Spend your $$$ initially on a good glass, mount it, and forget it. JMHO.