Rifle Scopes Kahles k318i or forever hold your peace

[Dthomas3523]

About to pull the trigger on a k318i skmr3.

Dual purpose bolt rifle and gas gun at times. Hopefully it will get a simrad or other nvg in front of it as well.

I don’t see these come up used much, which means either not a lot of people have them, or no one wants to get rid of them.

I rarely go over 18x on my 525 in matches, so topping at 18x doesn’t matter.

Sooooo.......here’s your chance, bash the k318i all you can while I make my last few arrangements to buy one. So that I go in knowing it all.

 

[D2junky]

I have one and due to some vision issues have a hard time finding that center dot at times. I’ve not felt myself wanting for more power. It has tracked well so far and I would say is a nice compromise of size for a dual purpose rig.

I like it.....but I don’t know that I 3k like it. I’m pretty sure I have some zero shift in mine. I need to swap it off the gun I have it on. It previously had a Nightforce SHV F1 mounted and shot lights out. Groups have opened up with the Kahles but I cannot confirm it is the scope at this time.

 

[Glassaholic]

I keep meaning to do a review of my K318i but was waiting for the ZCO ZC420; however, since the ZCO won’t be out for a while I might as well do a write up. Anyway, my summary of the K318i is that it is the best overall ultrashort available right now. It bested my Schmidt Ultra Short 3-20 optically in the upper range of magnification. It has a much better reticle than anything Schmidt offers at this time (my opinion of course). It is very short and fairly light. Great ergonomics and built pretty solid.

Complaints are no caps included at its price; however, I’ve found Aadland and like those more than Tenebraex, I do like the scope coat type cover Kahles provides though it won’t work if you like sunshades.

It is priced competitively if you consider the cost of the Schmidt Ultra Shorts, but I think most of the Ultra Shorts are overpriced. I’m very curious to see how the new XTR III 3.3-18x50 compares, but will have to wait until those are more prevalent most likely by this time next year.

DT, let me know if you want to know something specific.

 

[AverageGrunt]

Pull the trigger sissy then do the review lol

 

[Iggles2017]

About to pull the trigger on a k318i skmr3.

Dual purpose bolt rifle and gas gun at times. Hopefully it will get a simrad or other nvg in front of it as well.

I don’t see these come up used much, which means either not a lot of people have them, or no one wants to get rid of them.

I rarely go over 18x on my 525 in matches, so topping at 18x doesn’t matter.

Sooooo.......here’s your chance, bash the k318i all you can while I make my last few arrangements to buy one. So that I go in knowing it all.

The only negatives I see: Is that it is a little chunky (heavy) and the field of view is not as large as some may wish. Overall- it is a fantastic scope, and I'm sure you will be very pleased. Just my 2 cents.

 

[JLP83]

Only thing I don’t like is the price. I guess they charge a premium for the skmr3 reticle. The 4-16x50 Atacr with mil-c looks like a much better value if you don’t need a tree. I’ve been looking at scopes in this class for weeks and can’t make up my mind.

 

[Glassaholic]

The only negatives I see: Is that it is a little chunky (heavy) and the field of view is not as large as some may wish. Overall- it is a fantastic scope, and I'm sure you will be very pleased. Just my 2 cents.

A little chunky? Compared to what... the K318i is 32.6oz which hangs right in there with the other ultra shorts, the Leupold's are really the only ones lighter but they don't hold up optically. Some have complained about the FOV with the K525i but I haven't heard those murmur's from the K318i as its FOV holds up quite well compared to others with 28' @ 100y at 3.5x and 5.5' @ 100y at 18x.

Only thing I don’t like is the price. I guess they charge a premium for the skmr3 reticle. The 4-16x50 Atacr with mil-c looks like a much better value if you don’t need a tree. I’ve been looking at scopes in this class for weeks and can’t make up my mind.

The "premium" is for an ultra short design with a 5x erector, these are not easy scopes to make and perform well. The NF ATACR F1 4-16x50 is a nice scope but not in the same class, as I don't consider the 4-16 an Ultra Short design, sure it's a nice 4-16 design that's not too long but not truly an Ultra Short. Below is a quick spec comparison; in brief, the Kahles is a 5x erector vs. NF 4x, the Kahles is lighter, the Kahles is shorter the Kahles can focus closer. To me, those features put it in a different class from the NF, again, not bashing the NF as I'm sure it's a great scope, but I don't think the two are a fair comparison as they are very different designs.

All the above in consideration, like I mentioned earlier, I still think Ultra Shorts are a bit overpriced for what they are, but you pay a premium for unique designs that perform well and that's what we're seeing with the Kahles. I think the Burris XTR III 3.3-18x50 will give the Kahles and other Ultra Shorts a run for their money if it proves to perform well, but the illuminated SCR2 model won't make its debut until summer 2019 at the earliest so we have a while to wait.

 

[Iggles2017]

A little chunky? Compared to what... the K318i is 32.6oz which hangs right in there with the other ultra shorts, the Leupold's are really the only ones lighter but they don't hold up optically. Some have complained about the FOV with the K525i but I haven't heard those murmur's from the K318i as its FOV holds up quite well compared to others with 28' @ 100y at 3.5x and 5.5' @ 100y at 18x.


The "premium" is for an ultra short design with a 5x erector, these are not easy scopes to make and perform well. The NF ATACR F1 4-16x50 is a nice scope but not in the same class, as I don't consider the 4-16 an Ultra Short design, sure it's a nice 4-16 design that's not too long but not truly an Ultra Short. Below is a quick spec comparison; in brief, the Kahles is a 5x erector vs. NF 4x, the Kahles is lighter, the Kahles is shorter the Kahles can focus closer. To me, those features put it in a different class from the NF, again, not bashing the NF as I'm sure it's a great scope, but I don't think the two are a fair comparison as they are very different designs.

View attachment 6987270

All the above in consideration, like I mentioned earlier, I still think Ultra Shorts are a bit overpriced for what they are, but you pay a premium for unique designs that perform well and that's what we're seeing with the Kahles. I think the Burris XTR III 3.3-18x50 will give the Kahles and other Ultra Shorts a run for their money if it proves to perform well, but the illuminated SCR2 model won't make its debut until summer 2019 at the earliest so we have a while to wait.

I was just pointing out only drawbacks . Weight is heavy. If someone was looking for a negative, which was the question, it's not as light as a mark 5. Would I rather have a mark 5, no.

My 3-20 sb has a much better field of you on the low end.

Dude, we r talking opinions here. Don't give a shit if u agree.

Just giving my opinion.

 

[Glassaholic]

I was just pointing out only drawbacks . Weight is heavy. If someone was looking for a negative, which was the question, it's not as light as a mark 5. Would I rather have a mark 5, no.

My 3-20 sb has a much better field of you on the low end.

Dude, we r talking opinions here. Don't give a shit if u agree.

Just giving my opinion.

Iggles, I wasn't ripping on you, just pointing out that it's not that chunky compared to the other Ultra Shorts in its class (like the Schmidts). And FOV of a 3x compared to a 3.5x, the 3x is almost always going to win out, the 3-20 is a different design with a 6.7x erector and where it wins out in FOV it loses out in optical quality IMO. That being said the new XTR III is claiming to get over 40' @ 100y at 3.3x which would be better than even the Schmidt 3-20. You are correct, when it comes to opinions we all have them and share our thoughts, my intention was never to insult you by questioning your statement.

 

[bikeracer]

Just came from Blue Steel Ranch down in New Mexico and shot my new to me Manners/Curtis/Proof with a new to me 318 that I paid 2450 for I think. I have 3 624s (two on AIs) and really like the 318 on this lighter rifle. Tracks well, parallax felt spot on and glass felt like the 624 which means it was great. We were shooting in 34-38 mph wind so shot mostly at 600-700 with a few pokes at a 1K.

 

[5RWill]

I've mentioned it's my favorite optic i own at the moment and still stand by that. Was behind the K525i today as my short rig has been parted out and will be down until the barrel from PVA arrives for the Impact. I like both quite a bit but probably still love the k318i more. There just aren't many weak points considering it's size. I will admit Kahles pricing it within $100 of it's bigger brother has left me a little dumbfounded as most are going to want the extra mag at that point. That said if you shop around David you can find one for decent price. I got mine at $2700 granted a demo but it hadn't left the store and was pretty much new.

 

[BallisticPrimate]

A few weeks ago I got a chance to compare my S&B 3-20 with a friends k318i.

Keep in mind that my S&B is intended to play a duel roll as a hybrid hunting and competition scope, and for that purpose I (slightly) prefer the Schmidt. FOV is important to me, probably more than it is for others and it's an area where the Bender excels. I honestly could not tell any difference in the image quality, they are both outstanding. I preferred the parallax on the Schmidt but liked the turret feel of the k318i better. For a pure match gun I think the k318i has a better reticle, but I prefer the MSR for hunting and it's never held me back in matches. Having the extra 2x is also nice, but not a deal breaker for me.

I also have an ATACR 4-16x42, it's difficult to articulate what makes that scope so good, because the numbers don't do it justice. But clearly it's not possible to resolve the key differences between two scopes via a spreadsheet (though they are surely very valuable guides).

You can't really go wrong in this price bracket, try and get behind both and make a call based on your primary requirements.

 

[Iggles2017]

A few weeks ago I got a chance to compare my S&B 3-20 with a friends k318i.

Keep in mind that my S&B is intended to play a duel roll as a hybrid hunting and competition scope, and for that purpose I (slightly) prefer the Schmidt. FOV is important to me, probably more than it is for others and it's an area where the Bender excels. I honestly could not tell any difference in the image quality, they are both outstanding. I preferred the parallax on the Schmidt but liked the turret feel of the k318i better. For a pure match gun I think the k318i has a better reticle, but I prefer the MSR for hunting and it's never held me back in matches. Having the extra 2x is also nice, but not a deal breaker for me.

I also have an ATACR 4-16x42, it's difficult to articulate what makes that scope so good, because the numbers don't do it justice. But clearly it's not possible to resolve the key differences between two scopes via a spreadsheet (though they are surely very valuable guides).

You can't really go wrong in this price bracket, try and get behind both and make a call based on your primary requirements.

I totally agree with your analysis

 

[Sixfivesavage]

A little chunky? Compared to what... the K318i is 32.6oz which hangs right in there with the other ultra shorts, the Leupold's are really the only ones lighter but they don't hold up optically. Some have complained about the FOV with the K525i but I haven't heard those murmur's from the K318i as its FOV holds up quite well compared to others with 28' @ 100y at 3.5x and 5.5' @ 100y at 18x.


The "premium" is for an ultra short design with a 5x erector, these are not easy scopes to make and perform well. The NF ATACR F1 4-16x50 is a nice scope but not in the same class, as I don't consider the 4-16 an Ultra Short design, sure it's a nice 4-16 design that's not too long but not truly an Ultra Short. Below is a quick spec comparison; in brief, the Kahles is a 5x erector vs. NF 4x, the Kahles is lighter, the Kahles is shorter the Kahles can focus closer. To me, those features put it in a different class from the NF, again, not bashing the NF as I'm sure it's a great scope, but I don't think the two are a fair comparison as they are very different designs.

View attachment 6987270

All the above in consideration, like I mentioned earlier, I still think Ultra Shorts are a bit overpriced for what they are, but you pay a premium for unique designs that perform well and that's what we're seeing with the Kahles. I think the Burris XTR III 3.3-18x50 will give the Kahles and other Ultra Shorts a run for their money if it proves to perform well, but the illuminated SCR2 model won't make its debut until summer 2019 at the earliest so we have a while to wait.

Just a heads up, this chart has some errors on it assuming it is supposed to be representative of the 4-16 ATACR.

 

[Covertnoob5]

Just a heads up, this chart has some errors on it assuming it is supposed to be representative of the 4-16 ATACR.

What errors?

 

[5RWill]

What errors?

Think it depends on which 4-16 atacr since there are two F1 versions now less the 4-16x42 is being phased out.

 

[Sixfivesavage]

What errors?

I see now that I've had coffee that it's listing the 4-16x50 ATACR not the 42 so not as many errors as I thought but the ATACR does not have a dial for illumination brightness and it has a capped windage so I'd consider that locking. Not sure about the optical specs but I'd research it a tad to be sure it's accurate.

 

[Glassaholic]

I see now that I've had coffee that it's listing the 4-16x50 ATACR not the 42 so not as many errors as I thought but the ATACR does not have a dial for illumination brightness and it has a capped windage so I'd consider that locking. Not sure about the optical specs but I'd research it a tad to be sure it's accurate.

Thanks Six, I've updated my spreadsheet to identify the capped windage and illumination. Does the 4-16x42 also have capped windage or is it an open turret?

 

[Covertnoob5]

Thanks Six, I've updated my spreadsheet to identify the capped windage and illumination. Does the 4-16x42 also have capped windage or is it an open turret?

It has capped windage and a zero lock locking elevation turret.

 

[Sixfivesavage]

Thanks Six, I've updated my spreadsheet to identify the capped windage and illumination. Does the 4-16x42 also have capped windage or is it an open turret?

What he said.

It has capped windage and a zero lock locking elevation turret.

 

[Glassaholic]

It has capped windage and a zero lock locking elevation turret.

So is that a true locking turret or is it fancy for zero lock?

 

[Covertnoob5]

@wjm308

Fancy “only lock when the turret reads 0” thing. It’s pretty much the exact same as the Leupold C type turrets.

 

[Glassaholic]

@wjm308

Fancy “only lock when the turret reads 0” thing. It’s pretty much the exact same as the Leupold C type turrets.

Thanks again Noob. PS - My PVA tripod is supposed to be here tomorrow and I bought a leveling base from Bison Tactical so I look forward to finally being able to use the Reaper Grip, but with the holidays it may not happen until the new year...

 

[BallisticPrimate]

I totally agree with your analysis

Do you own both scopes? I'm always leery of drawing hard conclusions based on a very limited comparison.

 

[Iggles2017]

Do you own both scopes? I'm always leery of drawing hard conclusions based on a very limited comparison.

Yes

 

[kukworld]

I totally need a kahles in my life. I passed the opportunity to own 1-6 2 years ago I don’t think I’m able to pass 318 or 525 again..

 

[5RWill]

For those with the k525i how do you find the low light performance? They're both adequate for me but nothing mind blowing, especially considering the k525i. Felt like my Leupold MK5 was far better in this department. Not that either are bad but 30 min after sunset is really pushing the limit of it for my eyes. Least in the current conditions down here in early winter. Had the MK5 at a different time and day and maybe that was it. I just remember staring at a doe at 1100yds on 9x and loving the scope in that regard. Not sure i could do that with the kahles. Idk maybe i'm being over critical and expecting too much.

 

[Glassaholic]

For those with the k525i how do you find the low light performance? They're both adequate for me but nothing mind blowing, especially considering the k525i. Felt like my Leupold MK5 was far better in this department. Not that either are bad but 30 min after sunset is really pushing the limit of it for my eyes. Least in the current conditions down here in early winter. Had the MK5 at a different time and day and maybe that was it. I just remember staring at a doe at 1100yds on 9x and loving the scope in that regard. Not sure i could do that with the kahles. Idk maybe i'm being over critical and expecting too much.

I turn 50 next year and feel that my visual accuity has dropped over the past few years, that being said, when I compared the K318i, to the S&B US 3-20 and some other scopes, including my Minox ZP5 with 56mm objective it was very difficult to tell the difference in low light, the Kahles and Schmidt both held their own and I could not discern a great deal of difference as the light went from low to dark, I'd like to say I could discern a bit more brightness from the 56mm Minox, but I wonder if it was more my mind saying "it has got to be brighter"... While my eyes may be getting worse as I age, I also think optics have improved and the advantages of 56mm vs 50mm may not be as much as it used to be.

 

[5RWill]

I turn 50 next year and feel that my visual accuity has dropped over the past few years, that being said, when I compared the K318i, to the S&B US 3-20 and some other scopes, including my Minox ZP5 with 56mm objective it was very difficult to tell the difference in low light, the Kahles and Schmidt both held their own and I could not discern a great deal of difference as the light went from low to dark, I'd like to say I could discern a bit more brightness from the 56mm Minox, but I wonder if it was more my mind saying "it has got to be brighter"... While my eyes may be getting worse as I age, I also think optics have improved and the advantages of 56mm vs 50mm may not be as much as it used to be.

They're both going well into 30min past sunset so i shouldn't complain. I think i'm being over critical of it. I need to sit at the bench on a clear day with no overcast and see how they do.

 

[Buck Lawman]

I'm looking at the K318I for a new build that's near completion and I'm hoping you guys can help a bro out. My only question is do the heavy outside posts on the skmr3 reticle go all the way to the outside edge of the scope at 3.5x? I like the reticle at 18 x but haven't been able to see anything that represents the skmr3 at 3.5x and the only video I've seen of the reticle is on a 6-24 and it looks like the heavy posts don't continue all the way to the edge of the scope. That may just be an anomaly of the video not picking up the reticle but I thought I'd ask those that have time behind this thing.

 

[Dthomas3523]

I'm looking at the K318I for a new build that's near completion and I'm hoping you guys can help a bro out. My only question is do the heavy outside posts on the skmr3 reticle go all the way to the outside edge of the scope at 3.5x? I like the reticle at 18 x but haven't been able to see anything that represents the skmr3 at 3.5x and the only video I've seen of the reticle is on a 6-24 and it looks like the heavy posts don't continue all the way to the edge of the scope. That may just be an anomaly of the video not picking up the reticle but I thought I'd ask those that have time behind this thing.

I’m pretty sure this one is mine on 3.5x

Obviously it looks better in person. For reference, that is the split between the refrigerator and freezer door at about 7yds.

 

[Buck Lawman]

thanks!