-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Ior valdada
- Thread starter wapiti16b
- Start date
- Status
I didnt post that but ive compared mine to several others and its by far the best glass of the ones ive compared. These are others ive had:
-bushnell ers 3.5-21
-nightforce nxs 5.5-22x56
-viper pst ffp
-razor hd
-steiner military 4-16
The steiner was real close. Could probably call it a wash on that one. Basically ior uses schott glass and ziess lens coatings. Ive never used a hendsholdt, premier, uso, or s&b. I guess I wouldnt expect it to be better than any of these but it cant be much worse thats for sure.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
-bushnell ers 3.5-21
-nightforce nxs 5.5-22x56
-viper pst ffp
-razor hd
-steiner military 4-16
The steiner was real close. Could probably call it a wash on that one. Basically ior uses schott glass and ziess lens coatings. Ive never used a hendsholdt, premier, uso, or s&b. I guess I wouldnt expect it to be better than any of these but it cant be much worse thats for sure.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
I had a few IOR's and will never own another. Has there quality improved? I've got no idea and I never will, I got burned enough by them that I'm not stupid enough to buy again. I know many others who got burned as well and won't give them another chance. I've seen reports that show the new scopes stil have issues.
My question is why? When there are so many proven optics out there with a proven (good) track record, why would you gamble on a optic that's proven to fail? There were people jumping up and down about how great they are when everybody else's were dropping like flies. Because of the blind and biased there are few peoples opinions that I trust when it comes to gear.
My question is why? When there are so many proven optics out there with a proven (good) track record, why would you gamble on a optic that's proven to fail? There were people jumping up and down about how great they are when everybody else's were dropping like flies. Because of the blind and biased there are few peoples opinions that I trust when it comes to gear.
Last edited:
I haven't made a list, but over the years at the local range I have ran across most every scope there. We are always putting the rifles side by side and looking thru them. I let others shoot my rifle as others let me shoot theirs. So I have got to compare my IOR side by side with many scopes. I'm not anal enough to write them all down for future reference. But The IOR glass is better than most and as good as any of the rest.........that I've looked through.
Glass does you no good if the mechanics are not sound,
no failure on any scope ever had a single thing to do with "Glass" ... It's not a spotting scope.
But then again, they say ignorance is bliss... Clearly, like a lot of glass.
no failure on any scope ever had a single thing to do with "Glass" ... It's not a spotting scope.
But then again, they say ignorance is bliss... Clearly, like a lot of glass.
But frank, testing reliability wastes ammo. That 20 round box I bought for the year needs to last me for the four, five shot groups I'll shoot this year. Comparing glass is free.
Understood and agree completely. I however have never had any type of failure with my scope. Rock solid since the day I got it.
I appreciate your input. Your opinion is valued.
As has been noted, you're a minority, and we have no way of knowing what you have done to test and confirm your claims.
Ownership does not equal competence ... or understanding, especially when you consider your posts here.
You go on about "glass" and nothing about use, or tests performed. You ignore historical statistics in this case, and constantly try and push people to your side as if you need company to complete you. You're an island with few inhabitants and even less experience.
Hate to break it too you, but you do more harm than good in this case and really just force people to point out the problems.
Ownership does not equal competence ... or understanding, especially when you consider your posts here.
You go on about "glass" and nothing about use, or tests performed. You ignore historical statistics in this case, and constantly try and push people to your side as if you need company to complete you. You're an island with few inhabitants and even less experience.
Hate to break it too you, but you do more harm than good in this case and really just force people to point out the problems.
Not trying to sway anybody in any way. The op asked a question and im giving him my experiences. I have never had a problem with the ior products ive used and absolutely love them. Sorry I guess. I dont burn up ammo doing tests. I shoot! They work for me. Lots of others have too.
Historical facts about old products which have been addressed mean little to me. As far as my experience go ahead and question it. Im not militart trained if thats what matters to you. Ive been shooting since I was 6. I shoot a couple times a week at my local range which goes to 200yds. Weekends in the summer I shoot at my friends farm out to 1200 and after our work this winter 2000 this summer. I do long distance prairie dog hunting my home state of SD a few times a summer when I make it back. I dont shoot comps. Im not on here claiming dime sized groups at 1000 or making some ridiculous claims.
Im fine on my island. I can see you guys over on shore with my ior. Crystal clear!
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Historical facts about old products which have been addressed mean little to me. As far as my experience go ahead and question it. Im not militart trained if thats what matters to you. Ive been shooting since I was 6. I shoot a couple times a week at my local range which goes to 200yds. Weekends in the summer I shoot at my friends farm out to 1200 and after our work this winter 2000 this summer. I do long distance prairie dog hunting my home state of SD a few times a summer when I make it back. I dont shoot comps. Im not on here claiming dime sized groups at 1000 or making some ridiculous claims.
Im fine on my island. I can see you guys over on shore with my ior. Crystal clear!
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Nobody has proven they have been addressed, the numbers are so low it's hard to say and to my knowledge nobody has bothered to put them through the paces to determine if they have indeed been actually addressed.
They were addressed at Gen 2, then Gen 3 now they are really, really addressed with the Gen4.... ok if you two oh wait, 3 say so.
With people being gun-shy because of the history of the line, it's easy to say when very few are using it. And to what degree has not been determined." 200 yards, LOL, what do you dial on .3 or .5... LOL nice.
So far the only statements made are, "you look through them and they are clear" ... oh my bad, crystal clear and the stuff you are looking at is sharp as a tack, and the birds in the back yard have nice vibrant colors.
They were addressed at Gen 2, then Gen 3 now they are really, really addressed with the Gen4.... ok if you two oh wait, 3 say so.
With people being gun-shy because of the history of the line, it's easy to say when very few are using it. And to what degree has not been determined." 200 yards, LOL, what do you dial on .3 or .5... LOL nice.
So far the only statements made are, "you look through them and they are clear" ... oh my bad, crystal clear and the stuff you are looking at is sharp as a tack, and the birds in the back yard have nice vibrant colors.
Historical facts about old products which have been addressed mean little to me.
That is what I'm really having a hard time understanding. The claims of the older model IOR's failing is documented and understood completely, but some of these people act like they love living in the past and refuse to listen to all the people (around 12-13 on this post alone) that says they zero issues with the scopes. They get sideways over someone posting the scopes work and are great. It is more like a personal vendetta? I don't get it.
Im fine on my island. I can see you guys over on shore with my ior. Crystal clear!
That is Funny as hell!!!
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]
That is what I'm really having a hard time understanding. The claims of the older model IOR's failing is documented and understood completely, but some of these people act like they love living in the past and refuse to listen to all the people (around 12-13 on this post alone) that says they zero issues with the scopes. They get sideways over someone posting the scopes work and are great. It is more like a personal vendetta? I don't get it.
Im fine on my island. I can see you guys over on shore with my ior. Crystal clear!
That is Funny as hell!!!
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]
This is not ancient history... its only a few year ago, and after the problems of the first batch, they did the Gen 2, then that had problems, so they did the Gen 3, then that had problems so they did the Gen 4...
Get it ... it's not personal unless you paid good money for a Gen 2, or Gen 3 and were told it was fine when you bought it.
You need to knock it off because people are clearly sick of you BS and that will make it personal when I permanently dump you as you have been warned about this before
Get it ... it's not personal unless you paid good money for a Gen 2, or Gen 3 and were told it was fine when you bought it.
You need to knock it off because people are clearly sick of you BS and that will make it personal when I permanently dump you as you have been warned about this before
How are you or anybody else here any different than the ones that were saying there's were great years ago when others people's were constantly shitting the bed? How does "it hasn't failed me" prove or even remotely suggest they have improved when you most likely don't put your scope through much and all you have talked about is the glass quality? Every post you have made would also suggest it may be your only scope and definitely your only high end scope. How can you form an opinion from facts when you have no other knowledge to compare it with? The fact is you can't.
You're going to keep living in your fantasy world no matter what anyone else says.
Ive listed other scopes ive owned and still own that are in the same price range. Go ahead and laugh ranges are sparse in my area. So yeah I load test at 200yds and do alot of rimfire shooting for practice. I also stated Imy friend and I have a range on his land that is 1200yds and after the work we did this winter we will get 2000 this summer. I didnt sign up for this to impress anybody. Im sure your a more skilled shooter than I am. For you to question my experience and laugh at my shooting spots without ever meeting me well that says enough about who you are.
Nobodys ever put them through the paces yet your sure they are junk. Damn thats more outrageous than anything I said. I know my rifle and I dial for elevation. Its always where it needs to be. The limiting factor is me. It always returns to zero and yeah when I pay $1900 for a scope I expect good glass which it is. In fact better than other scopes ive owned in the same range. Guess what those scopes didnt fail either I just like this one better. Im working on putting it through a long term test. Of course that will take time hence the phrase long term. I will let you know if I have problems. But so far nope.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Nobodys ever put them through the paces yet your sure they are junk. Damn thats more outrageous than anything I said. I know my rifle and I dial for elevation. Its always where it needs to be. The limiting factor is me. It always returns to zero and yeah when I pay $1900 for a scope I expect good glass which it is. In fact better than other scopes ive owned in the same range. Guess what those scopes didnt fail either I just like this one better. Im working on putting it through a long term test. Of course that will take time hence the phrase long term. I will let you know if I have problems. But so far nope.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
You're the one thumping your chest and trying to "sell" people on your experience with the scope... it's laughable. What you're gonna do later, also laughable.
Don't like it, go start your own site, you and Philip can start a IOR Scope Cheerleader Squad and post about your new (or old) routines every day without having to answer a single question.
There is a reason people are poking you two or three, lol, in the eye over this because as was stated, you're a minority and your opinions don't negate the history or the experience of others. The fact you like what you have should be enough... instead we have to suffer through your endless postings and bullshit how it's the best scope ever.
Sorry the facts, experiences and history doesn't equal your opinions most people with a clue would have quit trying to sell it after the first dozen times. Forrest was right.
I'm thinking about purchasing the IOR 35mm 3x18 ZS model does anyone have one and what is your opinion on it ? would you buy it again , what if any problems have you encountered ?
I intend to mount it on my Sako 300 Win Mag to send 210 grain Berger VLDs down range hopefully into Elk and Mule Deer .
Thanks !
Frank my postings are not meant to negate the past. I was just trying to answer the op"s above question. The thread kept going so the discussion of the above question kept getting answered. There is nothing more to it than that?
You were trying to answer the OP's question yet the first sentence of your first post was...
That's not answering his question. That's spouting bullshit when you have no experience to back that up.
That's not answering his question. That's spouting bullshit when you have no experience to back that up.
I really was trying to give my honest answer to the post as well. I didnt really think my experiences would cause that much trouble. Heres a review from someone more respected here than me.
http://opticsthoughts.com/?page_id=120
Its toward the bottom being compared to a razor. May not be a long term test but as you said apparently nobody bothered.
This isnt meant to be a smartass comment and maybe I just dont understand business. I dont claim to but how is there a snipershide edition 3-18 ior scope?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
http://opticsthoughts.com/?page_id=120
Its toward the bottom being compared to a razor. May not be a long term test but as you said apparently nobody bothered.
This isnt meant to be a smartass comment and maybe I just dont understand business. I dont claim to but how is there a snipershide edition 3-18 ior scope?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
I'm thinking about purchasing the IOR 35mm 3x18 ZS model does anyone have one and what is your opinion on it ?
Thanks !
Part of his question was "What is your opinion of it"?
I thought I gave him an honest response?
From the what you have said previously about your "honest opinion", it looks like you went well beyond that. I am going to call BULLSHIT on your posts. Some people came on and explained their experience and opinion. You, however, went on to express your opinion, argue with others, make profound references to ancient quotes, AND THEN tried to get the OP "hooked up" with a good deal. What the fuck over?
Didn't the guys in Sweden test the IOR and were pleased with it? They could be hacks and not count.
The most comical part of this, and nobody bothers to actually read these reviews or the outcomes after the fact. They just jump to conclusions...
Ilya praises the IOR probably because that one he owned, yet he found a lot of issues with them (3-18x) and even later (without editing his initial review) the scope went down and had to be replaced.
He gave it high marks in the end despite stating: it having debris spec(s) inside FOV, finding distortions around the edges of the glass, confirming it tunnels around 4x, finding the click adjustments inconsistent, and then having it go down a short time later. Still... if you just jumped to the conclusion he recommends it ... things that make you go, hmm.
Ilya praises the IOR probably because that one he owned, yet he found a lot of issues with them (3-18x) and even later (without editing his initial review) the scope went down and had to be replaced.
He gave it high marks in the end despite stating: it having debris spec(s) inside FOV, finding distortions around the edges of the glass, confirming it tunnels around 4x, finding the click adjustments inconsistent, and then having it go down a short time later. Still... if you just jumped to the conclusion he recommends it ... things that make you go, hmm.
I will agree to disagree. I like my scope and stand by what i said. I recommended the new 6-24x56 ffp not the 3-18. If it breaks I will gladly swallow my pride and post an update. Til that happens other peoples experiences dont reflect mine and I have no reason to bash ior. I respect your opinion as well. What I dont respect is you questioning my skill and character based on my opinion.
I still want to know how the snipershide name got on an ior product if they are truly pure garbage.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
I still want to know how the snipershide name got on an ior product if they are truly pure garbage.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
That is the BEST QUESTION... THEY TOOK IT WITHOUT PERMISSION and were told to never use that name again...
They never once contacted me, asked my permission or anything, they just ran with it as if... simply because members here requested Scott @ Liberty Optics to ask them to make the 3-18x and the members here designed the reticle. The site proper had nothing to do with it.
We are trademarked, both the name and logo I have two USPTO filings. The only reason I didn't lawyer up is because I am not that kind of DICK... But they were never authorized to use our name.
Thanks for proving a point I have made on many occasions
How about this....some trusted guru on here should get a new gen 4 or gen 76 ior, whatever it is and put it through its paces. Someone completly unbiased. Then maybe, if it passes the tests we can all acknowledge that a company had problems in the past and has adressed these problems and made improvements. Then...we can wait and see if there are more problems listed or less.. it'll be an actual experiment and the key board ninja stuff can stop and as a shooting enthusiast community we can continue to help one another
Wow thats fuckin shady no matter whose side im on. I still love my scope and all but that actually changes my point of view slightly about the company as a whole.
Im not an optics expert or shooting professional but lets do this. Tell me a series of tests that this thing should be run through and I will dedicate some time when the snow melts off my shooting spots to do an unbiased test. I dont know how to test durability without beating the shit out of it which I really dont want to drop it off observation towers and such like ive seen others do in tests. Im too poor to intentionally beat the hell out of equipment I worked hard to buy. I never have and hopefully never will have my targets shoot back. If I did yeah I woulda went with something more proven and probably spent more.
I really wasn't trying to start a fight over this and will admit it got a little more heated than I would have liked but maybe in the end we can get some new data on this controversial topic.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Im not an optics expert or shooting professional but lets do this. Tell me a series of tests that this thing should be run through and I will dedicate some time when the snow melts off my shooting spots to do an unbiased test. I dont know how to test durability without beating the shit out of it which I really dont want to drop it off observation towers and such like ive seen others do in tests. Im too poor to intentionally beat the hell out of equipment I worked hard to buy. I never have and hopefully never will have my targets shoot back. If I did yeah I woulda went with something more proven and probably spent more.
I really wasn't trying to start a fight over this and will admit it got a little more heated than I would have liked but maybe in the end we can get some new data on this controversial topic.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Pepper you beat me to it but I agree as my post below yours states. I know im not trusted but I am capable enough at shooting to test function. Im also capable of putting the fact I paid alot of hard earned money for something aside to give a fair representation.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
IOR Optics are operator as f**k! Save us all a headache and buy an nightforce. You will not be disappointed with it. Mine takes a lot of abuse on my .300 win and remains clear and reliable. Most all IOR's I have been behind had turret problems, milky glass and wouldn't focus. For the money, nightforce and leupold in my limited experience are awesome!
I still own a nf. I love it as well. I owned a mark4 and wasnt impressed for the money. The reticle was canted when I got it which leupy fixed. It also seemed to be a bit fuzzy when I dialed out the parralax. If I focused the image sharp it there was a slight amount parralax. Im sure that can differ scope to scope but didnt care for mine.
Cloudy glass? I think even the people that hate ior with a passion can agree that the glass is pretty damn nice even if thats its only attribute. Either way I get its a love hate thing. I will test mine as thoroughly as possible.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Cloudy glass? I think even the people that hate ior with a passion can agree that the glass is pretty damn nice even if thats its only attribute. Either way I get its a love hate thing. I will test mine as thoroughly as possible.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
I would think if someone contacted ior and directed them towards bashing threads such as this they might donate one to someone for t&e. Side note, this topic is similar to my past experiences in high end audio and video. I used to sell and install so called quality products while products like vizio we avoided like a std. This is because vizio being a new company had tons of quality control issues. The repair shops were full of them where the higher end products such as pioneer elite were not seen in the repair shops. With this being said, vizio grew as a company, adressed issues and now makes a better quality product. I would imagine ior is doing the same. Time will tell i guess. If someone has a shitty ior they dont want, you can donate it to me. Ill give it a go. Call it a tax write off
I would think if someone contacted ior and directed them towards bashing threads such as this they might donate one to someone for t&e. Side note, this topic is similar to my past experiences in high end audio and video. I used to sell and install so called quality products while products like vizio we avoided like a std. This is because vizio being a new company had tons of quality control issues. The repair shops were full of them where the higher end products such as pioneer elite were not seen in the repair shops. With this being said, vizio grew as a company, adressed issues and now makes a better quality product. I would imagine ior is doing the same. Time will tell i guess. If someone has a shitty ior they dont want, you can donate it to me. Ill give it a go. Call it a tax write off
A IOR Sales rep out of Dallas told Frank a while back he could have any "two" IOR scopes he wanted for just this sort of test.
I'm new to this site and I had no idea that my post would stir up this much controversy and never intended it to do so !
That being said I'm kinda glad it has . I'm mostly a hunter and I'm just getting started in long range shooting and I appreciate any and all advice/opinions that have been given . I'm not a wealthy man by any means and I'm really looking for the best bang for the buck . I have no preferences as to brand except when it comes to Vortex , a great company no doubt ! , but I've used a few and they just weren't for me as their clarity was lacking . That's why the question about IOR based on what I've read and looking through one at my local gun shop and the cost comparison . I agree that reliability and repeatability are more important than the best glass , mechanicals are more important to me but as is human nature I want it all . The best glass, mechanicals , reticules , for the least amount of money . I'm at the age that good isn't good enough , life is short !
I'm still looking and researching
However if that IOR sales rep out of Dallas is in a generous mood I'd be glad to put one of his scopes to the test , Ha , Ha !
Once again Thanks to Everyone for their valued advice and opinions !
That being said I'm kinda glad it has . I'm mostly a hunter and I'm just getting started in long range shooting and I appreciate any and all advice/opinions that have been given . I'm not a wealthy man by any means and I'm really looking for the best bang for the buck . I have no preferences as to brand except when it comes to Vortex , a great company no doubt ! , but I've used a few and they just weren't for me as their clarity was lacking . That's why the question about IOR based on what I've read and looking through one at my local gun shop and the cost comparison . I agree that reliability and repeatability are more important than the best glass , mechanicals are more important to me but as is human nature I want it all . The best glass, mechanicals , reticules , for the least amount of money . I'm at the age that good isn't good enough , life is short !
I'm still looking and researching
However if that IOR sales rep out of Dallas is in a generous mood I'd be glad to put one of his scopes to the test , Ha , Ha !
Once again Thanks to Everyone for their valued advice and opinions !
Have you had a chance to look at the razor at all? Its a hellvof a scope that should be considered in the price range at all. Basically you know my opinion no trouble as of yet abd certainly really nice glass. Most think you will be "taking a chance" with the ior so thats a question you gotta ask yourself. Wouldnt hurt to discuss warranty matters with ior in colorado if your nervous or go another route completely. Bigjimfish hash a sweet uso for sale right now for $1750 I think. Thats as good as any deal you will find. I like my ior but I like lots of others too.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
The razor is great and the company is top notch too, just fyi, my razor had the magnification ring on upside own when i got it . They fixed it. I still love the optic and wont discredit them for an employee having a bad day
. They fixed it. I still love the optic and wont discredit them for an employee having a bad day
If you are looking for a hunting use scope, low light conditions will require special considerations in scope selection. First reticle design and illumination, reticles are either illuminated in whole or just the center crosshair. Both work and some of it is personal preference, having the whole reticle lit allows you to use hold offs, I find this easier to establish POA on targets in very low light. Finding the target in open glass on the side of the reticle line then bringing the line onto the POA, compared to finding and placing the center of an illuminated cross hair on target. With all this said reticle thickness becomes an issue, The MP-8s I have seen come through Long Gun Training are FAT and hairy. They do have the open dot in the center, this does help with target acquisition, again personal preference some guys like a center dot others hate them? I would say however less than 5% of illuminated scope owners on the civilian side actually use them for any real use.
IOR with milky glass hahahhahah ,sir for sure you need to go to an ophthalmologist for eye exams .
Leupold...in glass quality is at the average level even in daylight with Nightforce not far forward
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Don't forget Kahles and the hiden gem Docter in this list, an underated producer who stay in top 3 regarding low light performance.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Good info, I never knew the story of this.
I have praised the IOR 3.5-18x50 and still do. I have had no issues with it and it has performed well in every respect, I am also aware of the history of their products and gambled on the IOR purchase knowing Liberty Optics was good to go. I can't bash IOR based on my experience, but I certainly can understand others hesitation if they have had a sour history with IOR.
I have been pleased enough with the 3.5-18x50, that I am more than willing to try out a Recon in the future.
Last edited:
Have you seen the 9-36X44 Spyder. That scope looks awesome. I'm looking at the Recon or the Spyder. It all depends on whether I go FFP or SFP. I don't think you can go wrong with either one.
IOR
If you would like I could call the nice older gentleman that owns the milky piece of IOR so that you can look through it, go to the optometrist and get an eye exam with me and buy the OP and me a beer for being a douche. Good luck OP with your purchase.
If you would like I could call the nice older gentleman that owns the milky piece of IOR so that you can look through it, go to the optometrist and get an eye exam with me and buy the OP and me a beer for being a douche. Good luck OP with your purchase.
Last edited:
My eyes are very good and is a good chance yours to be in same good shape .
Why you rush to judge ALL IOR scopes and measure all with same words after you saw ONLY ONE "milky" ? Ask all the unhappy IOR owners and i bet all they say something like "crap, junk, but with an excellent glass" .
Now lets act like mens and be honest, i'm a douche because i suggested you a eye exam or you was superficial judging all IOR scopes because you saw and looked thru single one ?
In all i do i try to be open and honest , first regarding my own person and then regarding the ones around me , i'm always right? no i'm not but at least i let people around see my subjective approach and judge considering also this , read what i wrote about ONE IOR scope i own and then decide if i'm a generally douche
post number 32 :http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/228330-ior-3-18x42.html
P.S. I do prefer wine in front of beer .
My eyes are very good and is a good chance yours to be in same good shape .
Why you rush to judge ALL IOR scopes and measure all with same words after you saw ONLY ONE "milky" ? Ask all the unhappy IOR owners and i bet all they say something like "crap, junk, but with an excellent glass" .
Now lets act like mens and be honest, i'm a douche because i suggested you a eye exam or you was superficial judging all IOR scopes because you saw and looked thru single one ?
In all i do i try to be open and honest , first regarding my own person and then regarding the ones around me , i'm always right? no i'm not but at least i let people around see my subjective approach and judge considering also this , read what i wrote about ONE IOR scope i own and then decide if i'm a generally douche
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/228330-ior-3-18x42.html
P.S. I do prefer wine in front of beer .
First, re-read my post. Turrets on 5/6 IOR OPTICS I got to use were loose. Actually, two of them had milky glass. I only know how to get ahold of one of them so that you can see it for yourself. Also, the reason I called you a douche is just for commenting like you did. We are men and should act like it. Instead of instigating something on someone else's thread send a pm. Ask a simple question and get a simple answer. I apologize to the OP and everyone else for ranting. Hope he buys a nightforce. I will stay off his thread now.
By reading some of posts here and on some other threads on the Hide, I kinda get the feeling that the IOR hatred does not really have to do with the quality, but rather with the fact that IOR probably did not pay their respects to the right people and trampled the wrong people on their toes. I kinda of find the same issue with other brands as well that are really good and yet people talk shit about them despite the fact that tons of users have a bunch of positive things to say. I'm not sure how things work and who IOR needs to befriend but I kinda of appreciate the fact they didn't. They have my respect for that. It also gives me more confidence that I won't make the mistake I did when I purchased an NXS after reading hiped up reviews on it and realizing that the scope was totally imposible to see through in the desert backlight.
It's also pretty funny how people try to convice us who ACTUALLY OWN AND USE IOR Gen4 scopes that despite the fact that we do not have any problems with them, despite the fact that they track nicely, are easy to work with, have large adjustment ranges and really good optics, that all that is just an auto suggestion. They actually track like shit, the turrets are shit, the optics are blurry and so on. I mean come on!!!
Unlike [MENTION=82827]Philip[/MENTION], I do not consider they are the best ever because I own other scopes such as Hensoldt, USO, March, Steiner etc and have seen and tested a bunch of others, but the fact of the matter is they are really good scopes and very priceworthy. I don't give a shit if anyone had problems with previous generations, or if anyone is pissed at them for using the Hide's name, or doing some other shit. That is nothing but politics and it don't make my day easier when I am at the range. What interests me is if the scope does the job and the fact of the matter is that, in my case, it damn good does it.
I make a very clear difference between the models I am using. There are brands where certain models are good and others are not. That does not make the whole brand shit. The thread has to do with 3.5-18x50. Whatever issue anyone had with other models is quite irelevant. 3.5-18x50 is a fantastic scope, period. I can still remember the well known problems S&B had with their old field target 12.5-50x56 scope. The scope was nothing but a failure. However, anyone trying to digg upp that shit today in order to prevent people from purchassing the new field target 12.5-50x56 would be nothing but an ignorant, to say the least, as the new scope is absolutely outstanding. This is the way I think and work. I don't give into bull shit, hatred posts, old grumble, subjective opinions or whatever other shit. I don't care if the company is American, Chinese, Chech, Australian, Japanese, Romanian, German or Austrian but I am trying to find out if the scope does the job and that is both mechanically and optically. The two are just as important. If the optics are good but mechanics fail, I am not digging it but neither am I intersted in having nice clicks and good tracking but not beeing able to see what I am shooting at.
So, [MENTION=101171]wapiti16b[/MENTION], I can assure you that you won't be dissapointed by the 3.5-18x50.
It's also pretty funny how people try to convice us who ACTUALLY OWN AND USE IOR Gen4 scopes that despite the fact that we do not have any problems with them, despite the fact that they track nicely, are easy to work with, have large adjustment ranges and really good optics, that all that is just an auto suggestion. They actually track like shit, the turrets are shit, the optics are blurry and so on. I mean come on!!!
Unlike [MENTION=82827]Philip[/MENTION], I do not consider they are the best ever because I own other scopes such as Hensoldt, USO, March, Steiner etc and have seen and tested a bunch of others, but the fact of the matter is they are really good scopes and very priceworthy. I don't give a shit if anyone had problems with previous generations, or if anyone is pissed at them for using the Hide's name, or doing some other shit. That is nothing but politics and it don't make my day easier when I am at the range. What interests me is if the scope does the job and the fact of the matter is that, in my case, it damn good does it.
I make a very clear difference between the models I am using. There are brands where certain models are good and others are not. That does not make the whole brand shit. The thread has to do with 3.5-18x50. Whatever issue anyone had with other models is quite irelevant. 3.5-18x50 is a fantastic scope, period. I can still remember the well known problems S&B had with their old field target 12.5-50x56 scope. The scope was nothing but a failure. However, anyone trying to digg upp that shit today in order to prevent people from purchassing the new field target 12.5-50x56 would be nothing but an ignorant, to say the least, as the new scope is absolutely outstanding. This is the way I think and work. I don't give into bull shit, hatred posts, old grumble, subjective opinions or whatever other shit. I don't care if the company is American, Chinese, Chech, Australian, Japanese, Romanian, German or Austrian but I am trying to find out if the scope does the job and that is both mechanically and optically. The two are just as important. If the optics are good but mechanics fail, I am not digging it but neither am I intersted in having nice clicks and good tracking but not beeing able to see what I am shooting at.
So, [MENTION=101171]wapiti16b[/MENTION], I can assure you that you won't be dissapointed by the 3.5-18x50.
Last edited:
- Status
