Rifle Scopes Brownell’s Match Optic

[DPS03]

Serious question, did you not read it, or did you not understand it?


A scope's EP corresponds to your own pupil, which dilates from about 2mm in bright sunlight to perhaps 7mm in the dark. If your scope's exit pupil is smaller than your pupil, it can't transmit all the light you can use. If it's larger, the extra rim of light bounces off your iris and never enters your pupil to stimulate your retina. Wasted light. But an excess diameter of exit pupil does give your eye more room to wander around in without showing edge blackout, so that's something.

The reason a 30mm main tube scope isn't inherently brighter than a 1-inch scope is because both carry internal lenses much larger than 7mm, so there is no loss of light through either. The reason some 30mm scopes appear to project brighter views is probably because they were built with the absolute finest materials and effective light transmission (how much light the scope passes through) determines brightness, is a product of the number of air-to-glass surfaces in the scope (the fewer the better) and the anti-reflection coatings on those lenses. (The more the better.)

It never ceases to amaze me how some people choose to simply be an ass over the Internet.

" So what, then, are the advantages of a 30mm scope tube? The walls can be made thicker for added strength and durability or the internal lenses can be made slightly larger, which increases optical performance simply because larger lenses always perform better than smaller ones, all else being equal"

It's simply easier to get things right with a bigger tube.

 

[Basher]

It never ceases to amaze me how some people choose to simply be an ass over the Internet.

" So what, then, are the advantages of a 30mm scope tube? The walls can be made thicker for added strength and durability or the internal lenses can be made slightly larger, which increases optical performance simply because larger lenses always perform better than smaller ones, all else being equal"

It's simply easier to get things right with a bigger tube.

But larger lenses still have nothing to do with their ability to pass a higher quantity of light. They DO allow a larger range of adjustment before optical clarity is lost near the edges of the lens, but they don’t allow more light to pass through. The quality of the glass and the coatings used would help there, but light transmission is not a function of tube, or lens, size.

 

[WildBill3/75]

It never ceases to amaze me how some people choose to simply be an ass over the Internet.

" So what, then, are the advantages of a 30mm scope tube? The walls can be made thicker for added strength and durability or the internal lenses can be made slightly larger, which increases optical performance simply because larger lenses always perform better than smaller ones, all else being equal"

It's simply easier to get things right with a bigger tube.

In this case you are the ass.
He was just trying to educate you. Don't go getting your panties in a bunch.

Tube diameter has nothing to do with light transmission. Your post is there for the world to see.
"Very bright (better be...56 Objective, fully multi-coated, and a 34mm tube to make it easier to pass the light along)"

Now you know. Tube diameter doesn't do shit for light transmission. The main benefit of a larger tube is internal adjustment.

 

[koshkin]

Serious question, did you not read it, or did you not understand it?


A scope's EP corresponds to your own pupil, which dilates from about 2mm in bright sunlight to perhaps 7mm in the dark. If your scope's exit pupil is smaller than your pupil, it can't transmit all the light you can use. If it's larger, the extra rim of light bounces off your iris and never enters your pupil to stimulate your retina. Wasted light. But an excess diameter of exit pupil does give your eye more room to wander around in without showing edge blackout, so that's something.

The reason a 30mm main tube scope isn't inherently brighter than a 1-inch scope is because both carry internal lenses much larger than 7mm, so there is no loss of light through either. The reason some 30mm scopes appear to project brighter views is probably because they were built with the absolute finest materials and effective light transmission (how much light the scope passes through) determines brightness, is a product of the number of air-to-glass surfaces in the scope (the fewer the better) and the anti-reflection coatings on those lenses. (The more the better.)

I assume that is a quote from Swaro's website? That is mostly correct, but there are a few issues with it and whoever wrote likely has no idea what happens inside a scope (or he is trying to dumb it down in the most condescendingly stupid way possible).

Larger exit pupil is not wasted light. Your eye wandering around is not only there to avoid blackout. They way human vision works your brain accumulates information as it roams around the exit pupil, so it samples all over the exit pupil of the riflescope. That also really helps alleviate eye fatigue.

The argument about the scope brightness being related to internal lenses being larger than 7mm is kinda preposterous. It is not like there a 7mm diameter beam cutting through the scope. In general, the actual light transmission, as far as modern good quality riflescopes go, has almost nothing to do with how bright it looks to your eye.

ILya

 

[supercorndogs]

I assume that is a quote from Swaro's website? That is mostly correct, but there are a few issues with it and whoever wrote likely has no idea what happens inside a scope (or he is trying to dumb it down in the most condescendingly stupid way possible).

Larger exit pupil is not wasted light. Your eye wandering around is not only there to avoid blackout. They way human vision works your brain accumulates information as it roams around the exit pupil, so it samples all over the exit pupil of the riflescope. That also really helps alleviate eye fatigue.

The argument about the scope brightness being related to internal lenses being larger than 7mm is kinda preposterous. It is not like there a 7mm diameter beam cutting through the scope. In general, the actual light transmission, as far as modern good quality riflescopes go, has almost nothing to do with how bright it looks to your eye.

ILya

It was a quote from the article posted that was supposed to prove to me that tube diameter aided in light transmission.

 

[koshkin]

It was a quote form the article posted that was supposed to prove to me that tube diameter aided in light transmission.

It doesn't. That is one old wive's tale that just refuses to go away.

ILya

 

[MilSpecOkie]

It doesn't. That is one old wive's tale that just refuses to go away.

ILya

Do you still like the scope?

 

[koshkin]

Do you still like the scope?

Yes. It is an excellent scope for the money.

Ilya

 

[cleric]

It doesn't. That is one old wive's tale that just refuses to go away.

ILya

my gut says that people see brighter 34mm scopes and think it’s the tubes when in reality I would say the quality of the glass is better in 34mm tubes than 30mm tubes.
So they are right on the effect but wrong on the reason

 

[koshkin]

my gut says that people see brighter 34mm scopes and think it’s the tubes when in reality I would say the quality of the glass is better in 34mm tubes than 30mm tubes.
So they are right on the effect but wrong on the reason

Using that logic, if someone looks at Swaro Z5 with 1" tube and 34mm NcStar, they should be concluding that 1" scopes are brighter.

I do not think this fable is based on anything other than ignorance. Years ago I had a discussion with some nincompoop whose only argument was that a larger diameter waterhose passes through more water and the same principles apply to scope tubes.

ILya

 

[DPS03]

In this case you are the ass.
He was just trying to educate you. Don't go getting your panties in a bunch.

Tube diameter has nothing to do with light transmission. Your post is there for the world to see.
"Very bright (better be...56 Objective, fully multi-coated, and a 34mm tube to make it easier to pass the light along)"

Now you know. Tube diameter doesn't do shit for light transmission. The main benefit of a larger tube is internal adjustment.

No he was not...he smarted off and its plain to see unless you have zero EQ.

On top of that, if you had read what I wrote, you would know I didn't say that a larger tube=more light.

I said, and I quote for you, "...to make it easier to pass the light along. "

Try getting all of the optics into a 5mm tube if you think that isn't true.

 

[308pirate]

No he was not...he smarted off and its plain to see unless you have zero EQ.

On top of that, if you had read what I wrote, you would know I didn't say that a larger tube=more light.

I said, and I quote for you, "...to make it easier to pass the light along. "

Try getting all of the optics into a 5mm tube if you think that isn't true.

So unless your professional qualifications match or exceed those of Ilya Koshkin, I'm still going to listen to him when he says main tube diameter has nothing to do at all with light transmission.

 

[308pirate]

Using that logic, if someone looks at Swaro Z5 with 1" tube and 34mm NcStar, they should be concluding that 1" scopes are brighter.

I do not think this fable is based on anything other than ignorance. Years ago I had a discussion with some nincompoop whose only argument was that a larger diameter waterhose passes through more water and the same principles apply to scope tubes.

It's sometimes infuriating listening to idiots who think their "common sense" is all they need to understand end explain physical phenomena that takes literally years of study and practice to understand and master.

They're best ignored.

 

[WildBill3/75]

No he was not...he smarted off and its plain to see unless you have zero EQ.

On top of that, if you had read what I wrote, you would know I didn't say that a larger tube=more light.

I said, and I quote for you, "...to make it easier to pass the light along. "

Try getting all of the optics into a 5mm tube if you think that isn't true.

Damn you are dense.
You can't just semi quote yourself crazy guy.

"Very bright (better be...56 Objective, fully multi-coated, and a 34mm tube to make it easier to pass the light along)"
Obvious you were stating that a 34mm tube influences light.

Here's what a quick Google search popped up. Seriously, educate yourself.

SWAROVSKI OPTIK

Austrian manufacturer of premium quality rifle scopes, binoculars, spotting scopes, and tripods. Visit our online shop!

www.swarovskioptik.com

Nikon | Sport Optics | Exit pupil

Reports - How to select an eyepiece ?

.

My problem with you lies in the fact that someone tried to help educate you. You instead took that as a personal attack and instead of learning something new you dug a deep hole and started slinging shit.

Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

 

[DPS03]

Damn you are dense.
You can't just semi quote yourself crazy guy.

"Very bright (better be...56 Objective, fully multi-coated, and a 34mm tube to make it easier to pass the light along)"
Obvious you were stating that a 34mm tube influences light.

Here's what a quick Google search popped up. Seriously, educate yourself.

SWAROVSKI OPTIK

Austrian manufacturer of premium quality rifle scopes, binoculars, spotting scopes, and tripods. Visit our online shop!

www.swarovskioptik.com

Nikon | Sport Optics | Exit pupil

Reports - How to select an eyepiece ?

.

My problem with you lies in the fact that someone tried to help educate you. You instead took that as a personal attack and instead of learning something new you dug a deep hole and started slinging shit.

Narcissistic personality disorder — one of several types of personality disorders — is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

Funny you mention the word dense. I was at Fujitsu Telecommunications working with Dense Wave Division Multiplexing for a few years not too long after college. I am not completely uninformed when it comes to light transmission although far from an expert in it. Still, it's not like I'm completely "dense" on the subject.

Anyway, I got on here to relay some anecdotal evidence as to the value of a scope not to pick a fight over the Internet. This thread has gotten way off topic. If you still want to debate, feel free to message me after this. Debate though please. Not demean or argue.

Now I, apparently not effectively, was relating various aspects of the scope. I made a point about the brightness and then mentioned that the large (relatively speaking) tube makes it "easier" to pass along that light. Again, "easier" man, not greater. I'm not sure why anyone would equate the word "easier" with the word greater, or more, etc. I did not say that. I assure you though, all things being equal, it is indeed "easier" to get it right (read less distortion) when you have more space when dealing with precision equipment and working with optics is no exception. Hopefully everyone will agree with that much.

Now, some on here have said that tube size doesn't make any difference with respect to the amount of light transmission. That is, mostly, a statement I agree with for what we are discussing. Given the input source sizes we are dealing with in a scope, a 1" tube, or even smaller, is more than is needed to transmit every bit of light it receives (assuming normal ambient lighting of course). You cannot, however, reduce that size indefinitely and doing so will add to complexity. Again, it's just "easier" to get things right (read less expensive, not impossible). We are in agreement then that a larger tube does not equate to passing more light. I hope that's clear.

Finally, I'm not sure why you felt the need for the narcissism definition. That's the sort of thing those in "glass houses" may want to avoid "WildBill3".

 

[DPS03]

But larger lenses still have nothing to do with their ability to pass a higher quantity of light. They DO allow a larger range of adjustment before optical clarity is lost near the edges of the lens, but they don’t allow more light to pass through. The quality of the glass and the coatings used would help there, but light transmission is not a function of tube, or lens, size.

Agreed.

I didn't do the best job of making that clear in my original post.

In the real world (reading not in a lab condensing light or anything oddball like that) tube size has nothing directly to do with the amount of light that is passed along.

 

[daylate]

Forgive my ignorance, but who/what is LOW?

Actually I believe these are made by JOL.... they’re One of if the 3 or 4 major optics makers in Japan. They also make Crimson Trace scopes

 

[cleric]

It's sometimes infuriating listening to idiots who think their "common sense" is all they need to understand end explain physical phenomena that takes literally years of study and practice to understand and master.

They're best ignored.

This chain had nothing to do with the other. And as much as I like koshkin I found his disingenuous.

I think that on the whole 34mm tubes have better glass quality then 30mm tubes. If I took all the scopes in each category and put them in a bag and randomly drew out some the 34mm would have better optics. So people think it’s the tube when then tube is just the housing. Other factors impact brightness such as design and glass quality

 

[308pirate]

This chain had nothing to do with the other. And as much as I like koshkin I found his disingenuous.

I think that on the whole 34mm tubes have better glass quality then 30mm tubes. If I took all the scopes in each category and put them in a bag and randomly drew out some the 34mm would have better optics. So people think it’s the tube when then tube is just the housing. Other factors impact brightness such as design and glass quality

You can think whatever you want. You haven't displayed any professional qualifications and experience in the field of optical engineering that would give you the credibility that Ilya Koshkin has earned.

 

[cleric]

You can think whatever you want. You haven't displayed any professional qualifications and experience in the field of optical engineering that would give you the credibility that Ilya Koshkin has earned.

And what I said has nothing to do with optical engineering. And yes I do understand optics because I have worked with optics in an adjacent industry. Koshin certainly knows more then me but my comment was on where the myth came from. Not why it is wrong. The myth has been around forever.
But hey have a good day. You seem like you are having in a bad mood

 

[DPS03]

The 3-18x50 MPO seems to be related to the Crimson Trace 3-18x50 that I have been messing with for a little while now. Optically they look exceedingly similar which is a good thing since I though CT was very nice for the money and MPO is five hundred dollars less. The turrets on the MPO have significantly better feel than CT and I like the covered windage turret. If you want to run it open without the cap, the scope is still waterproof.

There are some differences between the two aside from turrets, most notably with the illumination module. I do not know if they are specc'ed differently, but image quality looks exceedingly close.

It will be very interesting to see how it stacks up against Optika6 3-18x50 and a few other similarly configured scopes.

With SWFA 5-20x50, it is a tough call given how much of a track record SWFA has. Optically, they are probably pretty close. Mechanically, it will take time to work it out. The turrets on the SWFA 5-20x50 have more solid click, but MPO clicks are a little wider spaced.

They eyepiece is respectable. The scope is pretty easy to get behind.

Overall, barring some unforeseen QC issues, Brownells will likely do well with this one. If my guess on the OEM is correct, I suspect these will be manufactured consistently.

At around 14" in length and 30 ounces of weight, the scope is fairly average in terms of dimensions. It should work well with bolt guns and large frame ARs. The scope focuses down to 25 yards and with the eyepiece settign that works for my eye it actually does focus down to 25 yards on 18x.

Dual lines are an interesting solution to low mag visibility issues. Seems to work fairly well.

I'll let you know how it holds up.

ILya

Looking at this site and scrolling down to the specs on the 5-25x56 variant (the one I have), it sounds like you are correct in the manufacturer assuming it's confirmed that Crimson Trace is made there as well.

BTW, they claim a light transfer rate of 97%. Would be interested to know if that's correct.

 

[TripleOrNothing]

I bought a 3-18 from the PX. It's a nice scope glass is good, not great. Very bright and definitely an improvement over the PST 2 that it replaced. I have it on a Tikka CTR and have hit steel out to 1000. I just recently noticed what appears to be a small defect in one of the internal lenses. It's only noticable between 3-4 power. Once you get past 4 it's fine. Obviously a small chip on the edge of a lense. I contacted Brownells about repairing it and they said that they won't fix it without proof of purchase even though they are the only people who sell these. I contacted the Hide member I bought it from to see if he will help out. I think he's going to...we will see. Added pic of problem. Noticable at 6 o'clock on 3 power.

 

[srt-4_uk]

Sure you aren't looking at the end of your barrel?

 

[TripleOrNothing]

Sure you aren't looking at the end of your barrel?

Holy Shit! I did put on a new brake. I will investigate when a get home and let you know how big of a dumb ass I am.

 

[TripleOrNothing]

Scope is fine. User is an idiot. It was the new brake. I didn't even think about it mysteriously appearing at the same time. Thanks

 

[koshkin]

Scope is fine. User is an idiot. It was the new brake. I didn't even think about it mysteriously appearing at the same time. Thanks

It is so refreshing to see someone one fess up to inadvertently doing something stupid, get a laugh out of it and move on.

That is becoming increasingly more rare, but this is the stuff that keeps us all grounded.

ILya

 

[CrabsandFootball]

Thinking of putting on of these on a LMT MWS with 20" 6.5CM.

I do like the idea of shaving some weight but would it be worth spending $500 more for the Gen 2 Razor?

 

[gdonley308]

Do you still like the scope?

So much so that I now have two of the 5-25x56’s. One on my Tikka TAC A1 6.5Cm and one on my Custom .300 PRC. For the money I haven’t seen a scope close to these. They are tight at first for sure.

 

[Lowlight]

We had Ryan from Brownells in our Iowa class and that gave us the opportunity to test a second MPO,

We filmed a short video on it, because Marc saw one for the first time and was really impressed with this optic as a choice

Lately we have been seeing a lot of sub $1200 scopes in class and most are failing our tracking tests, some more by more than 3%, which I would consider out of spec.

Both the scope I have and the ones tested have been 100% and they just feel better overall to a lot of their competitors

I have been remiss in discussing this scope, but it’s a great option

 

[gdonley308]

We had Ryan from Brownells in our Iowa class and that gave us the opportunity to test a second MPO,

We filmed a short video on it, because Marc saw one for the first time and was really impressed with this optic as a choice

Lately we have been seeing a lot of sub $1200 scopes in class and most are failing our tracking tests, some more by more than 3%, which I would consider out of spec.

Both the scope I have and the ones tested have been 100% and they just feel better overall to a lot of their competitors

I have been remiss in discussing this scope, but it’s a great option

But how many of the sub $1200 scopes are 100% made in Japan, with customer service like Brownell’s? The only con to me is the weight, if being heavy duty is a con? On the Tikka it didn’t matter, on my Custom .300 PRC I wanted the rifle under 12lbs for hunting. Barely made it as the scope is 36.4oz based on my scale. I think once enough of these scopes are out there being tested, and more good reviews on YouTube float in, Brownell’s will have trouble keeping up with demand. I just hope the QC doesn’t go South if this happens.

 

[JeffLebowski]

I bought this scope. So far, have only had it to the gun range to sight it in. My impressions are as follows:

Very bright (better be...56 Objective, fully multi-coated, and a 34mm tube to make it easier to pass the light along)
Very clear (for a $1000 scope, it's pretty darn nice)
Feels VERY solid
A bit heavy

One con is that to adjust the reticle takes GI-Joe with Kung Fu grip...that thing is TIGHT.

View attachment 7396471

@DPS03 what sunshade is correct for these?

 

[DPS03]

@DPS03 what sunshade is correct for these?

The photo I have attached shows the sun shade that came with the scope along with the lens covers as well.

 

[JeffLebowski]

The photo I have attached shows the sun shade that came with the scope along with the lens covers as well.

sorry, I’m dense

 

[DPS03]

sorry, I’m dense

No!

How could you have known if it was aftermarket or not?

Anyway, what comes with it seems fine.

 

[Lowlight]

Brownells said exactly who made it, never hid it,

just because the factory name isn't on the box, doesn't mean we don't know,

maybe the problem is YOU don't know

 

[DPS03]

Brownells said exactly who made it, never hid it,

just because the factory name isn't on the box, doesn't mean we don't know,

maybe the problem is YOU don't know

Where did they say this? I searched far and wide and never found where they stated it. Appreciate a link!

 

[BallisticPrimate]

This appears to be a great option backed by an excellent warranty. Has anyone been able to compare the MPO to a vortex razor?

 

[Lowlight]

Same place in Japan everyone else gets their optics, LOW ...

 

[MilSpecOkie]

Has anyone using this found the 20 Mils of elevation a problem? With a 34mm tube I expected more, but I rarely get to shoot past 1200 yards anyway.

 

[DPS03]

Same place in Japan everyone else gets their optics, LOW ...

I get that but you said "Brownells said exactly who made it, never hid it" so I was thinking you would know where they said that as I cannot find it anywhere.

Was it by word of mouth from a rep maybe? Not posted on the Internet?

Thanks again.

 

[JeffLebowski]

Ima gonna grab the 5-25x

 

[YF12A]

Same place in Japan everyone else gets their optics, LOW ...

I know it will never happen, but that is one factory I would really like to get a tour of, especially with Ilya as a guide! Dream off!

 

[Lowlight]

I get that but you said "Brownells said exactly who made it, never hid it" so I was thinking you would know where they said that as I cannot find it anywhere.

Was it by word of mouth from a rep maybe? Not posted on the Internet?

Thanks again.

Stop being a hard head, I have no clue what Brownells has posted or not posted, as far as I can tell they are not posting here,

But yes The Reps have made it very clear to everyone they send the scopes as well as in front of users. Even in places like SHOT they never tried to hide it,

The fact they are not posting on forums doesn't mean they are hiding anything, show me their posts? Probably none, BUT WE ALL KNOW WHERE IT COMES FROM

Sorry they have not filtered down to your level, but why would they, enough people who are talking about it know so it's NOT HIDDEN

you're just too ignorant to figure it out and want to beat this idiotic horse as if the factory has a bearing more so than the SPEC required by the manufacturer who asks for an OEM product. It doesn't say CHINA on it, so clearly it's from JAPAN, and everyone goes to the same damn factory, maybe if it said Philippines you can ask, but it clearly says JAPAN and they have been quite open.

It's not 2012, nobody is being coy about this shit, get real

 

[DPS03]

Stop being a hard head, I have no clue what Brownells has posted or not posted, as far as I can tell they are not posting here,

But yes The Reps have made it very clear to everyone they send the scopes as well as in front of users. Even in places like SHOT they never tried to hide it,

The fact they are not posting on forums doesn't mean they are hiding anything, show me their posts? Probably none, BUT WE ALL KNOW WHERE IT COMES FROM

Sorry they have not filtered down to your level, but why would they, enough people who are talking about it know so it's NOT HIDDEN

you're just too ignorant to figure it out and want to beat this idiotic horse as if the factory has a bearing more so than the SPEC required by the manufacturer who asks for an OEM product. It doesn't say CHINA on it, so clearly it's from JAPAN, and everyone goes to the same damn factory, maybe if it said Philippines you can ask, but it clearly says JAPAN and they have been quite open.

It's not 2012, nobody is being coy about this shit, get real

My gosh man I asked for a simple link. Not sure why that's being a "hard head". I'll refrain from asking you questions in the future.

JOL (https://www.jolusa.com/products) makes scopes in that exact specification as well. They are in Japan as well. They could have made them there for all I know.

If you have talked to the reps and they say LOW then fine. You just said that Brownells said who made them. I thought you had a link to that. Didn't realize it would trigger you this way.

 

[wb00757]

If the optic is of sufficient quality, is backed by a company with a reputation like Brownells and doesn't come from a a country that you may prefer not to patronize then who cares if it's LOW or JOL? For me the quality speaks for itself. It's a great optic for the price.

 

[DPS03]

If the optic is of sufficient quality, is backed by a company with a reputation like Brownells and doesn't come from a a country that you may prefer not to patronize then who cares if it's LOW or JOL? For me the quality speaks for itself. It's a great optic for the price.

Agreed in that it doesn't much matter in the long run. More just out of curiosity. Didn't mean to upset folks by asking a question.

Have seen debate in various forums and was looking for a definitive answer is all.

 

[Lowlight]

It's a red herring bullshit debate and the fact people continue to engage in it just shows their level of stupidity and ignorance

They want to pretend it has a bearing when clearly there is next to no, US-made scopes and the limited examples don't move the needle worth talking about. It's a cheap shot way to dismiss an optic in favor of the exact same other brands

This is the reason we have begun testing each and every scope in our class and recording the data in a God Book... we have every optic tested to date and the results of those tests written down, well over 100 students so far are entered and it's growing every month.

It's trends, which scope within a Manufacturers's choices trend better than the rest, which ones have consistent issues, minor as many maybe vs which brands have proven to test at a higher level. We see differences between the $2000 offerings vs the $800, so a brand can stand on the results of the $2000 versions while seeing as the majority of issues in their sub $1000 one. Or like the case of Althon, we have found them to be 100% in our tests regardless of the models when it comes to tracking. You can debate optics, but we test track.

Why don't we like this series of "innocent question", because it promotes a false narrative that it matters when we see it's more about the spec put forth than the factory of origin.

 

[DPS03]

It's a red herring bullshit debate and the fact people continue to engage in it just shows their level of stupidity and ignorance

They want to pretend it has a bearing when clearly there is next to no, US-made scopes and the limited examples don't move the needle worth talking about. It's a cheap shot way to dismiss an optic in favor of the exact same other brands

This is the reason we have begun testing each and every scope in our class and recording the data in a God Book... we have every optic tested to date and the results of those tests written down, well over 100 students so far are entered and it's growing every month.

It's trends, which scope within a Manufacturers's choices trend better than the rest, which ones have consistent issues, minor as many maybe vs which brands have proven to test at a higher level. We see differences between the $2000 offerings vs the $800, so a brand can stand on the results of the $2000 versions while seeing as the majority of issues in their sub $1000 one. Or like the case of Althon, we have found them to be 100% in our tests regardless of the models when it comes to tracking. You can debate optics, but we test track.

Why don't we like this series of "innocent question", because it promotes a false narrative that it matters when we see it's more about the spec put forth than the factory of origin.

Thank you!

Makes much more sense to me now.

I was asking for my own edification so if someone sees the scope at the range and asks about it I could say it was made at the same place _____ was.

As you point out though, that could lead to a bad assumption.

 

[AIKNOWU]

This site can offer some insights that folks with an interest in the conversation of the previous dozen posts might appreciate:

Japan Optical Co., Ltd., Japan, 〒520-3024 Shiga-ken, Rittō-shi, Ogaki, 5 Chome−13−5 セブンイレブン栗東小柿５丁目店 | Supplier Report — Panjiva

Japan Optical Co., Ltd. at Japan, 〒520-3024 Shiga-ken, Rittō-shi, Ogaki, 5 Chome−13−5 セブンイレブン栗東小柿５丁目店. Find their customers, contact information, and details on 193 shipments.

panjiva.com

 

[fdkay]

Figured I'd chime in.
Here is a Brownell's rep at shot show.