I go by the adage that you should typically spend more on the scope than the gun, and I typically do. Replaced my Bushnell scope after a few years on my 10-22 when the reticle broke. Bought a Leupold 3x9 and have loved it for over a quarter of a century on that same gun. Have Leupold scopes on all my long guns. Tried a Nikon once and had to have the nitrogen replaced when it fogged. They did it free, but I have never had a Leupold fail. Even their lowest cost scopes are exceptional. I put a Leupold Crossbones scope on my TenPoint crossbow when the stock scope failed. After one of the limbs delaminated, I bought a Ravin crossbow and have to change out the stock scope for the Leupold. The stock Ravin scope is pretty good, but even with lighted reticles on the Ravin scope, the unlighted Leupold offers better low light target acquisition. I call um like I see um. Leupold scopes are not cheap, but nothing is more expensive than buying something that does not do the job that you bought it for.