Rifle Scopes Brownell’s Match Optic
- Thread starter Afkirby
- Start date
Sig doesn't make optics.
They order them like most of these companies do.
The Tango 6 are LOW scopes, just like the Bushnell tacticals, Primary Arms Platinum, Razor Gen 1, Sightmark Pinnacle and others.
You're right. I said Sig made them and LOW does for them. The point remains that another company doing the same thing doesn't hurt the consumer when many come from the same manufacturer, so Brownell's not having been in the optics "making" business doesnt matter to the end item.
The Tango6 1-6x24 appears to be at least assembled in Oregon.
"SIG SAUER Electro-Optics fuses superior optical designs, advanced electronic technologies, and ruggedized mechanical systems tested to MIL-STD-810G at our R&D and assembly facility in Oregon, USA "
Grammatically speaking, this phrase is carefully written—all they’re saying is that they have a scope design that has advanced electronics and rugged mechanical design that at one point was tested to MIL-STD-810G at their lab in Oregon.
It is written to be legally correct (they could test 1 scope, one time and it would be true) but purposefully misleading; the scopes are absolutely made and assembled in Japan, but may undergo OQC or packaging in the US.
Maybe I've just worked in the retail industry too long but the private label game drives me nuts. I am sure that knowing Brownells they sourced a great scope, assuming its from LOW it will be quality but I want to see an optic companies name on my scope, not a retailer.
I know they are all playing the same sourcing game and it doesn't really matter but my assumption the moment I see something like this is that they are sourcing it to grow profit margin and then I immediately wonder what other corners have been cut...
That said, it looks like they focused on the right features to hit the price point.
I know they are all playing the same sourcing game and it doesn't really matter but my assumption the moment I see something like this is that they are sourcing it to grow profit margin and then I immediately wonder what other corners have been cut...
That said, it looks like they focused on the right features to hit the price point.
Don't think so. But Brownell's has changed them from "unavailable" to "pre-order". I believe they said June as the release date.
What are you talking about? I have one (Mark5HD 3.6-18×44) that came in yesterday. I assure you, the battery compartment holds a 2032 and it has 7 illumination settings with off detents between them. Not sure where you got the idea it is non illuminated only.
I’m really interested in these too. Looks like a great package in a $1000 scope. Hopefully they will get into the hands of some good guys and we’ll start seeing some reviews.
I just started testing the 3-18x50.
I really like what I am seeing so far given the price.
ILya
I really like what I am seeing so far given the price.
ILya
one arrived, I will open the box tomorrow
Excellent Frank. I had 2 on order but cancelled after NOT hearing any review. Always appreciate your view.
The ones going to the military are supposed to be assembled in the US, so there facility was being prepared for that.
What else they do in the US, I do not know.
ILya
I am really curious what your thoughts are on the reticle once you do some shooting with it.
I think it is well conceived, but there are a couple of design elements there that give me a little trouble.
ILya
I have purchased several Brownell house brand items and across the board I have been really happy with the quality. Based on what I have seen so far they will not put their name on something unless it is a quality item. I’m really hoping the optics fit into the same class of products. They defiantly have a lot of competition at that price point though. There have been so many good optics released in the last several years that hover right around that $1k price point. It really becomes necessary to have something that sets your product apart. I really like Brownell and hope they are able to pull it off with this optic. Im really looking forward to hearing some reviews on these.
Both of which absolutely suck! No risk when you take into account Brownells no questions asked return policy.
Opened the box,
It's a solid offering especially considering the price point,
Some basic, open the box, images
The iPhone wants to look past the reticle, but I will get the other phone to get a reticle image.
The picture is very nice, a tiny bit of yellow around the edges, but nothing earthshattering I have seen much worse.
The scope feels solid, the clicks are audible, there is a tiny hollow feeling for lack fo a better word. While it has some weight to it, there is a tiny bit of thinness to it when clicking.
It focuses down very nice, that tree is only like 8 yards away. and I didn't try to perfect it, I just go a pretty close "full sight picture" and clicked it. Damn iPhone wants to switch lenses on your when trying to focus in or expand. Rather than fight it, I will just grab a single-lens camera for a better shot.
It's a solid offering especially considering the price point,
Some basic, open the box, images
The iPhone wants to look past the reticle, but I will get the other phone to get a reticle image.
The picture is very nice, a tiny bit of yellow around the edges, but nothing earthshattering I have seen much worse.
The scope feels solid, the clicks are audible, there is a tiny hollow feeling for lack fo a better word. While it has some weight to it, there is a tiny bit of thinness to it when clicking.
It focuses down very nice, that tree is only like 8 yards away. and I didn't try to perfect it, I just go a pretty close "full sight picture" and clicked it. Damn iPhone wants to switch lenses on your when trying to focus in or expand. Rather than fight it, I will just grab a single-lens camera for a better shot.
The SWFA Line is really nice, especially the 5-20x, it punches well above its weight class. The MPO is definitely nicer than the others in the SS line, lower budget-wise.
That said, this is a more modern design over the SWFA scope and I suspect you will find more fans of the MPO reticle, but that is a personal thing, you should always default to the reticle that speaks to you versus forcing something on your mind.
Brownells has the Guarantee Forever claim on it, so there is definitely an air of piece of mind.
It's too early to say definitely but I know I continue to use my SWFA 5-20x, in fact, we use them as back up scopes for our classes as an optic will always go down and I find the SWFA to be super reliable.
time will tell on this, but it's a great entry point.
That said, this is a more modern design over the SWFA scope and I suspect you will find more fans of the MPO reticle, but that is a personal thing, you should always default to the reticle that speaks to you versus forcing something on your mind.
Brownells has the Guarantee Forever claim on it, so there is definitely an air of piece of mind.
It's too early to say definitely but I know I continue to use my SWFA 5-20x, in fact, we use them as back up scopes for our classes as an optic will always go down and I find the SWFA to be super reliable.
time will tell on this, but it's a great entry point.
You think THOSE options suck, at hundreds of dollars off their regular pricing that brings them down to $1k, but you think this will be better with $1k as the starting point? Okie dokie.
You think THOSE options suck, at hundreds of dollars off their regular pricing that brings them down to $1k, but you think this will be better with $1k as the starting point? Okie dokie.
Haha, I also responded to his thread, but realized there are some things (and some people) not worth arguing over. So I deleted it.
Should have left it up
Last edited:
You're just smarter than I am ??
Well it's a really long learning curve brother...
I try to play nice, stay in my lane. I suck at it.
And a guy arguing that two optic lines with years of proven reliability from companies that have been in business for decades are a poor choice compared to a brand new optic not even on the market yet? Well that's just low hanging fruit...
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
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
Same here. Your order is processed the day you place it. You get a confirmation email with the discount reflected in the total. When it's ready to ship, your card gets charged that total. It's the same with Midway and pretty much everyone else I've dealt with.
Name one place where one of the scopes you mentioned can be bought, used and returned for a full refund. Imo, a lot less risky than buying either of those pieces shit.You think THOSE options suck, at hundreds of dollars off their regular pricing that brings them down to $1k, but you think this will be better with $1k as the starting point? Okie dokie.
Ha, yeah I guess your right. I hadn't had any coffee yet when I posted that.
I can’t trust Bushnell after they fucked me on my DMR warranty.
Plus I feel like it’s only a matter of time until their Tactical division gets shut down by their VC funding in the wake of the next tragedy in an attempt at virtue signaling.
At least with Vortex and Brownells I know what side of the fence they’re on.
Looking forward to ordering one of these once the 5-25 is in stock and there’s a good coupon running.
Plus I feel like it’s only a matter of time until their Tactical division gets shut down by their VC funding in the wake of the next tragedy in an attempt at virtue signaling.
At least with Vortex and Brownells I know what side of the fence they’re on.
Looking forward to ordering one of these once the 5-25 is in stock and there’s a good coupon running.
Sure. Using a scope and then getting my money back is totally at the top of my list when considering what scope to buy.
You know, I read your post(s) a few times trying to figure out why you're out here trying to make people feel bad for taking post-purchase service into consideration into their scope purchase.
And then I realize that it was Birddog, the biggest Burris shill on the internet. And it all made sense.
Settle down, Francis. It's sarcasm.
I happen to agree with him, post purchase service is one thing. Openly planning on buying something to try and then return if you don't like it is taking advantage of a generous satisfaction policy.
It'll eventually go away when abused enough. Not for nothing, but both of my suggestions carry lifetime warranties. One I've used and was treated in an exemplary manner and one I've not needed to invoke.
I don't think asking for some feedback or testing or experience ahead of a purchase is unreasonable, even with a no hassle warranty.
I see that argument made all the time on these forums, get a Vortex because their warranty sets the standard. Then somebody else will counter with "what choice did they have when you look at some of the failure rates?"
Just because there's an ironclad warranty/replacement policy doesn't necessarily make it a better or less risky purchase.
I happen to agree with him, post purchase service is one thing. Openly planning on buying something to try and then return if you don't like it is taking advantage of a generous satisfaction policy.
It'll eventually go away when abused enough. Not for nothing, but both of my suggestions carry lifetime warranties. One I've used and was treated in an exemplary manner and one I've not needed to invoke.
I don't think asking for some feedback or testing or experience ahead of a purchase is unreasonable, even with a no hassle warranty.
I see that argument made all the time on these forums, get a Vortex because their warranty sets the standard. Then somebody else will counter with "what choice did they have when you look at some of the failure rates?"
Just because there's an ironclad warranty/replacement policy doesn't necessarily make it a better or less risky purchase.
Having worked retail in my youth I'm used to championing the "don't abuse return policies" line, but I really don't see that being the case if you're buying a product with the intent of keeping it, and will only return it if you're unsatisfied with it. That sounds like the exact scenario the policy is designed for.
If you're buying something with the intent of returning it (e.g. the classic superbowl TV, or buying several different models of something to compare and return all but your favorite), then I agree that's abusing the policy.
If you're buying something with the intent of returning it (e.g. the classic superbowl TV, or buying several different models of something to compare and return all but your favorite), then I agree that's abusing the policy.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
I went thru every covenant series scope and the glass quality was horrendous The selling points from the reticle to the magnification, 34mm tube I was sold but later was disappointed when parallax broke on one etc wtc
But the brownells looks sooooo much like the cabelas. Cabelas said they could not disclose who makes that series either lol
Similar threads
