The cheapest scope i would ever consider, but it actually works fairly well. - Simmons 22 MAG 4X32 Rimfire Rifle Scopes w/ Rings

I should start by saying that this scope is definitely not a good scope. It is just good considering the price. More money certainly buys you more scope quality just about every time. Having said that, if you are on a very tight budget, or are just looking for the most bare bones and lightweight scope for a knockaround rifle, this could very well be your best choice. I bought one to try out on a cheap air rifle for my girlfriend to shoot. It held up well, and I feel like the image quality was better than one should expect for under under $50. The quick focus eye piece was a little wobbly, but I was able to shim it with a small strip of vinyl tape. The included rings are actually fairly decent as long as it is just going on a rimfire (with a grooved receiver). The image clarity, brightness, field of view, and color rendition are all quite acceptable for the price. Flare is well controlled compared to some scopes that cost quite a bit more.

Tracking was actually quite good. The crosshairs are not level with the turrets. If you plan to make lots of clicks to adjust for distance or wind, you will have to level the turret and have a canted reticle. Since this is a cheap, low-powered scope, I decided to mount the scope with the reticle level, and the turrets canted. I chose this route because for this type of scope, I will just hold over for distance, and use kentucky windage. The scope has held zero without issue on a WASR-10 and a 10/22.

In short, if you just need a no-frills, lightweight, inexpensive scope, and have minimal expectations, this scope will function fine in my experience. If you don't mind something a little larger, heavier, and slightly more expensive, the Tasco 2.5-10x42AO Mil-Dot scope is an impressive scope for the money. It can be found for about $50, and will runs circles around anything near its price point. I have tried the other .22 Mag scopes (the 3-9x32 and 3-9x32AO), and was very disappointed. They have a much poorer image and much smaller field of view.