Sightron SII 36x42 vs Sightron SII Big Sky 36x42

L

lesloan

Guest
I'm considering buying a new scope for my rimfire BR rifle. The ones I'm considering are the subject 36x Sightrons, and I'm looking for unbiased feedback on these two. The price difference is a bit over $$250. Is the Big Sky worth that much more, in your opinion? If so, why?

FWIW, I already have the the standard SII 36x on one rifle, and a Weaver T36 on another, and slightly prefer the Sightron. I think the optics are comparable, and the Sightron has slightly more repeatable adjustments. The Weaver's a bit cheaper, but I find the way the adjustments are marked on the T36's elevation turret, zero to 4.5 then back to zero, unacceptable (I shoot different distances, from 50 to 175 yds.) I corrected this on my T36 by buying a pair of T24 turrets, which fit and are properly marked zero to 9. But the price of new turrets (you have to buy them in pairs) pretty much wipes out the price differential.
 
Sightron

lesloan said:
Anybody?
Click to expand...

I have had 3 SII 36x42, they all would not hold for benchrest shooting, they had to be modified. Also optics are not good, at least as far as I am concerned. I would rather buy a T-36. Do not know about Big sky
 
I shoot both the SII and the Big Sky. All of this is just my opinion. In competition - the only difference I have noticed is the Big Sky is definitely more clear. However, I have not encountered a situation where the SII was not adequate. I have not had any issues what-so-ever with either. If the extra 250-300 doesn't break the bank, I would go with the Big Sky. As I get older, that difference in clarity might become more of an issue.

Stanley
 
r44astro said:
I have had 3 SII 36x42, they all would not hold for benchrest shooting, they had to be modified. Also optics are not good, at least as far as I am concerned. I would rather buy a T-36. Do not know about Big sky
Click to expand...

What was the problem? I have a T36 and an SII 36x42 and don't really see much difference, optically. I slightly prefer the SII 'cuz the adjustments seem a bit more repeatable, though they're both good in this area and that might just be my imagination. That's why my question is related more to just the two Sightron 36's. I would, though, like to know what you mean by "not hold(ing)." and what modifications you had to do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apollo said:
I shoot both the SII and the Big Sky. All of this is just my opinion. In competition - the only difference I have noticed is the Big Sky is definitely more clear. However, I have not encountered a situation where the SII was not adequate. I have not had any issues what-so-ever with either. If the extra 250-300 doesn't break the bank, I would go with the Big Sky. As I get older, that difference in clarity might become more of an issue.

Stanley
Click to expand...

Thanks, Stanley. I'll be able to tell for myself in a week or so. Just ordered the Big Sky. :eek:
 
OK, folks...I went ahead & sprung for the Big Sky. Finally got a chance to shoot with it on Sunday, with good conditions. I have 2 other Sightron SII 36x42's (not Big Sky's) for comparison, and here's what I've decided: Optics--The Big Sky is better, but not by a huge margin. The SII's are already so good optically that it's hard to make a major improvement. Adjustments-- Very solid on all 3 scopes. I've had Leupolds and still have Weavers, both of which are excellent on repeatability, but the Sightrons seem just a little bit better. One thing I really appreciate about the B.S. is that the turrets are 10 MOA per revolutions, as opposed to the other SII's 7.5 and the Weaver T36's 9. I shoot at various ranges, from 50 to 175 yards, and with 1/8 MOA clicks, as all 3 of these scopes have, on .22rf rifles having 10MOA/rev. makes it just a bit easier to keep track of settings for different distances. Objective-- The standard SII has 2 full turns to go from the closest focus point to the longest, the BS does it in 180 deg. Which is better? For me, it's 180 deg. one. I don't find finding the right focal point to be problematical, but some do. I like being able to move the objective from one distance to another conveniently.

So...if I were doing it again, would I still spend the extra $$ to get the Big Sky? In a word, yes. It is a beautiful instrument. Optics are superb, clicks are solid and totally repeatable, and everything works smoothly and precisely. The regular SII is nearly as good, but not quite. I think both have an edge over my Weaver T36, both optically and in adjustments. This is not to take anything away from the Weaver--it's a very fine scope in its own right, and is cheaper than the Sightrons.

One final comment: the best buy I found on the Big Sky was, surprisingly, (to me, anyway), at Amazon.com. Their price was almost $100 less than anybody else's, and shipping was free. SWFA, with it's 10% price match guarantee, was actually cheaper. They did offer to beat Amazon's price, so I placed my order with them. But soon after, I got an email from SWFA telling me my scope was backordered. I didn't want to wait, so I canceled my order and bought from Amazon.
 
Thanks for the mini review and comparison to the weaver. I have a couple ( not the BIg sky's though) of each and am hard pressed to distinguish any or much differance between S or W course mine go back aways and it might be time to up grade a bit. I have some L as well but not useable for RF as rf distance seems to be right at there minimum.
 
blades said:
Thanks for the mini review and comparison to the weaver. I have a couple ( not the BIg sky's though) of each and am hard pressed to distinguish any or much differance between S or W course mine go back aways and it might be time to up grade a bit. I have some L as well but not useable for RF as rf distance seems to be right at there minimum.
Click to expand...

I really like the SII 36X Big Sky, and wouldn't hesitate to buy another one...if I were buying a new scope. I especially like the 180 deg. turn for AO adjusting, and dislike the 720 deg. of the standard SII. I also like the 10 MOA/rev. on the turrets vs the 7.5 in the std. SII. And I really liked getting it for $70 less than the next best price I could find, and the free shipping at Amazon.com. Best of all, I had enough Amazon points to bring the total cost down to just over $500, shipped. (Be careful, though...there were about 3 different sources noted at Amazon, and there was quite a difference among them.) So if I already planned a new scope I'd definitely go with the Big Sky. OTOH, I have 2 other SII 36's as I noted, and do not plan to replace 'em with SIIB's. There's just not that big of a difference.

And you're welcome! :D
 
I think you can have the scope "adjusted" for rimfire use - don't know where or what it costs but believe that to be true.
 
I had to go look at my Sightrons to see what the shortest marked focusing distance is. I didn't really know, 'cuz the shortest distance I shoot is 50 yds. The regular SII's are marked down to 15 yds., the Big Sky to 10. I dunno if they'll actually focus closer or not--I just looked at the graduated scales. FWIW, the scopes are all on rimfires. The only CF I still shoot is a Savage Mod. 12 VLP in .223 Rem., and it has my sole surviving T36 Weaver.
 
Just wanted to add something;
I had an old Sightron scope that was not very clear. I e-mailed Sightron and they said to send it in and they would see if they could fix it. I did. Just got a package back the other day. Because they no longer make that model of scope AND there was something wrong with it -Sightron upgraded it with a brand new Big Sky model free of charge. WOW!!! Things like this make me a repeat customer and might tip the scales toward Sightron for those making a decision on a different scope.

Stanley
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top