Excellent value, not ideal for a forward mount though - Barska 1.25-4.5x26 Euro-30 Rifle Scopes w/ 4 A Reticle - AC10018 Rifle Scope

This is a decent little scope, in terms of what you get for money invested it should be considered excellent, but...

I would not reccomend this for a forward or barrel mounted optic, the eye relief is too short, after 5 inches from your eye to the glass it is unusable, I am serious, not just poor viewing at that distance, it is unusable over 5 or 6". For a scout scope mounted in front of the action you should be looking for is around 10", I bought this to forward mount on an enfield and it is not suitable as such, but I will use it over the action,

Glass quality: I'd rate clarity about 7 or 8 out of 10, it is quite clear which is probably because it isn't a high magnification scope, the glass is comparable or actually better then a 20 year old leupold 4 power fixed scope I have.

It is good for quick target acquisition, and although it isnt as nice as more expensive scopes, but possibly due to the larger 30mm tube it has a decent width of being able to view clearly when moving your head side to side before it gets fuzzy, much much better as compared to my outdated leupold, and much better then my mueller 8-32 target, but not top tier. As for construction, it looks as well built as a bushnell mid range optic.

The package included rings, they are nothing amazing but work, but I decided not to use them, it also comes with the plastic lens covers with a yellow tinted rear lens, pretty average stuff.

Conclusion: if you want a low power scope for a rifle you use to shoot from 10 yards to 250, (very nice for a .303 or 30-30 or similar) and don't need it forward/barrel mounted, and have pretty consistent cheek weld on your rifle this scope should work very nicely for you, it is very good value for the money, and the seller shipped very quickly.
Pros: for the money, this is a very good little scope, the 30mm tube is really nice
Cons: eye relief is too short for a scout scope, rings could be better

This review was written in the old system and had content requirements that are different than reviews written today.