Rifle Scopes High End Tactical: Part II

#201
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: J-Ham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Carter, that's a real good point you make there. I found it VERY interesting about the design of the Hensoldt scopes, and that Ziess had to know going into it that they were making it difficult on themselves. </div></div>

You think thats difficult, try sitting down and talking design with them
crazy.gif
They will literally blow your mind with the knowledge they have about all the science behind it.

Good review btw Ilya!!!!
 
#202
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Just wanted to thank ILYA for the thorough review. I can't imagine how long this took him. But I did have a question ILYA if your dont mind.

Did you find that any of the scopes gave better groups than any of the others? Or worst groups? Just curious if one is mechanicaly superior to any others.

Also going to go IOR 3-18x50 or Vortex Razor for a sako 338. Would I be wrong to if I was to go with the IOR?

Thanks agian for the hard work iam sure everyone appreciates it.
 
#203
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: savageman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wanted to thank ILYA for the thorough review. I can't imagine how long this took him. But I did have a question ILYA if your dont mind.

Did you find that any of the scopes gave better groups than any of the others? Or worst groups? Just curious if one is mechanicaly superior to any others.

Also going to go IOR 3-18x50 or Vortex Razor for a sako 338. Would I be wrong to if I was to go with the IOR?

Thanks agian for the hard work iam sure everyone appreciates it. </div></div>

On group size: I do not think there was any statistical variation between the groups I was shooting that exceeded the normal dispersion due to my inconsistency.

Between Razor HD 5-20x50 and IOR 3.5-18x50, it is a tough call. Ultimately, IOR is a better featured scope with somewhat better glass.

Razor has a more natural color gamut and more positive clicks, while IOR has more adjustment per revolution.

In terms of durability, both are somewhat new designs, so time will tell how they will hold up. I only saw one sample of each, so I do not have the statistics to support the superiority of one over the other in this regard.

Bottom line, the choice comes down to what you find more important to you. For example, if holding over with the reticle is something you often do, Razor is a better way to go. EBR-2 is very well suited for that, while IOR's reticle is a touch thick. On the other hand, MP8-A5 is more visible in low light.

ILya
 
#204
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In terms of durability, both are somewhat new designs, so time will tell how they will hold up. I only saw one sample of each, so I do not have the statistics to support the superiority of one over the other in this regard.</div></div>

ILYA,

I would LOVE to see Frank put an IOR through the paces from his Razor review video. If you haven't watched that, you should. I don't think there are many questions about the Razor's durability. They've been out there over a year now and I really haven't seen many, if any, complaints of mechanical failures. The IOR on the other hand has a bit of a shaky heritage to overcome.

But like you said, time will tell...

John
 
#206
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Thank you sir for the insight. As you know most of us have to spend all this money for a scope sight un seen. Thanks to you and others on this forum we can at least get an idea of what we should expect.

Not that it means anything but...

+2 for IOR stress test.
 
#207
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HDC-Deadly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: J-Ham</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Carter, that's a real good point you make there. I found it VERY interesting about the design of the Hensoldt scopes, and that Ziess had to know going into it that they were making it difficult on themselves. </div></div>

You think thats difficult, try sitting down and talking design with them
crazy.gif
They will literally blow your mind with the knowledge they have about all the science behind it.

Good review btw Ilya!!!! </div></div>

Yet they don't know what a zero stop is.

Sigh...

One day I hope they will, along with a reticle that suits my needs.
 
#209
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bacarrat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You really can't get lost on the turns on a Henny, there are only 2 turns on the knob. </div></div>
+1. I don't mind not having a zero stop on mine at all. On a 40 moa mount, I have 1.5 mils below my zero.
 
#210
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Fair enough.

But I want a certain set of features that will give me the best possible chance. Hensolt are so close for me, but not close enough.

At least they are saving me about $1000!
 
#212
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Gentlemen,

It looks like I will start working on the next installment in the "High End Tactical" article series some time next month. I am currently in the process of assembling the contestants.

So far it looks like I will have Vortex Razor 5-20x50 with the new eyepiece and one of the new 30mm Premier scopes, either the Hunter or Light Tactical. I will probably get my hands onto a production March 3-24x42FFP scope, since the first batch is likely to get here in time. I am also working on getting one of the new Steiner scopes to look at, probably a 4-16x50.
A baseline scope for this comparison will be the same S&B 4-16x50 I used in the previous article. That should provide some continuity.

This should keep me busy for a bit, and if I manage to get a proper start in April, I should be done some time in late June.

This time around, I want to limit the number of scopes I am messing with since the last article had too many contestants in it and making sense of them all was a bit involved.

ILya
 
#213
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

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

It looks like I will start working on the next installment in the "High End Tactical" article series some time next month. I am currently in the process of assembling the contestants.

So far it looks like I will have Vortex Razor 5-20x50 with the new eyepiece and one of the new 30mm Premier scopes, either the Hunter or Light Tactical. I will probably get my hands onto a production March 3-24x42FFP scope, since the first batch is likely to get here in time. I am also working on getting one of the new Steiner scopes to look at, probably a 4-16x50.
A baseline scope for this comparison will be the same S&B 4-16x50 I used in the previous article. That should provide some continuity.

This should keep me busy for a bit, and if I manage to get a proper start in April, I should be done some time in late June.

This time around, I want to limit the number of scopes I am messing with since the last article had too many contestants in it and making sense of them all was a bit involved.

ILya </div></div>

Sweet, I am seriously looking forward to it! I am curious to see how the new Steiner scopes will stack up.
 
#214
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

I have already put a deposit down on the March, but with the Quake and issues in Japan, I am really not expecting it anytime soon, I think I am in the second batch.
 
#216
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Flyingbullseye</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ilya, any thoughts about doing another review for tactical scopes in the mid price range for us poor boys?

Flyingbullseye</div></div>

I have a few other reviews planned, but I am always open to suggestions.

Which scopes did you have in mind?

ILya
 
#218
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: Flyingbullseye</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ilya, any thoughts about doing another review for tactical scopes in the mid price range for us poor boys?

Flyingbullseye</div></div>

I have a few other reviews planned, but I am always open to suggestions.

Which scopes did you have in mind?

ILya </div></div>

As you probably already know, there are three "new" FFPs on the market; Bushnell's remake of their 3-12x44 and 6-24x50, Vortex PST is finally shipping and Weaver's 5-15x50 seems to be available.

It's always interesting to see if the gap between the entry level scopes and the high end is getting smaller - or if the entry level ones are overpriced :)

Cheers,
Nik
 
#219
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

I just wrapped up with a review involving the PST and will publish it shortly.

As for the other scopes, I'll see if I can get my hands on them. Quite a few scope makers (for understandable reasons) do not want to have anything to do with me, so I do not have easy access to everything.

ILya
 
#220
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just wrapped up with a review involving the PST and will publish it shortly.

As for the other scopes, I'll see if I can get my hands on them. Quite a few scope makers (for understandable reasons) do not want to have anything to do with me, so I do not have easy access to everything.

ILya </div></div>
I'd be interested to know which scope makers are avoiding you???
 
#221
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Notso</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ILYA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just wrapped up with a review involving the PST and will publish it shortly.

As for the other scopes, I'll see if I can get my hands on them. Quite a few scope makers (for understandable reasons) do not want to have anything to do with me, so I do not have easy access to everything.

ILya </div></div>
I'd be interested to know which scope makers are avoiding you??? </div></div>

Honestly, I do not think that is very important. It is a rather simple business decision.

Most large scope companies are not used to the type of stuff I do. They are used to dealing with gun magazines where if you pay for advertisement, you are guaranteed a good write-up. With me, they have no clue what they are going to get, so for a company with an established market share, the risk of dealing with me is considerable. Arguably, they have more to lose than they have to gain. I suspect that is one of the reasons I get a lot more traction with smaller players who are more open to risk. Besides, with a lot of companies who do not deal with me, I really do not know whether that is because they do not like what I do or simply due to lack of time and resources.

ILya
 
#222
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

ILYA,

If you want to do a Bushnell 6-24x50 FFP at some point and they won't send you one and you don't want to buy one, send me a PM and I will lend you mine for the review.

I have preordered a March 3-24x42 FFP and got on Saturday an IOR 3.5-18x50 FFP both based partly on your review so it is the least I can do.
smile.gif
 
#223
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

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

If you want to do a Bushnell 6-24x50 FFP at some point and they won't send you one and you don't want to buy one, send me a PM and I will lend you mine for the review.

I have preordered a March 3-24x42 FFP and got on Saturday an IOR 3.5-18x50 FFP both based partly on your review so it is the least I can do.
smile.gif
</div></div>

Thanks.

I might take you up on that in the future, but I am fairly well booked until later in the year.

ILya
 
#224
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

I read the first review you did East vs West...and this did not disappoint. Wish there was a way to be a part of this and truly see these scopes in person but it's great to have a review like this to base a "blind" decision. I REALLY want that March scope...that suite me to a TEE. Thanks for the review.
 
#225
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: alshirey</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I read the first review you did East vs West...and this did not disappoint. Wish there was a way to be a part of this and truly see these scopes in person but it's great to have a review like this to base a "blind" decision. I REALLY want that March scope...that suite me to a TEE. Thanks for the review.</div></div>

Well, all you have to do is make your way to the left coast when I do "Part 3".

ILya
 
#226
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Great article. I'm in the market for a scope and this was quite helpful. I was surprised how well the Premier turned out especially compared to the S&B I was considering. Thanks for all your hard (and i'm sure fun) work!
 
#227
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

I'm sure you have heard it enough, but thank you very much for the well written report. It's hard for me and I'm sure many other guys to have a chance to compare all these scope to each other. You have made my decision to buy a Premier very easy. Thanks for you time and effort.
 
#230
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

ILya - Thank you for the excellent review. It's seldom that I read product evaluations so well done. Relying in great part on your research, I purchased a Premier 3-15X50. With best regards from the Big Empty, ELN.
 
#231
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Wow great article very well done and seemed very unbias which is tough to find.

It honestly made me truely realize how different people truly like different optics and no one scope everybody will like. I have yet to see a march but have been behind all the rest of the scopes you tested. my choice is the s&b (5-25x56) and i like it for some of the reasons you don't (thinner reticle, seperate ill. knob) I found this very comical.

It just goes to show you when picking a optic it is very important to figure out what "you" want not what everybody tells you is the best. Recently i have been given alot of shit from buddies for rocking a bushnell ffp scope, but honestly i don't give a shit it works for me. Really at the end of the day thats what matters.
 
#232
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Team-Send-It</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow great article very well done and seemed very unbias which is tough to find.

It honestly made me truely realize how different people truly like different optics and no one scope everybody will like. I have yet to see a march but have been behind all the rest of the scopes you tested. my choice is the s&b (5-25x56) and i like it for some of the reasons you don't (thinner reticle, seperate ill. knob) I found this very comical.

It just goes to show you when picking a optic it is very important to figure out what "you" want not what everybody tells you is the best. Recently i have been given alot of shit from buddies for rocking a bushnell ffp scope, but honestly i don't give a shit it works for me. Really at the end of the day thats what matters. </div></div>

Great post!

I can't emphasize it enough: everyone has different preferences and when I say that I prefer a particular scope, I always explain why. Even with that, it is still best to look at it yourself.

ILya
 
#233
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

Extremely well written and well thought out. I very much liked the style of the article and your unbiased methods. I also liked the fact that you did not pick a clear winner. Excellent write up, thank you for taking the time and doing the testing for all of us.

-SBS
 
#234
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Extremely well written and well thought out. I very much liked the style of the article and your unbiased methods. I also liked the fact that you did not pick a clear winner. Excellent write up, thank you for taking the time and doing the testing for all of us.

-SBS </div></div>

Thanks.

Picking a clear winner is possible when there is a narrowly defined application and a specific user in mind. Lacking that, all I can do is try to verbalize each scope's strengths and weaknesses the best I can.

ILya
 
#236
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sharac</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can you be more specific on the subject? I would expect that high end scopes ABSOLUTELY must track and work as intended, especially since a lot of them are meant/targeting for "serious" customers (military, LE)... Any less would be a shocker...</div></div>

There is a LOT of emotional investment made in scopes of this caliber because they cost so much. People feel their decision on which one they purchased is a direct reflection on them as people, so it creates a no win atmosphere for someone who puts doubt into that decision.

With that, I won't expand on what I have experienced... it only causes a shit storm. I have no interest in poking anyone in the eye, if every scope on the list works as expected and in the end it only comes down to who's glass is slightly is better than the other, well everyone can consider it a win... or not. I still personally check each and every one over time... trust me when I say, I have scopes here due for review which are being used every week on a variety of system because no longer will I get a scope on Monday, shoot it on Wednesday and review it on Friday.

As has been written, any scope can and will break. There have been endless threads on the subject, polls, reviews, anecdotes, you name it, we have written and discussed it until the horse has rotted away. As long as you are happy in your purchase, and it works within the context of your shooting, who am I say different, even if my cross section is a little broader than the guy who says, "I have being using "X" brand for 2 years and I have never had an issue"... if that is his experience, there is no denying it as truth. The arguments are just not worth it anymore if you ask me.

I look forward to the review whatever the outcome. </div></div>


If you don't mind explaining, what do you do in order to fully test a scope when you get it? How do you verify that it is tracking correctly?
 
#237
Re: High End Tactical: Part II

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lw8</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sharac</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can you be more specific on the subject? I would expect that high end scopes ABSOLUTELY must track and work as intended, especially since a lot of them are meant/targeting for "serious" customers (military, LE)... Any less would be a shocker...</div></div>

There is a LOT of emotional investment made in scopes of this caliber because they cost so much. People feel their decision on which one they purchased is a direct reflection on them as people, so it creates a no win atmosphere for someone who puts doubt into that decision.

With that, I won't expand on what I have experienced... it only causes a shit storm. I have no interest in poking anyone in the eye, if every scope on the list works as expected and in the end it only comes down to who's glass is slightly is better than the other, well everyone can consider it a win... or not. I still personally check each and every one over time... trust me when I say, I have scopes here due for review which are being used every week on a variety of system because no longer will I get a scope on Monday, shoot it on Wednesday and review it on Friday.

As has been written, any scope can and will break. There have been endless threads on the subject, polls, reviews, anecdotes, you name it, we have written and discussed it until the horse has rotted away. As long as you are happy in your purchase, and it works within the context of your shooting, who am I say different, even if my cross section is a little broader than the guy who says, "I have being using "X" brand for 2 years and I have never had an issue"... if that is his experience, there is no denying it as truth. The arguments are just not worth it anymore if you ask me.

I look forward to the review whatever the outcome. </div></div>


If you don't mind explaining, what do you do in order to fully test a scope when you get it? How do you verify that it is tracking correctly? </div></div>

You don't want to know.
laugh.gif


Check out some of his test videos to see what he puts rifles/scopes through.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...904#Post1385904

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...729#Post2101729

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...130#Post1123130
 
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
10
Views
453
carbonbased
carbonbased
Milirad
Rifle Scopes Burris Eliminator 6 Accuracy Range Test Review
Replies
19
Views
8K
Eric B.
E
Iamero
Firearms High End Scope Sell-Off (S&G, Leupold, Minox, Steiner)
Replies
1
Views
703
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