Rifle Scopes High End Tactical: Part II

#151
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Rath,

If every company took the scope QC'd it and got it back in 2-3 weeks I would say you are right it was meaningless, but on the other hand if a company cant even a check out a good scope, send it back with a polite note in that time frame what do you think you are up against if you really do have a problem? As noted both Sightron and bushnell were able to actually fix a bad scope in that time frame.

If I were a consultant making recommendations to either company the only thing I would recommend would be to send the customer an email when you receive the scope and another at the time someone looks at it along with a time frame to fix it and get it back and perhaps one when it ships. an email only takes a minute. I suspect all the manufactures are reading this thread. So lets tell them what we want and expect.

You are right in that sending back a broken scope would be that truer test but much more difficult to pull off. They are all great scopes, I just want a few more data points to compare if I am going to lay out that kind of cash, and service performance is a big data point for me. And when these companies know they are going be tested publicly on the Hide, in a thread that will be read by what I am sure will be Thousands by the time it all over, their service can only get better. So whats the downside again?
 
#152
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

The downside is that a singular example (i.e. one scope per company) does not provide anywhere near enough data to draw any definitive conclusions. Therefore the test is pointless.
 
#153
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rath</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The downside is that a singular example (i.e. one scope per company) does not provide anywhere near enough data to draw any definitive conclusions. Therefore the test is pointless. </div></div>

That is a good point. If you were to judge my company's response time based on one instance, you would probably get the wrong idea. Sometimes we have a guy in the area, sometimes we are slammed.

Of course, the same could be said about these scope tests in general. All companies produce scopes that break in the field. The test could be one of the 2% or whatever that do not perform well.
 
#154
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rath</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The downside is that a singular example (i.e. one scope per company) does not provide anywhere near enough data to draw any definitive conclusions. Therefore the test is pointless. </div></div>

That is a good point. If you were to judge my company's response time based on one instance, you would probably get the wrong idea. Sometimes we have a guy in the area, sometimes we are slammed.

Of course, the same could be said about these scope tests in general. All companies produce scopes that break in the field. The test could be one of the 2% or whatever that do not perform well. </div></div>

Point taken. So at what point did the Vortex Pst fiasco become statistically significant? Thats rhetorical; it became statistically significant the first time it appeared on this board. The point is in the internet age you are only as good as your last shipment or service call. As a company you need to be on ball every time. If I have a bad experience with a vendor you guys are going to hear about it. You want to hear about it, and if the Co is smart they want to hear about it so they can fix it. if I am going to spend 2-3k on an optic I want to know what happens when I have to send it back:

I want them to communicate with me

I want confirmation it was received by email.

I want to know when it is going to be looked at; is it going to have to be sent back to another country for inspection? Repair? How long does that typically take? what should I expect?

I want them to follow through

I want to know as many of these details as possible prior to buying, and not find out like some members here have, that yes indeed your scope is sitting on a shelf until we have enough to justify a shipment back to the factory over seas.

Good Customer service is about good communication with the customer not just a quick turn around, and while you are correct that its not statistically significant mathematically most of us can get a pretty good idea of what we might be in for from this kind of exercise.

If someone like ILya, who correct me if I am wrong is an industry insider,is going to do an extensive review of all these high end optics then give us the whole story including what to expect when it breaks (see items above). If he can do that without sending the scope back I guess we will have to take his word for it, but I would still rather see these Co's evaluated on a real customer service experience: how well did they communicate and did they follow through with what they said they would do in a timely manner? Because guess what? -- if a Co drops the ball today it becomes statistically significant tomorrow. Just ask Vortex
 
#155
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Low Sioux</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rath</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The downside is that a singular example (i.e. one scope per company) does not provide anywhere near enough data to draw any definitive conclusions. Therefore the test is pointless. </div></div>

That is a good point. If you were to judge my company's response time based on one instance, you would probably get the wrong idea. Sometimes we have a guy in the area, sometimes we are slammed.

Of course, the same could be said about these scope tests in general. All companies produce scopes that break in the field. The test could be one of the 2% or whatever that do not perform well. </div></div>

Point taken. So at what point did the Vortex Pst fiasco become statistically significant? Thats rhetorical; it became statistically significant the first time it appeared on this board. The point is in the internet age you are only as good as your last shipment or service call. As a company you need to be on ball every time. If I have a bad experience with a vendor you guys are going to hear about it. You want to hear about it, and if the Co is smart they want to hear about it so they can fix it. if I am going to spend 2-3k on an optic I want to know what happens when I have to send it back:

I want them to communicate with me

I want confirmation it was received by email.

I want to know when it is going to be looked at; is it going to have to be sent back to another country for inspection? Repair? How long does that typically take? what should I expect?

I want them to follow through

I want to know as many of these details as possible prior to buying, and not find out like some members here have, that yes indeed your scope is sitting on a shelf until we have enough to justify a shipment back to the factory over seas.

Good Customer service is about good communication with the customer not just a quick turn around, and while you are correct that its not statistically significant mathematically most of us can get a pretty good idea of what we might be in for from this kind of exercise.

If someone like ILya, who correct me if I am wrong is an industry insider,is going to do an extensive review of all these high end optics then give us the whole story including what to expect when it breaks (see items above). If he can do that without sending the scope back I guess we will have to take his word for it, but I would still rather see these Co's evaluated on a real customer service experience: how well did they communicate and did they follow through with what they said they would do in a timely manner? Because guess what? -- if a Co drops the ball today it becomes statistically significant tomorrow. Just ask Vortex
</div></div>

You don't need Ilya to do this and more to the point, I doubt that he would. You said yourself, this is the internet age - the information regarding customer service is out there already. The reason to be happy about Ilya writing his extensive review is that he will provide the perspective of an optics specialist - that's not easily attained given the somewhat unique circumstances of his ability to have all those scopes, for a prolonged period, to compare and contrast.

Before I bought my Premier I knew two things 1. Scott @ Libertyoptics would take care of me no matter what. 2. Premier had good customer service. When I bought my Hensoldt I knew that Nathan stood by his products and trust me when I say this, I tested his patience (thanks Nathan!). I knew all this from this forum. What was lacking, (despite the vast acreage of pixels in threads debating 'glass' and 'clarity' etc) was a proper extensive optics specialist's comparison of the scopes - hence the interest in Ilya's work.

You point isn't invalid, just not relevant to Ilya's study.
 
#156
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

my $.02 real quickly, but <span style="font-weight: bold">I want to read a scope performance evaluation and comparison not a customer service report</span>. When did this become a customer service & relations report
confused.gif
 
#157
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: popeye089</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my $.02 real quickly, but <span style="font-weight: bold">I want to read a scope performance evaluation and comparison not a customer service report</span>. When did this become a customer service & relations report
confused.gif
</div></div>

From Past posts on the forum:

"I sent the scope to Val he shipped it to Romainia, called me on friday and said they were sending me a brand new one, total time from when I shipped it to CO. and hearing from Val was four weeks, thats still pretty fast in my opinion."


"Scott did relate to me that, "The IOR-Valdada business model relies on replacement of warranted scopes, not repair; since they have no repair or service technicians.""

The service question is important to me because I want to know about things like this BEFORE I buy it. Which is one of the reasons I read this board. I am simply advocating that if someone is going do an extensive comparative review of high end products at least spend a paragraph to tell me what to expect when it breaks. Enough said; sorry it took so long to make that point
 
#159
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: popeye089</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my $.02 real quickly, but <span style="font-weight: bold">I want to read a scope performance evaluation and comparison not a customer service report</span>. When did this become a customer service & relations report
confused.gif
</div></div>

+1

This is a thread about ILya Koshkin's High End Tactical Part II Review. The idea of lying and claiming perfectly good scopes are broken to satisfy one persons ridiculous customer service analysis theory is ludicrous and has no part in this thread. Probably why ILya has not taken the time to respond to it.
Stare.gif
 
#160
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: popeye089</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my $.02 real quickly, but <span style="font-weight: bold">I want to read a scope performance evaluation and comparison not a customer service report</span>. When did this become a customer service & relations report
confused.gif
</div></div>

^ this. Please drop the issue soux so that this thread can remain on course. If you want to debate non objective CS oppinions, there are hundreds of endless nowere going threads dedicated to the topic. And anyone with consistant horrible service is well know by all already. . . . So let's move on please
 
#161
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Gentlemen,
I decided to go against my principles somewhat and posted a "raw" version of the article onto my website.
I will go back and do some editing, swap out some pictures and add a little more information from my notes over the next couple of days. However, the bulk of my impressions are there.
I would like to add to notes, before I give you the link:

1) I do not do reliability testing. I do not have the facilities for it, the quantities to make the statistics, nor the time. If you want to see how these scopes hold up, you should look at Lowlight's work. He has the facilities to abuse these scopes in ways that I simply can not replicate.
2) In retrospect, this article has too many scopes in it. Once the number of scopes you are comparing becomes greater than four or five, the difficulty in making sense of the results becomes exponentially greater. Going forward, I will restrict the number of scopes I look at simultaneously.

Here is the link. In the meantime, I'll go look for my fire-proof suit.
High End Tactical Scopes: Part II

ILya
 
#162
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Oh, snap...

Extremely well done sir. I like the fact that you didn't even attempt to name a clear cut winner, as with these choices, the winner is obviously the consumer. Rather, you pointed out what each model did/didn't do well, and allowed the reader to draw their own conclusions based on his/her needs.

Finally, I NEED a Hensoldt. Thanks Ilya.
 
#164
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bryanZ06</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Off to read now...</div></div>

Bring a pillow with you. I was aiming at putting people to sleep at about half way point.

ILya
 
#166
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bryanZ06</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Off to read now...</div></div>

Bring a pillow with you. I was aiming at putting people to sleep at about half way point.

ILya</div></div>

On the contrary. Thank you for your time, it was great to get this kind of deep information. This is what I like to read.
 
#167
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oddball-Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bryanZ06</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Off to read now...</div></div>

Bring a pillow with you. I was aiming at putting people to sleep at about half way point.

ILya</div></div>

On the contrary. Thank you for your time, it was great to get this kind of deep information. This is what I like to read. </div></div>

+1

I appreciate the depth of information that you provided and the time that you took to put this information together.

BTW-I found no need for the pillow.
grin.gif
 
#168
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Great review!

I have been very curious about the March FFP. It looks like it might have a chance to become a looked upon scope for serious shooters. I am concerned about the ruggedness, but eventually it will be apparent.

I just made up my mind on a couple of future optic decisions.

Thanks.
 
#171
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Crap! Who knew there were that many different aspects to consider when comparing scopes?
Thanks Ilya! Great read and it seems you did a very well thought out comparo. Didn't notice any bashing or bad mouthing just reporting. Most refreshing as well as illuminating.
 
#173
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Thank you, gentlemen.

I will avoid looking at the article for about a day or so. Then, I'll go back and correct the typos, inconsistencies, etc.

My next write-up is going to be simpler and take less time. I hope to wrap up with it just before I head out to SHOT. This one will involve Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x44, Nikon Monarch X 2.5-10x44, SWFA Super Sniper 3-9x42 and PFI RR800-1 3-9x42.

I already started looking at these four, and had an interesting experience. I just spent a number of weeks trying to find flaws in a bunch of exceptionally nice scopes. Now that I am looking at (generally very competent) mid-range designs, they are really not looking that hot. I have to re-adjust my palette a little, so to speak, but I have got to admit that Hensoldt, March, Premier, etc really spoil your eyeballs.

ILya
 
#175
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Great read! So it looks like for those of us looking to put together light agile rifles, the March or the upcoming Premier Light Tactical will be the way to go (assuming the new Premier performs just as well as its big brother).

Ah decisions decisions...
 
#176
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Great write up Ilya and thanks again for a really educating two days at the range. Time to start hiding the pennies from the wife for a Premier...

Cheers mate and let me know when you're going to take your DTA to the desert...!
 
#178
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Great write up Ilya and thanks again for a really educating two days at the range. Time to start hiding the pennies from the wife for a Premier...

Cheers mate and let me know when you're going to take your DTA to the desert...!
</div></div>

Thanks for writing up your impressions and for bringing your Hensoldt over.

By the way, I'll be heading to the range this coming weekend, likely on Sunday, with the next batch of scopes I am trying to look at before SHOT. If you have time, stop by.

I am pretty sure that with just a little more nudging you'll buy a 338LM....

ILya
 
#180
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Thank you for taking the time to conduct this review. I will give the march some serious consideration. It would be great for lowlight to perform some durability testing on one as my only concern is if I dropped one what would happen as it is so small and light...
 
#182
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Thanks a bunch ILYA!

I sure appreciate how the whole article was laid out.The detailed description of each scopes strengths and weaknesses helped me with a few future scope purchasing decisions.I know which scope I want now because you took the time to do this.
smile.gif


I'd sure like to send you a donation for helping me out.I figure the least I can do is buy you lunch or if enough people were to make a donation too(subtle hint)you might be able to put one of those high $$$ scopes on your DTA.PM me and I'll get you a check in the mail.

Steve
 
#184
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: steve123</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks a bunch ILYA!

I sure appreciate how the whole article was laid out.The detailed description of each scopes strengths and weaknesses helped me with a few future scope purchasing decisions.I know which scope I want now because you took the time to do this.
smile.gif


I'd sure like to send you a donation for helping me out.I figure the least I can do is buy you lunch or if enough people were to make a donation too(subtle hint)you might be able to put one of those high $$$ scopes on your DTA.PM me and I'll get you a check in the mail.

Steve

</div></div>

thats a great idea!
 
#185
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: steve123</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks a bunch ILYA!

I sure appreciate how the whole article was laid out.The detailed description of each scopes strengths and weaknesses helped me with a few future scope purchasing decisions.I know which scope I want now because you took the time to do this.
smile.gif


I'd sure like to send you a donation for helping me out.I figure the least I can do is buy you lunch or if enough people were to make a donation too(subtle hint)you might be able to put one of those high $$$ scopes on your DTA.PM me and I'll get you a check in the mail.

Steve

</div></div>

thats a great idea! </div></div>

+1 on this. Thanks for all the effort in putting this together.
 
#187
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Outstanding article, ILya, thanks for taking the time to do that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now that I am looking at (generally very competent) mid-range designs, they are really not looking that hot. I have to re-adjust my palette a little, so to speak, but I have got to admit that Hensoldt, March, Premier, etc really spoil your eyeballs.</div></div>
Don't you just hate that? Expensive tastes get...expensive.

 
#188
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't you just hate that? Expensive tastes get...expensive.</div></div>
The saying "Ignorance is bliss" has never been more true, eh?
 
#189
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Outstanding article, ILya, thanks for taking the time to do that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now that I am looking at (generally very competent) mid-range designs, they are really not looking that hot. I have to re-adjust my palette a little, so to speak, but I have got to admit that Hensoldt, March, Premier, etc really spoil your eyeballs.</div></div>
Don't you just hate that? Expensive tastes get...expensive.

</div></div>

That's the unfortunate truth. I got myself so conditioned to look for flaws in scopes, that it is hard to detach myself from it.

Thanks for letting me borrow those mounts by the way. I am quite impressed with them.

ILya
 
#191
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Ilya, thanks for sharing your view on the various scopes. Now I understand why the 4-16 S&B depth of field is so different from my 3-12.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">By the way, I'll be heading to the range this coming weekend, likely on Sunday, with the next batch of scopes I am trying to look at before SHOT. If you have time, stop by.
</div></div>

I am going to Angeles Sunday morning for one of our CaPRC matches. I'll be on the look out for the guy with expensive scopes.
smile.gif
 
#192
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

ILYA,

Well done, great review. Having owned most of the scopes that you tested I'll say that I'd have to agree with almost every point in your review.

I wasn't surprised to see the Premier and the Hensoldt both do very well and I think that you captured the exact thoughts I had on the Hensoldt. The compact size and ease of sight picture was what made it tops for me over the others, but they all are capable scopes in the tactical market.

I'm still a Hensoldt fan boy, will likely always be. You article just reminded me of all the reasons why!

Thanks again for taking the time, I can only imagine how many hours you had into all of this.

Jason
 
#193
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Ilya,

I noticed there was no specific review given to the S&B turrets in that section, while every other scope received a very detailed and descriptive report regarding their turrets. Can you comment on the S&B turrets?

Thanks
 
#195
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

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

I noticed there was no specific review given to the S&B turrets in that section, while every other scope received a very detailed and descriptive report regarding their turrets. Can you comment on the S&B turrets?

Thanks</div></div>

S&B turrets were very good and I found nothing to complain about except I tend to prefer larger diameter knobs. I thought I mentioned them, but I'll go back and check.

ILya
 
#196
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ho Chung</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ilya, thanks for sharing your view on the various scopes. Now I understand why the 4-16 S&B depth of field is so different from my 3-12.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">By the way, I'll be heading to the range this coming weekend, likely on Sunday, with the next batch of scopes I am trying to look at before SHOT. If you have time, stop by.
</div></div>

I am going to Angeles Sunday morning for one of our CaPRC matches. I'll be on the look out for the guy with expensive scopes.
smile.gif
</div></div>

I do not think I'll have fancy scope with me. I'll be packaging them up and sending them back to their owners. I have one more article to finish before SHOT.

It looks like I'll make it to the range both Saturday and Sunday. I'll stop by and watch you shoot. I mailed in my CAPRC membership form, but I am not going to participate in this shoot. Maybe next one if my schedule allows it.

ILya
 
#197
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

BTW- I one of the things I really liked about the review was the discussion of engineering tradeoffs in optical design, especially regarding the tradeoff between compactness and optical qualities that went into the Hensoldt. I have read a lot about coatings and glass quality, but engineering is seldom mentioned and for the top scopes, that seems to be a big deal. I get excited reading about the March and how it is able to do so much in a lighter weight package with a smaller objective... good for a lightweight rifle build.
 
#198
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

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

Well done, great review. Having owned most of the scopes that you tested I'll say that I'd have to agree with almost every point in your review.

I wasn't surprised to see the Premier and the Hensoldt both do very well and I think that you captured the exact thoughts I had on the Hensoldt. The compact size and ease of sight picture was what made it tops for me over the others, but they all are capable scopes in the tactical market.

I'm still a Hensoldt fan boy, will likely always be. You article just reminded me of all the reasons why!

Thanks again for taking the time, I can only imagine how many hours you had into all of this.

Jason </div></div>

Thanks for letting me use your scope, Jason.

Hensoldt is a superb scope and I do not think you are missing out on much by sticking with it.

ILya
 
#199
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW- I one of the things I really liked about the review was the discussion of engineering tradeoffs in optical design, especially regarding the tradeoff between compactness and optical qualities that went into the Hensoldt. I have read a lot about coatings and glass quality, but engineering is seldom mentioned and for the top scopes, that seems to be a big deal. I get excited reading about the March and how it is able to do so much in a lighter weight package with a smaller objective... good for a lightweight rifle build. </div></div>

System design (I think that is what you are referring to as engineering) is absolutely critical and not only in high end scopes. People tend to focus "glass quality" which is somewhat ambiguous, but there is a lot that goes into it and system design is the determining factor for everything else. If you use the best coating and highest quality optical glass in a scope with a crappy design, you'll get a crappy image.

ILya
 
#200
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Carter, that's a real good point you make there. I found it VERY interesting about the design of the Hensoldt scopes, and that Zeiss had to know going into it that they were making it difficult on themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

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
9
Views
333
Glassaholic
Glassaholic
Milirad
Rifle Scopes Burris Eliminator 6 Accuracy Range Test Review
Replies
19
Views
7K
Eric B.
E
Iamero
Firearms High End Scope Sell-Off (S&G, Leupold, Minox, Steiner)
Replies
1
Views
697
Iamero
Iamero
hafejd30
ZCO527 vs NF ATACR 7-35 vs Arken EP5- (Last Light Comparison)
Replies
29
Views
4K
tna9001
T
AquaRhombus77
Scope Recommendation
Replies
18
Views
2K
Scopeye
S
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts