Rifle Scopes Are S&B scopes really that much better?

#51
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jake6547</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wish I knew somebody in the area that had one. probley wouldn't take much to convince me. </div></div>

If you can make the drive to EuroOptic in PA, you can compare ALL the scopes side by side. +Alex the owner is a real good guy to deal with.

Fair waring, I did this last year and ended up walking out with an S&B.
 
#52
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 25MAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I recall reading somewhere...and please correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the Schmidt&Benders the only scopes to pass every phase of the military standard testing they put different brand scopes through before approving them for a military contract?

I could have sworn I read that in one of the posts...if that is the case that truly proves how reliable and tough they are compared to the rest.

and before someone jumps all over this post...I am asking the question if that is a fact, I am not making a statement
smile.gif
</div></div>

I was told by someone from Steiner Optics and two guys from Sako that this was the case. I was told that S&B was the only scope that passed all the tests for the PRS submission - hence the reason that it was picked for the PSR contract. I was also told that the second runner up was Nightforce and that NF only failed one or two of the tests.

I have no proof that any of this is true other than what I heard from the these people. Since Sako is also owned by Beretta, and since Sako worked directly with S&B in conjunction with developing the M10 TRG in hopes of getting the PSR contract, I would think that the information is somewhat reputable.

Here's a link to the PSR performance specs as outlined:

https://www.neco.navy.mil/synopsis_file/N0016410RJQ31_10RJQ31_spec_DRAFT.pdf

Unfortunately I don't have the final results, just the listed expectations for all submitted scopes.
 
#53
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: UncleBenji</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scot E</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I would be very curious to hear what S&B owners have to say about durability and specifically turret repeatability. I haven't had the luxury of owning a S&B but from what I have gathered they aren't built like NF or Premier as far as turret repeatability is concerned.

Scot E. </div></div>

S&B are the benchmark for which other scopes are compared. You will never have tracking problems with the S&B's, and any issues that you've heard of might be related to the older Premier serviced S&B's that were put out with some inferior components due to supply delays - it's old news. Rob01 is right; don't let it's refined exterior detract from it's rugged interior and repeatability. </div></div>

I'm not posting to "bash" Bender, but it is incorrect to espouse/pontificate statements like above. Benders can have issues too!

Mine was getting 2moa advanced between zero and 10moa on the dial. I discovered it while performing the tracking test I SHOULD have performed immediately upon purchasing/mounting. I spent a year scratching my head over why my 175smk that chronoed 2655fps was only taking 11.25moa to get from 100 yards to 600 yards.

Called Bender, explained the situation. They had me send it in, and they very promptly gave it a full exam, found additional troubles, and replaced the erector assembly.

I have no gripe about the product (other than $$!!) or the service. It is fantastic, but everything can/will fail. Buy with confidence, but don't think for a second that it can, or will never have an issue.
 
#54
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Oh, I do have some gripes, come to think of it:

Illumination knob is in the way, and can prevent you from mounting the scope exactly where you like, and it doesn't have an off position between each level if intensity.
 
#55
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: springer01</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not worth it and not needed at all from a cost stand point. They will not make you shoot better.. just like a Ferrari will not make you drive faster.. however, my NEXT SCOPE IS GOING TO BE AN S&B. I already made up my mind on this =)</div></div>

Pretty sure a Ferrari would make me drive faster!!
cool.gif
</div></div>

Not faster than a souped up Honda even though it cost 10 times more. Also I seen a guy take a stock Mazda 323 with race tires on them much faster than another guy with a souped up Mustang.
laugh.gif
 
#56
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: UncleBenji</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scot E</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I would be very curious to hear what S&B owners have to say about durability and specifically turret repeatability. I haven't had the luxury of owning a S&B but from what I have gathered they aren't built like NF or Premier as far as turret repeatability is concerned.

Scot E. </div></div>

S&B are the benchmark for which other scopes are compared. You will never have tracking problems with the S&B's, and any issues that you've heard of might be related to the older Premier serviced S&B's that were put out with some inferior components due to supply delays - it's old news. Rob01 is right; don't let it's refined exterior detract from it's rugged interior and repeatability. </div></div>

I'm not posting to "bash" Bender, but it is incorrect to espouse/pontificate statements like above. Benders can have issues too!

Mine was getting 2moa advanced between zero and 10moa on the dial. I discovered it while performing the tracking test I SHOULD have performed immediately upon purchasing/mounting. I spent a year scratching my head over why my 175smk that chronoed 2655fps was only taking 11.25moa to get from 100 yards to 600 yards.

Called Bender, explained the situation. They had me send it in, and they very promptly gave it a full exam, found additional troubles, and replaced the erector assembly.

I have no gripe about the product (other than $$!!) or the service. It is fantastic, but everything can/will fail. Buy with confidence, but don't think for a second that it can, or will never have an issue.</div></div>

I used the word "never" as a colloquialism, not to be taken literally. Of course there are the random issues that occur - thank you for the obvious statement.

Perhaps I need to be blatently literal for both you and the OP. How's this: For every problem that occures with an S&B, there is an increased disproportionate amount of problems that occur with other scopes of similar price.
 
#58
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

I still am yet to look through a S&B that has the paralax knob actually match the distance shooting. Not a huge deal, but still irritating. Also noticed it on several PR, but not as much on USO scopes. Dont know why it is.

But I love that, "AH HA" moment when you look through great glass. Love it.

And yes, my next scope is either going to be a S&B, Hendsoldt, or March. Dang decisions (and availability!!).

Regards,
DT
 
#59
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: D_TROS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I still am yet to look through a S&B that has the paralax knob actually match the distance shooting. Not a huge deal, but still irritating. Also noticed it on several PR, but not as much on USO scopes. Dont know why it is.

But I love that, "AH HA" moment when you look through great glass. Love it.

And yes, my next scope is either going to be a S&B, Hendsoldt, or March. Dang decisions (and availability!!).

Regards,
DT </div></div>

I agree. I'm yet to encounter a scope whose marked parallax knob properly corresponds. Perhaps each scope is a little different, and the knob isnt one size fits all... For $3k, you'd think the could test this, and etch the knob individually calibrated to the scooe.

In reality though, it's a non-issue...
 
#61
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tylerw02</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doesn't necessary parallax compensation differ based on environmental? </div></div>

And the fact that we all see things differently (function of our eyes and focal point)?
 
#62
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tylerw02</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doesn't necessary parallax compensation differ based on environmental? </div></div>

Good question ...

I didn't think so, I thought it was only a function of simple geometry - that the objective image must be projected onto the same plane as the reticle, or else there is a parallax error.

I could be wrong, but I'm don't know how temperature/baro/etc would affect the focal length.
 
#63
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: msr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tylerw02</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doesn't necessary parallax compensation differ based on environmental? </div></div>

And the fact that we all see things differently (function of our eyes and focal point)? </div></div>

I'm pretty sure parallax is not subjective. One persons eyes may notice it more or less, but that doesn't mean more/less parallax exists...

...I think!
 
#64
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: msr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tylerw02</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Doesn't necessary parallax compensation differ based on environmental? </div></div>

And the fact that we all see things differently (function of our eyes and focal point)?</div></div>

I think the eye focus also changes the point at which the parallax adjusts to clarity. If I'm wearing my contacts then the parallax is spot on. If I'm not wearing contacts, then the parallax is about 15-20 yds off.
 
#65
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

The parallax adjustment is also in meters so if dealing in yards then it won't be right on. I have found with my S&Bs that they were damn close.

Also I would never say that you will never have a problem with a scope of any manufacturer as anything made by man can break. I have found you have a smaller chance of anything happening or being wrong though with the S&Bs and you can see that on most boards. And if anything does go wrong S&B has a first rate Service Center in Ashburn, VA and Mark, Phil or Jerry will get you taken care of ASAP. They are also building scopes there as well.
 
#66
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Numbered parallax knobs are like BDC turrets, even if done perfectly for one set of conditions, they only work correctly under that one set of conditions. It's not the manufacturers fault that conditions vary.

As pressure, temperature and humidity change, they don't just change the resistance the bullet encounters, they also change the refractive properties of the air. This affects the overall optical formula because the stuff between the scope and the target (which happens to be air for our purposes) with its refractive index is part of the overall optical formula.

An extreme case that everyone has seen is the reflection of objects above very hot surfaces (like a road) in the summer. That is what changing refractive index depending on the air temperature can do to light rays. Guess what it can do to the parallax setting?

Practically, you have to find the right parallax setting for every set of conditions, just like you have to find a firing solution for every set of conditions. Fortunately, it es quite easy to just dial out parallax and be done with it, ignoring the numbers.
 
#67
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: David S.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As pressure, temperature and humidity change, they don't just change the resistance the bullet encounters, they also change the refractive properties of the air. This affects the overall optical formula because the stuff between the scope and the target (which happens to be air for our purposes) with its refractive index is part of the overall optical formula. </div></div>

This is what I was getting at.
 
#69
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Turbo,
What S&B do you have that does not have off between each position? I have not seen one that did not.
RTH
 
#70
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rth1800</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Turbo,
What S&B do you have that does not have off between each position? I have not seen one that did not.
RTH </div></div>

PM-II 5-25x56, P4F, CW DT moa... ...but because it went to Bender for the tracking/erecter issue, it's coming back with CCW DT MTC mrad turrets!
 
#72
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ASM1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I thought I was the Only Guy that had Gold Fish in his scope! My question is How the hell do I feed them ?
</div></div>
Yah, its a little embarrassing having a $3,500.00 scope fill up with water, but shit happens.
Truth is any scope can fail and S&B were great to deal with.

Their shock and disbelief that the scope had failed was pretty amusing and almost comical.
You could almost hear them thinking, "Oh MINE GOT! ZEE Outrage! Franz Dietrich built ZAT dam scope.

He Vill will be shotZ at dawn for Zis"!
smile.gif
 
#73
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scot E</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Am I reading the specs correctly, the PMII 5-25 has 26 MILs of adjustment but the rest of their scopes have about half that amount? </div></div>
That depends - the actual Elevation travel specs vary from model to model and whether the scope is MIL-based or MOA-based. Most of the 0.1 MIL versions of the PMII 5-25X[56mm] are spec'ed at 26 MILs' of Elevation adjustment - including the MTC/LT [More Tacile Click/Locking Turret], but the non-LT MTC [More Tacile Click] version is spec'ed at 22 MILs'. All of these have 0.1 MIL clicks.

In contrast, the two (2) MOA-based versions of the PMII 5-25X[56mm] are spec'ed at 65 MOA and 64 MOA of Elevation adjustment. The standard DT Turret (non-MTC/non LT) is spec'ed at 65 MOA of .25 MOA clicks, while the MTC/LT [More Tacile Click/Locking Turret] is spec'ed at 64 MOA of .25 MOA clicks. 65 MOA of Elevation travel is obviously a lot less than the MIL version (26 MILs' converted to MOA is roughly 93 MOA).

The 0.1 MIL versions of the PMII 4-16X[42mm] and PMII 4-16X[50mm] are spec'ed at 13 MILs' of Elevation adjustment and come in ST (Single Turn) Turret only. The .25 MOA versions of the PMII 4-16X[42mm] and PMII 4-16X[50mm] are spec'ed at 56 MOA of Elevation adjustment and come in DT (Double Turn) Turret only (the finer .25 MOA adjustments need the DT Turret to get to 65 MOA, while all 13 MILs' of the MIL version can be dialed in a ST. The 4-16X is an older design and it's Erector doesn't have enough travel to need a second turn for the MIL version.

Not counting the different reticles available, there are actually twenty (20) different configurations of the PMII 3-12X[50mm]: Six (6) Non-Illuminated, Non-adjustable Parallax versions, Six (6) Non-Illuminated, Adjustable Parallax (<span style="font-style: italic">"P"</span>)versions, Six (6) Illuminated, Adjustable Parallax (<span style="font-style: italic">"LP"</span> ) versions, a Non-Illuminated, MTC (<span style="font-style: italic">"P/MTC"</span>) version, and an Illuminated, Adjustable Parallax, MTC (<span style="font-style: italic">"LP/MTC"</span>) version. These scopes range from 12 MIL ST Turret to 22 MIL DT to 13 MIL ST and 22 MIL DT to 32 MOA ST and 56 MOA DT travel.

The as-yet-un-released PMII 3-20X[50mm] DT/LP/MTC/LT (Double Turn/Illuminated/Adjustable Parallax/More Tacile Click/Locking Turret) is spec'ed at 26 MIL's in 0.1 MIL increments for the MIL version and 64 MOA in .25 MOA increments for the MOA version.


Keith
 
#74
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
ASM1 said:
"Oh MINE GOT! ZEE Outrage! Franz Dietrich built ZAT dam scope.

He Vill will be shotZ at dawn for Zis"!
smile.gif

</div></div>

Lol......good to hear S&B also has this kind of accountability!
Click to expand...
 
#76
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope.
 
#77
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

One thing to remember too is these comparison threads always seem to spin out into a black and white "this one is the best and this one sucks" discussion and here, especially, that's not the case. The S&B hands down is better in about all categories. Better by a lot or better by a tiny bit is what is debatable, but the bottom line is when you go down every box the sum of all its parts equates to S&B being the best overall.
 
#78
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">One thing to remember too is these comparison threads always seem to spin out into a black and white "this one is the best and this one sucks" discussion and here, especially, that's not the case. The S&B hands down is better in about all categories. <span style="color: #FF6600">Better by a lot or better by a tiny bit is what is debatable, but the bottom line is when you go down every box the sum of all its parts equates to S&B being the best overall</span>. </div></div>


I like the way Mike has sumed it up.! Question you have to ask your self, can I aford 1st class or 2nd.? Simple answer look in your wallet
grin.gif
 
#79
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

I don't use the scopes for work but I haven't found one that is "better." I thought that the Hensoldt had the best glass, no scientific testing just what looked best to me. I like the EREK turret on the USO more then the others. I like the compact size and weight of the March scopes. My favorite reticle so far is the Gen2 xr by Premier.

I guess there is no single feature of the S&B that is a favorite but all together the scope is really nice.
 
#80
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Something else that should be added to this thread...

The FFP assembly on S&B is probably the best of all makes. Take any other FFP scope and run it up and down through the power range while checking the eye box and edge glass clarity. I think S&B wins this hands down.

Very forgiving eye box compared to other FFP's in its class and edge clarity is flawless.

That is pretty important to me in an FFP scope. Some manufacturers make really nice SFP scopes but thier FFP scopes are lacking.
 
#81
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 11B-B4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Something else that should be added to this thread...

The FFP assembly on S&B is probably the best of all makes. Take any other FFP scope and run it up and down through the power range while checking the eye box and edge glass clarity. I think S&B wins this hands down.

Very forgiving eye box compared to other FFP's in its class and edge clarity is flawless.

That is pretty important to me in an FFP scope. Some manufacturers make really nice SFP scopes but thier FFP scopes are lacking. </div></div>

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure clarity and eyebox throughout the power range has nothing to do with where the reticle is located.
 
#82
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope. </div></div>


A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells).
 
#83
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope. </div></div>


A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>


http://www.snipercentral.com/sbp2.htm

I really don't think the guys listed in the above article are either old nor blind. Perhaps you were just being sarcastic...but really...you should try comparing S&B to your NF. I think you'll be surprised at the difference. I was a doubter and thought nothing could beat my NF scopes...but there is a difference and now I've switched to optics with premium German sourced glass. They are expensive...but worth every $100's more than my NF. My moto...use the very best optic that fits your needs and budget....shoot more...and enjoy life!

Wayne

P.S.

This is probably an old article...but I don't think the Marine snipers would have selected the more expensive S&B scope over the others for no reason. Guess they are motivated by the fact they are laying their lives on the line...but guys in that position get my respect for their opinions.
 
#84
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Senderofan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope. </div></div>


A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>


http://www.snipercentral.com/sbp2.htm

I really don't think the guys listed in the above article are either old nor blind. Perhaps you were just being sarcastic...but really...you should try comparing S&B to your NF. I think you'll be surprised at the difference. I was a doubter and thought nothing could beat my NF scopes...but there is a difference and now I've switched to optics with premium German sourced glass. They are expensive...but worth every $100's more than my NF. My moto...use the very best optic that fits your needs and budget....shoot more...and enjoy life!

Wayne

P.S.

This is probably an old article...but I don't think the Marine snipers would have selected the more expensive S&B scope over the others for no reason. Guess they are motivated by the fact they are laying their lives on the line...but guys in that position get my respect for their opinions. </div></div>


Well I can't see much difference between NF and Bushnells either. I have 3 NF's and zero Bushnells, so no reason for me to try to talk them up.

I am being serious, guys who own the high end glass tends to be older guys, or guys that have coke bottles subscribed for glasses... or both.

Marine Snipers are not paying for their scopes. Also I have seen Snipers with NightForce too. Remember, these guys do not get to pick their gear, we do. Also the article that you linked said it best at the end when it stated...

"So the question remains, is the scope worth $2500? Or what many people always ask, is it twice as good as a Leupold mark 4 or Nightforce as the price indicates? Well, no, it is not twice as good, but neither is a Nightforce twice as good as a Nikon. But, as quality goes up, it takes more and more effort to get the smaller gains"
 
#85
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pgh_rugger</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 11B-B4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Something else that should be added to this thread...

The FFP assembly on S&B is probably the best of all makes. Take any other FFP scope and run it up and down through the power range while checking the eye box and edge glass clarity. I think S&B wins this hands down.

Very forgiving eye box compared to other FFP's in its class and edge clarity is flawless.

That is pretty important to me in an FFP scope. Some manufacturers make really nice SFP scopes but thier FFP scopes are lacking. </div></div>

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure clarity and eyebox throughout the power range has nothing to do with where the reticle is located. </div></div>

Yes you are wrong. To make a quality FFP unit it is very hard to not disturb these qualities. Look in high end vs lower end FFP units you will see the difference. This isnt even glass quality... this is huge problems in the way the scope performs.
 
#86
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope. </div></div>


A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>

Wow. How is this thread still going? I really like this contrasting perspective of this post but it reinforces the truth:

- If the actual activity of shooting is not your profession & source of income, you don't <span style="text-decoration: underline">need </span>one -- and that's almost all of us
- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying
- If you are trying to quantify $2500 as having to be twice as good as $1250, it is not worth buying
- If you can think of much better ways to spend money, it is not worth buying
- If you judge, stereotype or classify S&B owners or view ownership as a status symbol, you definitely don't need one

If you enjoy shooting as a hobby, appreciate refinement and have disposable income ... why the fuck not buy a few to enhance the hobby? I own 2 now and I love them. I'm not a sniper. I don't think I'm a sniper. I don't even compete. I'm not old. I love to shoot. I notice the difference -- and I absolutely love the difference. I shoot in the desert with friends, and I could care less if nobody ever sees or knows I have them cause I bought them for me. That's my story.
 
#87
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamstur</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you looked through a FFP scope yet?
I really don't like them on lower powers....Just the nature of the beast. Not saying its all bad, but you should make sure before you run off to buy the "dream".

Not sure why you would sell a perfectly good scope....Just dumping the money IMHO. Personally I would just save for the S&B...So what if it takes a bit longer..There is always another rifle that needs another scope. </div></div>


A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>

Wow. How is this thread still going? I really like this contrasting perspective of this post but it reinforces the truth:

- If the actual activity of shooting is not your profession & source of income, you don't <span style="text-decoration: underline">need </span>one -- and that's almost all of us
- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying
- If you are trying to quantify $2500 as having to be twice as good as $1250, it is not worth buying
- If you can think of much better ways to spend money, it is not worth buying
- If you judge, stereotype or classify S&B owners or view ownership as a status symbol, you definitely don't need one

If you enjoy shooting as a hobby, appreciate refinement and have disposable income ... why the fuck not buy a few to enhance the hobby? I own 2 now and I love them. I'm not a sniper. I don't think I'm a sniper. I don't even compete. I'm not old. I love to shoot. I notice the difference -- and I absolutely love the difference. I shoot in the desert with friends, and I could care less if nobody ever sees or knows I have them cause I bought them for me. That's my story. </div></div>

Exactly!

And why justify the cost of the NF? I've got a couple of Sightron S III's that compare very favorably to the NF and are half the cost.

The answer to the question "Why?" is because for the time being...we can. It's nice to have so many good to excellent choices in optics. To each their own. I'd prefer to enjoy my rigs in private..I'm anti status symbol myself....lucky for me...most guys in these parts think NcStar is a top tier optic company.

I hope we have this many companies and price points to choose from..for many more decades. I think it only benefits the consumer...us collectively.

Wayne
 
#88
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamstur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Wow. How is this thread still going? I really like this contrasting perspective of this post but it reinforces the truth:

- If the actual activity of shooting is not your profession & source of income, you don't <span style="text-decoration: underline">need </span>one -- and that's almost all of us
- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying
- If you are trying to quantify $2500 as having to be twice as good as $1250, it is not worth buying
- If you can think of much better ways to spend money, it is not worth buying
- If you judge, stereotype or classify S&B owners or view ownership as a status symbol, you definitely don't need one

If you enjoy shooting as a hobby, appreciate refinement and have disposable income ... why the fuck not buy a few to enhance the hobby? I own 2 now and I love them. I'm not a sniper. I don't think I'm a sniper. I don't even compete. I'm not old. I love to shoot. I notice the difference -- and I absolutely love the difference. I shoot in the desert with friends, and I could care less if nobody ever sees or knows I have them cause I bought them for me. That's my story. </div></div>


All good points. To me hobbies are suppose to cost money, and you should get what makes you happy. Just giving my 2 cents in on the matter.
 
#89
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">

I am being serious, guys who own the high end glass tends to be older guys, or guys that have coke bottles subscribed for glasses... or both.
</span></div></div>

Now, THAT is damn funny!
laugh.gif
 
#90
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>

And thinking it's all about the glass is the first mistake. Glass is a little ways down the line in the wants and needs list for scopes. Reliability in the adjustments and repeatability in those adjustments are a higher concern and you also get those in an S&B. You get those in NF scopes as well but Leupold is not known for them or are the other brands mentioned. Depends how much precision you want on your precision rifle.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamstur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Wow. How is this thread still going? I really like this contrasting perspective of this post but it reinforces the truth:

- If the actual activity of shooting is not your profession & source of income, you don't <span style="text-decoration: underline">need </span>one -- and that's almost all of us
- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying
- If you are trying to quantify $2500 as having to be twice as good as $1250, it is not worth buying
- If you can think of much better ways to spend money, it is not worth buying
- If you judge, stereotype or classify S&B owners or view ownership as a status symbol, you definitely don't need one

If you enjoy shooting as a hobby, appreciate refinement and have disposable income ... why the fuck not buy a few to enhance the hobby? I own 2 now and I love them. I'm not a sniper. I don't think I'm a sniper. I don't even compete. I'm not old. I love to shoot. I notice the difference -- and I absolutely love the difference. I shoot in the desert with friends, and I could care less if nobody ever sees or knows I have them cause I bought them for me. That's my story.</div></div>

So sweating and saving isn't worth doing anymore? Guess that says alot about our society now where hard work is just too hard. No need to train or work to refine the skills either I guess.

Obviously if you need the money to feed the kids you wouldn't take from that to buy something you want. That's common sense. But there is nothing wrong with seeing an item you want and think it might help you in your hobby and putting money aside and saving for it

Apply that list to any shooting product. With that list we all shouldn't be shooting anything more than inexpensive factory rifles topped with Barskas. No custom rifles, no Atlas bipods, no Sphur mounts, no expensive packs etc, etc. Well I guess you get the point. Precision isn't always cheap especially where optics are concerned.
 
#91
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

They're great scopes, but I have to be doing some serious shooting to justify the price for one.

I don't shoot nearly enough to justify for a $4,000 scope.

My HDMR has worked well out to 1000 yards. Perhaps at that range a S&B will outshine it, but I can think of many other things to do with the 2500 I just saved over the course of a year. LOL

but I also don't make 6 figures a year. If I did, I probably would buy one regardless. LOL
 
#92
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamstur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying</div></div>
So sweating and saving isn't worth doing anymore? Guess that says alot about our society now where hard work is just too hard. No need to train or work to refine the skills either I guess.

<span style="color: #CC0000">Obviously if you need the money to feed the kids you wouldn't take from that to buy something you want. That's common sense. </span>But there is nothing wrong with seeing an item you want and think it might help you in your hobby and putting money aside and saving for it</div></div>

I picked an easily misconstrued word, or you read way too deep into that one.

I meant "sweating" as in stress from poor decisions to scrounge the cash for one ... i.e., ignoring common sense and starving the kids or defaulting bills for a hobby. I've dealt with enough people in a supervisory role to know folks very often ignore common sense, make bad decisions & get into serious financial ruts.

I firmly believe we should all "sweat" by working hard and do the best at what we do, but reality is we don't all have the same income. In my post above, I'm just saying if someone can't afford one without making bad decisions, any perceived quality difference is not worth the burden from repurcussions. As someone replied above, a NF is a stretch for his budget, so he is perfectly happy using Sightron.

There's a lot of great product out there at very affordable prices -- I'm just throwing the line out there that S&B are phenomenal scopes, but a hobby should be fun & exciting ... and not bring financial, family, or personal ruin to justify owning the shinier toy.
 
#93
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ASM1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I thought I was the Only Guy that had Gold Fish in his scope! My question is How the hell do I feed them ?
</div></div>
Yah, its a little embarrassing having a $3,500.00 scope fill up with water, but shit happens.
Truth is any scope can fail and S&B were great to deal with.

Their shock and disbelief that the scope had failed was pretty amusing and almost comical.
You could almost hear them thinking, "Oh MINE GOT! ZEE Outrage! Franz Dietrich built ZAT dam scope.

He Vill will be shotZ at dawn for Zis"!
smile.gif

</div></div>

dude i lived in germany and i dont care who you are thats funny so true so true
 
#94
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

I guess at being in my mid 30s I wear glasses and am getting old. Guess I should trade my fully customized sn-3 for a barska or some 300 dollar super sniper. My boss would be thrilled.
 
#95
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EricCartmann</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

A lot of people do not need "S&B Glass" so why even save? S&B Glass is for old blind guys that can't see. Some people are born with horrible vision, and as you age it gets worse. Your ability to see contrast and shades of colors degrade.

I think I just talked myself out of an S&B and will stick to NightForce and Leupolds (as well as Weavers and Bushnells). </div></div>

And thinking it's all about the glass is the first mistake. Glass is a little ways down the line in the wants and needs list for scopes. Reliability in the adjustments and repeatability in those adjustments are a higher concern and you also get those in an S&B. You get those in NF scopes as well but Leupold is not known for them or are the other brands mentioned. Depends how much precision you want on your precision rifle.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamstur</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Wow. How is this thread still going? I really like this contrasting perspective of this post but it reinforces the truth:

- If the actual activity of shooting is not your profession & source of income, you don't <span style="text-decoration: underline">need </span>one -- and that's almost all of us
- If you have to sweat & save to buy one, it is not worth buying
- If you are trying to quantify $2500 as having to be twice as good as $1250, it is not worth buying
- If you can think of much better ways to spend money, it is not worth buying
- If you judge, stereotype or classify S&B owners or view ownership as a status symbol, you definitely don't need one

If you enjoy shooting as a hobby, appreciate refinement and have disposable income ... why the fuck not buy a few to enhance the hobby? I own 2 now and I love them. I'm not a sniper. I don't think I'm a sniper. I don't even compete. I'm not old. I love to shoot. I notice the difference -- and I absolutely love the difference. I shoot in the desert with friends, and I could care less if nobody ever sees or knows I have them cause I bought them for me. That's my story.</div></div>

So sweating and saving isn't worth doing anymore? Guess that says alot about our society now where hard work is just too hard. No need to train or work to refine the skills either I guess.

Obviously if you need the money to feed the kids you wouldn't take from that to buy something you want. That's common sense. But there is nothing wrong with seeing an item you want and think it might help you in your hobby and putting money aside and saving for it

Apply that list to any shooting product. With that list we all shouldn't be shooting anything more than inexpensive factory rifles topped with Barskas. No custom rifles, no Atlas bipods, no Sphur mounts, no expensive packs etc, etc. Well I guess you get the point. Precision isn't always cheap especially where optics are concerned. </div></div>


Why limit you and your hard work to a S&B? Why not work harder and get a Hensoldt ZF 6-24x72 SAM? Why use the cheapie S&B? The ZF is only $8000 more, and if you value hard work, you will have no problem saving up for it
smile.gif
 
#96
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

Hensoldts don't have a good choice in reticles
wink.gif
Seriously, i don't pick them by price. I wish S&Bs were cheaper. I would still use them. They give me everything I have ever needed out of a scope. I started using them about 6 years ago and still have my first 5-25 and it's never let me down after flying all over the country to matches. I will stick with my S&Bs for a while thanks
smile.gif


Hamstur seems like we were coming from the same spot but just different ways of getting there.
 
#97
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

S&B sent me a PMII to T&E. I tried it in every condition next to my NF and optically I saw nothing to make me spend more money. The adjustable illumination was nice and focus below 50 yards was nice. As much as I wanted to fall in love with the S&B, I just didn't. Needless to say I still shoot NF.
 
#98
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

I've only had my 5-25 for 3 days and don't even have the gun to mount it on yet so I can't comment on that, but my short dot is nothing short of awesome. Believe it or not I have had a nightforce go down on me, wandering zero, while my S&B has been beat to hell and is still good to go! Plus I am biased because I live about 15 minutes from their US service center.
 
#99
Re: Are S&B scopes really that much better?

I shoot a NF and I have shot with a S&B. At first glance it was harder to distinguish the difference optically, but after shooting 2 or 3 days in a row on the NF then switching it was a pretty big difference.

Both scopes are robust and can take a beating, but I don't have a reason to spend that much more, you might.

To be honest I really like the simplicity and design of NF's so maybe I'm partial in this comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sm1990
Rifle Scopes S&b 1-8 short dot
Replies
2
Views
262
charnicus
charnicus
carbonbased
Rifle Scopes S&B 5-25 vs 3-20 US at 20x
Replies
25
Views
560
carbonbased
carbonbased
carbonbased
Flare / Glare / Backlit notes on 4 scopes (NX8 4-32, Razor Gen II 4.5-27, Razor LHT 4.5-22, S&B 5-25)
Replies
10
Views
457
carbonbased
carbonbased
Secant
Help Me Pick Rangefinding Binos (2024/2025)
Replies
57
Views
1K
Chukwithak
C
9
Digital vs. Optical scopes
Replies
2
Views
262
Rancid Coolaid
Rancid Coolaid
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts