Rifle Scopes Ior valdada

[Lowlight]

Some people you just figure are your run of the mill type assholes, you know the guys who,"hate when people say" then turn around and say the exact same thing themselves. Luckily they soon say something very telling that proves they are not just assholes, but true pieces of shit with no honor who applaud the same behavior.

One day you hope they attempt to build something of their own, and they have it "borrowed' for someone else's financial gain so they can truly experience what they praise.

and @phillip61
IOR said I can try a Gen 4 under their supervision, not the same as saying I can have any "two" scopes... they said they wanted to watch me test the scopes and I have stated numerous times I don't do a one shot, one day reviews. That is as waste of everyone's time. Besides in the past, the scopes failed after a few hundred rounds, so why would you spend a "day" on this, under supervision. I can easily buy my own and then as a Customer test it how I want without the strings attached.

 

[Icallem]

I have a 6-24 IOR. I did some work for a lady that was going to sell several items, one of which is the IOR scope. We arrived at a price, but later, behind my back she did something so that I'm in this scope ~$400.

Mine has been a good scope. That said, I have no idea what a new one cost and will not find out. I'm not here to bash IOR as mine is fine, but they would not even be a consideration if looking for a new scope.

If I am reading this correct, this scope is in the 2000 range. That price will put me in a new Razor, NF or a used USO.

Again, mine has been good and does have good glass, but for my money, IOR would not even make the list for a new purchase.

YMMV

 

[GBMaryland]

I owned an IOR 3-18 and I was OK, but I found the finish easy to mar, and the screw (new out of he box) were rusty... Between that and some of he function related aspects, it wasn't for me.

Scope I own that I really like:

Hensoldt 3-12 SSP(P) - unreal eye relief, excellent glass, fine reticle, ability to use in focus at maximum magnificent like a CQ dot sight, but it's only workable on an AR type platform, and it does not (out of the box) mount properly on a Larue OBR without adding a 1mm shim to the locking mechanism.

Premier Heritage 5-25 - love the very fine reticle that doesn't obscure smaller targets at maximum magnification, glass is very good, eye relief is pretty good too, use it on a TRG-42

Night Force NXS 3.5-15x56 - like the glass, reticle is one of their rarer ones that is not for sniping (more interesting really), nothing bad to say about it, except the illumination is clearly meant for very low light conditions

Scope I'm still deciding on:

Steiner 5-25x56 ("military," MSR) - glass is very good in general, reticle has THICK lines at full magnification which is not desirable in a FFP

OK scopes:

All of my Leupold Mark 4 M2 scopes (16x40, 3.5-10x40, 4.5-14x50, and the multiples of each)...

Ok glass, nothing like the German glass, and I'd stay away from the 8.5-25x50 (edge distortion). All of them have the TMR and I think one of them (which is not an M2) is mil/mil.

I put he glass in he leupolds behind the IOR, and the customer service leaps and bounds better.

For example, aside for it not taking 2 months to get the scope fixed (like the IOR), they made me custom BDC turrets for the lower magnification scope for use with a 375 H&H Mag... Which, if I destroy it again, they are "happy to repair! (At not cost to me...)"

I don't hate the IOR at all, but having played and used all of these scopes (except the Steiner) extensively, it was one of the lesser scopes for an overall perspective... Customer service would have to have gotten much better before I'd consider them again.

I'm leaving a lot of stuff out here, on all of the scopes.

 

[phillip61]

Not trying to piss anyone off. Just curious as to what the IOR reticle design was before the SH design? Whats the main difference between the two. I've looked but can't find pictures. Can/will someone post side by side pics of the two.

 

[Its only light]

I could be way off but I thought the dif was the sh reticle is in mils? Never used a 3-18 so cant say for sure.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[phillip61]

In the Gen 4's it looks like its offered in a lot of models. Is the SH-A5 reticle the "Floating Dot"?

 

[Its only light]

Hmmm got me wondering. Time for some research

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[BCP]

I had an older one and the older Mp8 was just lines, not as thick and no floating center dot. I liked my IOR scopes a lot but I don't really miss them either, the cheaper Vortex PST/SWFA offerings do the same thing for less money and I think that for 1800 you can't beat a Vortex Razor. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Cobracutter]

The IOR is the best scope on the planet, bar none. I have a 3.5-18X50 and would not trade it for any scope. You will love it. Tracks perfectly, bulit like a tank, Easy to use zero stop, the floating dot reticle is the best design ever, and the glass is second to none.

What else would you like to know.

Here is a pic of mine.

This is why some people's post just get skipped over when reading a thread. Not even worth the time to read.

 

[phillip61]

This is why some people's post just get skipped over when reading a thread. Not even worth the time to read.

You read it?......are you just trolling? Or do you have something to say to the OP about the thread he started?

 

[Its only light]

I told myself I was done with this thread and yet here I am.

I dont know that I would go as far to say its the best optic on the planet. There are way too many nice scopes ive never even seen in person. The rest of the statement is pretty spot on. They are excellent and if u would have problems they do make it right. Not sure why people love to fight about this topic. Maybe thats what the war is really about!?!

As far as best optic on the planet. I take statements like that as an exaggeration and not serious. You know how many times ive said that was thr best sex on the planet.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[Cobracutter]

You read it?......are you just trolling? Or do you have something to say to the OP about the thread he started?

There are 3 plausable explaintions for your continued triade of IOR nut hugging, arguing with people WAY more experinced than most of us here, and ignoring all historical information:

1. You are a paid shill or have some vested financial interest in VAL/IOR

2. You are just an ignorant shooter/user who runs his mouth about shit he has no fucking idea what he is talking about.

3. In addition to #2, you are also mentally handicapped or have some sort of psychological issue that prevents you from being able to asborb what people actualy say or understand. In this case , I appologize as this is not something you can control.


I will leave it up to the membership to decide which one or combination it is. At any rate, your posts make everyone who reads them drop a few points in their IQ. You contribute NOTHING to these threads and are like some sad, pathetic broken record, repeating the same mindless, retarded bullshit every post that most people with any common sense stopped paying attention to a long time ago. The fact you are former Army just makes me hang my head a little lower after reading your dribble. Stop arguing or trying to flip questions back at people who you cannot hold a candle to in shooting ability, experince or industry reputation.

 

[Rob01]

I think what Cobracutter was trying to say is....
We Are Now A Little Dumber - YouTube

And stop posting in every IOR scope for sale thread in the Optics for sale section. It's getting old.

 

[E. Bryant]

Please keep in mind that philip61 admitted just a few weeks ago to not knowing what chromatic aberration is, and then followed that up with a thread that clearly demonstrated his inability to understand the basic difference (much less the difference in usage) between FFP and SFP scopes.

It doesn't much matter how many scopes that one has looked through if they don't know anything about how they work.

 

[Scimitar]

I used to have IOR scopes on most of my rifles. Broke enough to lose faith. Been too happy my my USO and Bushnell HDMRs to try anything else that they or anyone else have come out with.

 

[phillip61]

Please keep in mind that philip61 admitted just a few weeks ago to not knowing what chromatic aberration is, and then followed that up with a thread that clearly demonstrated his inability to understand the basic difference (much less the difference in usage) between FFP and SFP scopes.

It doesn't much matter how many scopes that one has looked through if they don't know anything about how they work.

I still really do not know what chromatic aberration is. I still have never used a FFP scope. Looked through a few, but never used one. I am not the know all, be all, end all of scope people. I have never claimed to be. When someone post "What about this Nightforce scope" or "What about this Sightron scope" I never post anything in those threads because I know nothing of those scopes. I only post in IOR threads. I own one. To me it's the best scope in the world bar none. Period. It's never broke or gave me any issues. So when someone post "I'm thinking about buying a IOR scope, What your opinion" I give them my honest opinion. Cobracutters 1, 2, and three are all wrong. When you have a negative attitude toward someone or something you tend to only see the negative. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Try looking for some positive things and I'm sure you will find some.

I understand Frank has a reason to be ticked at IOR for using the Sniper Hide name without his permission. But I had nothing to do with that. I also understand that previous models of IOR scopes have been less than perfect. But I've noticed that all the post for what seems like the last year or so from people that have bought the newer model scopes has all been positive reviews. I appreciate ya'lls replies. It's good to get things off your chest and out in the open.

 

[delixe]

When someone post "What about this Nightforce scope" or "What about this Sightron scope" I never post anything in those threads because I know nothing of those scopes. I only post in IOR threads. I own one. To me it's the best scope in the world bar none. Period. It's never broke or gave me any issues.

You just admitted that you have no experience with scopes from at least 2 popular manufacturers, then in the next breath, that your IOR is the best scope in the world.

How can you not see that the first statement negates entirely the 2nd?
Is your grasp of logic really that poor?

You can offer this and only this opinion with any validity (and I'm paraphrasing here), that you have very little relevant experience with modern tactical scopes, but your IOR is the best scope you own and it's never broken or given you any issues.

I have to say I don't find your opinion to carry much weight, if any at all.

 

[Cobracutter]

By now, I think we can safely say which category phillip61 is in. There is no other excuse but mental illness for someone over the age of 15 to post his dribble.

 

[TxShooter63]

First of all, I run a large gun range, an on line retail store, a large shooting organization, and I shoot professionally in the PRS with mixed results based on whether my rifle will feed and fire ammunition properly. I am going to throw a few facts into this thread and I will likely get banned or the thread will be deleted but I am tired of things being thrown around as facts that are not. I sell IOR, Bushnell, and US Optics and while I personally prefer IOR for personal reasons, there are many good optics on the market today. I have owned 10 IOR scopes and shoot them in the PRS series now. I have had zero issues with any of them. Now I am going to provide the facts as I understand them about a few things.

1. Val: Val defected from communist Romania as a member of the Romanian bobsled team during the Olympics. I believe 1984 was the year. He lived in a refuge camp in Italy and eventually immigrated to the U.S. legally. He got here with nothing. From that he has built a reasonably successful business. He is one of the hardest working, most honest, and personable people I have ever met. His business has grown because he takes care of his customers. He owns the American distributorship for IOR Scopes and he with some input from me, is designing the next generation of IOR optics.

2. IOR is one of the biggest optics companies in the world. IOR is many times the size of most of what you would consider the top tier optics makers. They have been in business for almost 100 years. They are one of the few companies that manufactures and assembles almost all the parts in their optics.

3. In regards to the IOR Sniper's Hide Edition, let me give you some information that has not been shared. IOR was the only company willing to work with the SH members to manufacture a reticle of their design. The cost for something like that today is nearly $10,000 to IOR. IOR did this for the SH members when no one else would and added nothing to the price of the scope to cover this design cost. IOR and Val wanted the scope tested prior to being released in mass but the SH members did not want to wait on field testing so it was delivered "as is". There was an internal part that was weak and ended up causing some issues but was replaced immediately in later scopes.

As far as this being called the Sniper's Hide model without Frank's permission? What else would you call it. The members came to IOR and ask them to build this scope with their reticle. They did that and didn't charge anyone those design costs. Frank says he wasn't compensated, that isn't true. He was given a free scope.
There is another issue that really bothers me about the accusations made that SH wasn't compensated for this. The fact that SH had their own scope designed by a company did much to legitimize SH as a website. It was one of the big turning points in this sites road to where it is today. Frank gained much by having a scope designed by the members of his website and in my opinion, the money IOR spent to design the reticle for his members was payment in full for calling the scope the SH version. Again, what the hell else would you have called it?

4. Quality-I have no doubt that the experiences some of you have had in past years with IOR's quality are true. In the 5 years I have been using them, I have had no issues so maybe I got lucky. I have looked at all the scopes in the line and while I personally think there needs to be a thinning of the herd, all of very solid quality. I pay almost $1500 per match to compete in PRS events and honestly my scopes are the only thing that haven't given me issues. I saw mention of "why risk a purchase with IOR" why not go with a proven company? I shoot with and against the best shooters in the country and I have personally seen guys have scope issues with every major brand made including Schmidt Bender, US Optics, NF, I personally had issues with a Bushnell H59 HDMR, and you don't want to know about Vortex. Not allot of issues with the exception of Vortex, but issues do occur. We run our stuff very, very hard and things break. My point here is that you can not buy yourself a guarantee of having no issues no matter what you spend. Does IOR have more issues TODAY than these other companies? Not that I have seen.

In truth, there are a lot of good optics being made today by a number of companies. That is why I sell more than one brand. What you need depends on what you are going to do with the scope. The information presented above is based on my personal experiences shooting professionally and my conversations with Val himself. If I have any facts wrong, I apologize but I have done my best to present some actual facts into this thread. For those of you that want to drag me into an argument on the Internet, don't bother trying. I have said what I have to say and I have 4 businesses to run and I try practice shooting 1-2 hours per day as well. Most of you don't put your names at the bottom of your posts, I do. Every time I reply to a topic on this website I risk something, do you?

If IOR makes a scope that suits your needs buy it. If SB, NF, or any of the others have something you like, buy it. 99% of the time you will get a good product from most of the top tier companies. It took me 4 days to get time to type this much so I apologize for coming into this so late.

 

[Ruggedtouch]

Applause and thanks to TxShooter63 for a well thought out post.

I'm new to the site and have been trying to understand the dynamic that causes such strong emotion and tightened sphynchters at the mere mention of... that Romanian optics maker. I own one of the 3x18's and am thoroughly satisfied with the performance. I'm a sport/target shooter and don't compete except to define who buys dinner. Those friends and range acquaintances who have shot behind it have all commented positively on the form, function and features.

Thanks to TxShooter for adding some relevant history and experience to a thread that needed some of the same.

 

[springer01]

I came in to the IOR game after the "SH edition" I remember the threads about the reticle design and scope, but that's about it. Did members scopes fail and IOR didn't step up to fix them? I owned one of the "SH editions" and it failed and IOR replaced it with a new scope, but that was long after it was released. Like I stated previously I bought it used and I still had no problems getting it replaced. Just trying to find out what happened that caused the hatred of IOR. I know not only IOR scopes have issues, I have had two Zeiss scopes that had issues right out of the box. Vortex had several problems when the PST was released and still receive praise.

I personally feel like it was the fact that the SH name was used, and then the scope failed in turn a failed scope was associated with this website. If the scope would have worked without a hitch the SH name being associated with the scope would not of been as much of an issue. I could be 100% wrong, but this is just how I see it and I have read many of these IOR bashing threads.

On edit... maybe the reason I see it this way is because that's how I would feel had my name been associated with something that didn't work out so well. I mean who want's to be associated with something that people are unhappy with!

 

[phillip61]

I came in to the IOR game after the "SH edition" I remember the threads about the reticle design and scope, but that's about it. Did members scopes fail and IOR didn't step up to fix them? I owned one of the "SH editions" and it failed and IOR replaced it with a new scope, but that was long after it was released. Like I stated previously I bought it used and I still had no problems getting it replaced. Just trying to find out what happened that caused the hatred of IOR. I know not only IOR scopes have issues, I have had two Zeiss scopes that had issues right out of the box. Vortex had several problems when the PST was released and still receive praise.

I personally feel like it was the fact that the SH name was used, and then the scope failed in turn a failed scope was associated with this website. If the scope would have worked without a hitch the SH name being associated with the scope would not of been a non issue. I could be 100% wrong, but this is just how I see it and I have read many of these IOR bashing threads.

I was on SWFA's web site the other day and could have swore I remember seeing several scopes that were advertised as being "Gen. 4 special SH edition". If I saw that right I guess they're still making them. Was it/Is it just the reticle that makes them a "SH" edition? If so, which reticle? The MP-8 dot or the Mod. MP-8 dot. Or something different?

 

[springer01]

I was on SWFA's web site the other day and could have swore I remember seeing several scopes that were advertised as being "Gen. 4 special SH edition". If I saw that right I guess they're still making them. Was it/Is it just the reticle that makes them a "SH" edition? If so, which reticle? The MP-8 dot or the Mod. MP-8 dot. Or something different?

John Boyette was the one behind the MP-8 reticle with input from members here, but I don't remember the details on the scope design. They are still made I think Gen 4 is when they finally fixed the problem, I had a Gen 2 if I remember correctly and it failed.

 

[Thumper580]

TxShooter...nice information....however the IOR haters will never relent. Refreshing information from someone who "might" actually be accepted as qualified to speak on the subject.

 

[Lowlight]

We had nothing to do with it and the scope we received, which promptly broke after 200 rounds came from Scott at Liberty Optics if IOR gave it to him, it was never mentioned as "payment" for the use of the name...

Since when are "forum Member" related to this or any company. If a member asks a company to make something and says they will post about it how is that my issue and how does that give IOR permission to use my name... ?

Scott from Liberty coordinated it and John Boyette lead the charge, I am not either one of those people. SH is incorporated, the name Sniper's Hide was trademarked ... Never speaking to me seems like a very big issue.

$10,000 for a reticle, please, USO was doing them for people for $2000, and again telling a dealer and a member of this forum making a scope / reticle for you does not entitle you to my company name. People give me scopes all time, they do it be causes it sells them, they don't market me... I got 6 last week alone from a company.

Youre a late comer to this party, using the site as an admitted dealer and yes you should be banned and yes I might remove this thread. As if IOR scope issues are isolated incidents and them using my name did anything but cast a negative light on this subject.

Youre being lied too, the fact he NEVER spoke to me speaks volumes and saying because Scott volunteered IOR and a few people stepped with a design does not entitle you to shit. How about the fact I never put out an official review of the broke scope? Or how about explaining where it was said to me up front, by your members drawing a reticle and you accepting a sub-$2k scope we will use your name.

I think it's time I scour the internet and get my lawyer to enforce my trademark.

 

[Lowlight]

Fucking scumbags the lot of deserve to be banned ...

 

[Lowlight]

By the way you scumbags, this site had a hand in designing the McMillan A5 stock, and we did the first Snipers Hide rifle around that. We made a huge production of it and MCM never called it the SH Edition and I was involved with that at every stage..

How come I was not involved here if it was so obvious and I was paid ... How much are typical licensing fees and how does one scope cover years worth of sales, seems there is some accounting missing in your FACT asshole.

 

[Cobracutter]

Frank it is interesting how people who claim to not know much or are new"....can preach your and sh's history back to you. Their recollection of historical events vs their opinions of flawed optics seem to have a correlation.

 

[SNAFU308]

I find it interesting how anyone can say a particular scope is "The best in the world bar none" when openly admitting they have very little experience such quantifying statements without the experience to back them up hold little value.

It would be perfectly reasonable to say "This is the best scope i've ever owned" or to say it's better than X scope that you have owned but to say it's the best ever is just plain ignorant.

Perhaps you should spend a little more time thinking about and articulating your responses

 

[Bender]

that escalated quickly......

 

[Lowlight]

Here is another little, "Fact" ... USO with permission from the site did a limited edition SH scope, the bodies were marked as such and they were numbered.

The idea "no other company would work with us" blatant fucking scumbag lie... USO did, I also drew the very first MOA reticle USO did and uses today still. I did it with John SR. I traveled to USO, and spent 10 days at the factory. Might be a clue there.

We did not approach IOR, Paul you're a fucking scumbag liar. You might want to talk to Scott about your facts.

When I get home I can post pictures of the SH Limited Edition Scope. Seems kinda strange everything we do is limited, the rifles, the USO, and everything like the rifles are marked in an appropriate manner authorized by me, the site, and company owner.

 

[Rob01]

that escalated quickly......

Ron Burgundy - That Escalated Quickly - YouTube

 

[RHutch]

Frank,

Is this the SH USO scope? I owned this for a while bought here from a member back in '05 or '06.
The rifle was a GAP/SH "Headhunter" edition and the scope , and IIRC, had the old SH logo somewhere on it, on the front parallax ring maybe. My pics don't show it though.
The reticle was MOA.

 

[Lowlight]

That is the scope and that is the rifle that was built around the A5 Stock... It was our first SH Build because we worked with MCM to do the A5.

Same thing with the scope, limited edition, marked and authorized. So much for "no other company working with us"

The front ring should have the Logo on it and I believe it said Limited Edition with a Number on it.

Gotta love how people want to rewrite this site's history and dare to infer we owe IOR for anything, as if.

 

[Lowlight]

Here is one where you can see it says Limited Edition #44 ...

 

[hlee]

I think it's time I scour the internet and get my lawyer to enforce my trademark.

It is well beyond time. As a trademark holder you must enforce your trademark rights in every instance the trademark is infringed. Not doing so, you risk losing the rights to the trademark. But, you probably knew this.

It is off topic but, a few years ago the University of Texas had a restaurant in Austin shut down for using the name Bevos (there are 1000s of trademark infringement cases just like this, this one I can remember). It was an Italian restaurant and I am told that Bevos means "drinks" in Italian. Of course, in Austin "Bevo" means a big longhorn steer that naps on the sidelines during football games... Trademarks- use them or lose them. Don't risk becoming the AR-10 of Internet shooting forums...

 

[Bender]

Here is more proof that no company EVER worked with Frank!!!!



Oh.....wait.............

 

[Punisher29073]

Why dont we just all quit sugar coating and pussy footing around here and say whats on our minds. I am really having trouble delineating who is a fanboy and who believes that the IOR scopes leave somewhat to be desired.

I did buy an IOR 6-24x50 scope as my first step up from a Vari X III and have been happy with it. It did have an issue with the sight picture getting fuzzy after shots on my 300WM, but I sent it back to Val with a letter. Two weeks later, I received my scope back, with two turret caps that had previously been missing. The problem seems to be fixed and it works for me, but I know that I dont put it through its paces like many of the other members here do nor do I have anywhere near the money others have in them. This is a hunting model, not one of the tactical models.

That being said, I like my Bushnell 6-24x50 Tac model with the g2 reticle much more.

Ryan

 

[Beiruty]

Anyone has a review for the new 40mm tube scopes? For example, the Crusader?

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Most hardcore nut swinger on the planet, bar none. PERIOD.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Most clueless nut swinger on the planet, bar none. PERIOD.

Fixed.

 

[phillip61]

Fixed.

If that is directed at me thats fine. If you feel you must resort to name calling that is you. I choose not to. But what you can't call me is a yes man or a sell out. I'm proud of the gear I own and use. I don't know how anyone could go to a comp. or just go to the range shooting all the while thinking "I have the 9th best gun I could buy and the 12th best scope I could buy". That don't even make sense. A person has to believe they have the best to be able to go out and perform at their best. At least that is the way I see it. But if you really want to call me names and such just pm me and ask me for my phone number. I'll give it to ya.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

News flash dude, you don't even have the 50th best scope you could buy... IOR is garbage. I'd run a PST before I bet my match fee on a IOR.

 

[KillShot]

News flash dude, you don't even have the 50th best scope you could buy... IOR is garbage. I'd run a PST before I bet my match fee on a IOR.

That just HAPPENED...

 

[phillip61]

News flash dude, you don't even have the 50th best scope you could buy... IOR is garbage. I'd run a PST before I bet my match fee on a IOR.

Yes, if that is the scope you feel is the best for you than that is what I would do also.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Clueless and no reading comprehension.

 

[SNAFU308]

If that is directed at me thats fine. If you feel you must resort to name calling that is you. I choose not to. But what you can't call me is a yes man or a sell out. I'm proud of the gear I own and use. I don't know how anyone could go to a comp. or just go to the range shooting all the while thinking "I have the 9th best gun I could buy and the 12th best scope I could buy". That don't even make sense. A person has to believe they have the best to be able to go out and perform at their best. At least that is the way I see it. But if you really want to call me names and such just pm me and ask me for my phone number. I'll give it to ya.

It's the Nut behind the Butt that counts mate. I have seen and shot against guys that had the absolute best that money can buy and they didn't have a clue and couldn't shoot worth a damn. I took a factory .308 rifle (Savage 110 in a HS stock) with a 3.5-10 MK4 with 1 MOA clicks for elevation to a 1000 yard benchrest match once an placed 3rd against guys who were running full custom rifles with superior cartridges.

How about you stopped flaming the fire you have admitted you don't have experience in the area of high end scopes, we get it you have an IOR and you're happy and that's great but stop trying to tell everyone it's the best ever when you haven't tried any of the scopes considered by the majority to be the BEST.

Hate to say this too but there is NO BEST rifle or scope out there, if there was everyone would be using the EXACT same setup, a rifle and scope is a personal thing, a stock that fits me may not fit you, a calibre I like to shoot and be successful with may be different to the one everyone else likes. There are certainly some rifles/actions/stocks etc that seem to be used more frequently by those competing and IOR is not amongst them.

If you want to see what the best SHOOTERS are using http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...actical-shooters-equipment-what-pros-use.html

 

[phillip61]

Clueless and no reading comprehension.

My reading comprehension is fine. I read on this site and many others that everyone that owns a gen. 4 IOR is pleased with them. I have not seen one negative review. Every shooting magazine that has reviewed them has only been positive. There is about 12-13 people that has responded to this very thread that have all responded with a positive comments. The only negative things I read is from people that don't own them. Why would I or anyone else listen to someone about a scope that they have never owned? not to mention the fact that why would someone comment on a scope they have never owned?

 

[phillip61]

a rifle and scope is a personal thing, a stock that fits me may not fit you, a calibre I like to shoot and be successful with may be different to the one everyone else likes. .........you took the words right out'a my mouth.

 

[SNAFU308]

My reading comprehension is fine. I read on this site and many others that everyone that owns a gen. 4 IOR is pleased with them. I have not seen one negative review. Every shooting magazine that has reviewed them has only been positive. There is about 12-13 people that has responded to this very thread that have all responded with a positive comments. The only negative things I read is from people that don't own them. Why would I or anyone else listen to someone about a scope that they have never owned? not to mention the fact that why would someone comment on a scope they have never owned?

Seriously??? I beginning to think the statement about you being mentally challenged might be spot on. YOU have said that IOR is the best bar none in effect saying it's better than, Nightforce, Schmidt and Bender, Kahles, US Optics, Steiner and every other high end scope out there but yet YOU have admitted having no experience with them??

This sight has 100 000 members and 12-13 have a IOR that said they're happy with and that's great but that's a minuscule percent. Look in a thread about any of the other manufacturers and see how many people reply is those there are 1000's of members with other scopes that are happy with them many of which have used IOR and have an actually basis for comparison that aren't talking out their ass. You have no experience with any other high end scopes so stop trying to make out like you do or that the IOR is better.

How do you know IOR is better if you've never owned the scopes you're claiming it's better than???