My 2 cents...That’s $65 you’ll wish you’d spent on a $2-300 scope later. I bought a Leupold. Very happy with it.
That’s my primary consideration. You know the one: It it sounds too good to be true...
But just dam! Did you take a look at the link?
Here’s some of the comments I’ve seen on the company:
“I’ve seen the reticle shoot loose in more Bushnells than Leapers. I had a Leapers 1st gen. 6x32 on my SKS that was one of the best scopes I’ve used as far as staying zeroed and the settings being repeatable. The only probs. I had were the o-ring pushed out around the objective eyepiece after about three years (caused no problems tho), and it would flare badly in bright sunlight, like most cheap scopes do. On the other hand, my sons Bushnell Banner 3x9 broke the reticle within the first box of ammo. This is typical of the cheaper Bushnells that I’ve seen. “
“I HAVE A LEAPERS T-168 ON MY AR. IT HAS HELD ZERO WITH NO PROBLEM. KILLES LOTS OF HOGS WITH IT.YOU WILL HEAR THAT THEY ARE JUNK. I MUST HAVE BEEN LUCKY. SEEMS EVERYONE THINKS YOU HAVE TO SPEND MEGA BUCKS ON AIMPOINTS ARE OTHER BRAND NAMES TO HAVE A GOOD SCOPE.”
“From what I can tell, the Leapers 5th Generation True Strength series is not made any different then a Bushnell at/in similar price range. Same quality. Only reason a Bushnell might be higher priced is it is considered a brand name. Not a high end brand name, but a brand name none the less. But in having both, looking at both, same quality. Both brands are or have multi-coated optics, are waterproof,shockproof and either nitrogen purged or filled for fog proof/prevention.”
“I bought this scope as a cheap optic to put on my .223 AK for plinking around and was generally surprised by it. The optics are surprisingly clear for a cheap scope, the illuminated reticle isn’t bad, and it has held its zero through hundreds of rounds. However, it does fog up pretty quick and the rings are garbage, plan on buying a set separately.”