Rifle Scopes Minox ZP5s in PRS/NRL Competitions

[Killer Deal]

What's up Hide,

Wanted to inquire of the community in particular the practical shooting community why the Minox ZP5 doesn't seem to be represented in the competition circles. From all my research it appears that the glass quality competent competing above the ATACRs and Khales but below the S&Bs, TTs, ZCOs. The MR4 reticle is a great design to my eyes. Other than the spline issues that were noted with the black box models (maybe some white boxes too), I don't see why they don't get that much love especially at the lightly used price point I see them here around in the PX. I'm on the fence of picking up another Leupold Mark5HD, but have been considering the Minox if it's a step above in terms of function and glass.

Is there something I'm missing?

Is Minox being a German company without a huge support base in the U.S. a big deterent to people in general?

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Locally, a few of us had some issues that may or may not have been mechanically related. I say may not because none of us went through a proper testing after. Just returned to what was working for us.

Optically the minox is up there with any of them. And the mr4 reticle is liked by many.

I’d say it’s just probably a marketing thing. You don’t see much of a big push by minox in the US.

Well, except that 50% off thing they did a year or two ago. And IMO, that was much worse for them than good. They devalued their product by 50% for almost a year or so. Which in turn makes the used market price go down as people don’t need to sell it for much to recoup costs. So why pay $3200 for a new one with used selling for $2200 or less?

So, IMO, a slightly rough start with turret feel and possibly mechanical + poor marketing = just never took off.

 

[BLKWLFK9]

To me, it is bc minox has not done the marketing here in the US that the other big names do, but they are very popular in the EU. I have one and absolutely love it. Bought a NF 7-35 and it didn't handle the mirage as well as the minox so I sold the NF and kept the minox for one of my rifles and a TT on my main match rifle. I had plans on selling the minox but I don't think I can bring myself to do it.

 

[BLKWLFK9]

Wanted to add this.

I have a white box zp5 that tracks perfectly and honestly, when it comes to actual click feel and sound, I prefer it over the TT. With that said, the tooless zero function of the TT is just something that can't be outdone by the minox. I know there was a mushy feel to the black box zp5s but mine has the best clicks I think I've ever felt, and I have felt them all. That is something very subjective kinda like reticles. I must have one of the best turret examples of the zp5s. I would undoubtedly buy a whitebox zp5 over a leupold 100 times out of 100. Wouldnt even be close.

 

[Killer Deal]

Locally, a few of us had some issues that may or may not have been mechanically related. I say may not because none of us went through a proper testing after. Just returned to what was working for

I’d say it’s just probably a marketing thing. You don’t see much of a big push by minox in the US.

Well, except that 50% off thing they did a year or two ago. And IMO, that was much worse for them than good. They devalued their product by 50% for almost a year or so. Which in turn makes the used market price go down as people don’t need to sell it for much to recoup costs. So why pay $3200 for a new one with used selling for $2200 or less?

That makes sense, interesting decisions they made there, but I could see how'd that would hurt them.

Bummer about the mechanical issues you guys experienced. I read bigJims review about the spline quirk, but it seems to be hit or miss but again when your investing that kind of money not something you should be encountering.

I appreciate the feedback, Thank you.

 

[Killer Deal]

Wanted to add this.

I have a white box zp5 that tracks perfectly and honestly, when it comes to actual click feel and sound, I prefer it over the TT. With that said, the tooless zero function of the TT is just something that can't be outdone by the minox. I know there was a mushy feel to the black box zp5s but mine has the best clicks I think I've ever felt, and I have felt them all. That is something very subjective kinda like reticles. I must have one of the best turret examples of the zp5s. I would undoubtedly buy a whitebox zp5 over a leupold 100 times out of 100. Wouldnt even be close.

Haha , I appreciate the feedback. I'm happy with my current mark5 for prs, but I'm building out an extended range rifle for the NF ELR Match and wanted to step up the glass and yeah, I've seen a few used minox's in the $2,200
Range which for me is comparable to leupolds so it's had my attention. I think that gives some reassurance, but rolling the dice a little bit on the tracking consistency , but if you were willing to sell the atacr and keep the minox it says a lot to me. Gives me some questions to ask sellers before I buy a used one.

Makes sense on the marketing points too. That's huge in our digital age.

Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate it.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Don’t let me discourage you from trying one. I know plenty who like them quite a bit.

 

[CSTactical]

Not pointing to any specific manufacturer, but the question gets asked about, “Hey I heard the ‘glass/optics’ is comparable with a ZCO or Tangent for less money.”

Unfortunately it takes much more in this market when you’re going after the top. Here is some things to consider.

Quality control/consistency
Reliability
Durability
Manufacturer support (Where is it going and for how long?)
Warranty (Transferable? How long?)

And on the performance side:
IQ
Field of view
Depth of field
Parallax friendliness/finicky
Zoom ratio
Chromatic aberration

Other features:
Reticle
Illumination
Length
Weight
resale

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

Wanted to add this.

I have a white box zp5 that tracks perfectly and honestly, when it comes to actual click feel and sound, I prefer it over the TT. With that said, the tooless zero function of the TT is just something that can't be outdone by the minox. I know there was a mushy feel to the black box zp5s but mine has the best clicks I think I've ever felt, and I have felt them all. That is something very subjective kinda like reticles. I must have one of the best turret examples of the zp5s. I would undoubtedly buy a whitebox zp5 over a leupold 100 times out of 100. Wouldnt even be close.

Have to agree with the turret feel being good. Maybe I got lucky but my elevation turret is phenomenal. Spun them up and across and they tracked perfectly over the ten mill target. Glass is solid. As good as my PMII, and much better FOV. Also the MR4 rocks.

However the QC may be lacking, so I think it’s hit or miss with having an issue. This might limit the market to casual shooters rather than serious competitors. Mine took a four month trip to Germany for a minor issue but it’s been a damn good scope since. I’m rolling the dice and buying another used one. That half price fiasco a while back was the best thing to happen from a buyers perspective.

 

[Glassaholic]

We should make a sticky out of this, feels like every few months we are answering similar questions to this with the ZP5.

First a little history, a long long time ago in a state far far away a little company named Premier Reticles decided to make a scope that was the end all be all of scopes. They hired a team of ex-Schmidt engineers and dubbed them Optronika - the Skunk Works of optical design. Around 2013/2014 Premier folded and sold off scope assets to ATI who created a brand called Tangent Theta (TT) and TT made a few tweaks to the optical formula and designed a brand new turret system and the rest is history… well, not so fast, Optronika also seemed to disappear but not really, the main players started a new company called German Sport Optics (GSO) and they began doing design for other companies. Along comes Minox who only had a name in tiny spy cameras previously and they want to make a name for themselves in the rifle scope market, none of their existing lines are turning any heads so they turn to GSO and GSO decides to share the optical formula for the 5-25 and 3-15 and the ZP5 series is born.

Yes, Minox had some QC issues with early turrets and there are a few Minox haters who usually chime in and tell the story of having owned ten ZP5’s and all were horrible optically; however, that has not been the case with the two I’ve owned or the others my friends have owned, or the many other happy owners of these relatively overlooked scopes. So you see, the Premier, TT and Minox ZP5 are all related and have extremely similar specs and perform very close optically (mechanically they are different). I’ve owned TT, ZCO, Schmidt and other alpha glass including the Minox and I’d rank Minox ZP5 as the closest to TT I’ve ever seen, ZCO would come in very closely and then Schmidt, others have differing views but the point is they are all very very close, so close you should not be choosing based on wanting the absolute best optically but choosing based on reticle choice and mechanical features, ergonomics, etc.

So why not as much love for the ZP5? Two factors IMO - the name Minox and the fact their repair center is in Germany. Minox simply does not have the name other companies do, and send a scope overseas for months at a time for a repair or upgrade is not very enticing. Too many other scopes in the 5-25 and 3-15 class to choose from so not much to differentiate the Minox over the others, for a few years the MR4 was one of the best reticles out there but now there are equals and some that are better (reticle is personal preference so no need to go down that rabbit hole )

I would say this, if the repair situation and shipping to Germany doesn’t bother you much and you like everything else about the scope then I have no hesitation recommending the ZP5 it is an absolute bargain for the prices it usually goes for in the classifieds.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

The biggest issue is warranty. You could end up being without an optic for 4 months. That's not going to happen with TT or ZCO or even Vortex.

I seem to recall most of the CS Tactical team shooting Minox and being huge proponents of them for a few years. They all shoot ZCO and TT now, and after speaking with a few, there is a reason they don't mess with Minox anymore. I think this is what we call a hint.

I would buy a used one assuming I had backups incase/when it goes down. Otherwise spend the money on something like the new G3 razor which punches above its weight class and can be had for a similar price as a used ZP5. I shoot TT and ZCO if that matters.

 

[Killer Deal]

Q Glass is solid. As good as my PMII, and much better FOV. Also the MR4 rocks.

However the QC may be lacking, so I think it’s hit or miss with having an issue. This might limit the market to casual shooters rather than serious competitors. Mine took a four month trip to Germany for a minor issue but it’s been a damn good scope since.

That's true, a 4 month turn around can be quite discouraging. If you don't mind me asking what was the minor issue you mentioned so I know what questions I should be asking when I'm looking at one.

If the performance and quality is there, I'm willing to risk the biscuit haha. While the turn around time hurts If I can buy a $3200 optic at two-thirds the price that appropriately competes with optics at its price point what's not to like. I'm almost all the way there. I guess just hashing out the nuances at this point.

 

[Killer Deal]

First a little history ...

So you see, the Premier, TT and Minox ZP5 are all related and have extremely similar specs and perform very close optically (mechanically they are different). I’ve owned TT, ZCO, Schmidt and other alpha glass including the Minox and I’d rank Minox ZP5 as the closest to TT I’ve ever seen, ZCO would come in very closely and then Schmidt, others have differing views but the point is they are all very very close, so close you should not be choosing based on wanting the absolute best optically but choosing based on reticle choice and mechanical features, ergonomics, etc.

So why not as much love for the ZP5? Two factors IMO - the name Minox and the fact their repair center is in Germany.

I would say this, if the repair situation and shipping to Germany doesn’t bother you much and you like everything else about the scope then I have no hesitation recommending the ZP5 it is an absolute bargain for the prices it usually goes for in the classifieds.

That's awesome, thank you for the thorough overview. Makes sense and helps it stand up to pedigree in word and actually.

All in all, I think I'm good with the weight times. My goal is the best optic I can afford and my hard upper limit is about that $2k-2.2k mark and the MR4 is one of my favorite reticles I've seen with the next closest one being the mil-xt but for the money everything was point to the lightly used minox over the nx8.

Thank you for your feedback, that helps give me that last 5% of confidence I needed to take that step of faith and sort out the rest on the back end.

 

[Killer Deal]

The biggest issue is warranty. You could end up being without an optic for 4 months. That's not going to happen with TT or ZCO or even Vortex.

I seem to recall most of the CS Tactical team shooting Minox and being huge proponents of them for a few years. They all shoot ZCO and TT now, and after speaking with a few, there is a reason they don't mess with Minox anymore. I think this is what we call a hint.

I would buy a used one assuming I had backups incase/when it goes down. Otherwise spend the money on something like the new G3 razor which punches above its weight class and can be had for a similar price as a used ZP5. I shoot TT and ZCO if that matters.

Those are fair points. I guess I have to balance the tentative sponsorship side of that equation too, but it does say a lot. That or the zco/tts to them were that much better in their view also since those two optics are the cream of the crop right now.

That being said as a Veteran the vortex G3 can be has for a little more than a used minox. My only issue with it is the reticle. One of my requirements for this optic I want to buy is I want an open and unobstructed top hemisphere with 2-5 mils of vertical Strata above horizontal strada and a trivial thing is can please get the option of having black Vortex, come on.

But again thank you for your input and feedback.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

That's true, a 4 month turn around can be quite discouraging. If you don't mind me asking what was the minor issue you mentioned so I know what questions I should be asking when I'm looking at one.

If the performance and quality is there, I'm willing to risk the biscuit haha. While the turn around time hurts If I can buy a $3200 optic at two-thirds the price that appropriately competes with optics at its price point what's not to like. I'm almost all the way there. I guess just hashing out the nuances at this point.

First let me say I’m just a casual shooter, not a gamer, and I don’t abuse my gear. I have another precision rifle that I happily shot while the ZP5 was away. It was just an inconvenience, but one that I was willing to take on because I absolutely love the MR4 reticle, the elevation turret, and the image quality of the ZP5 and I got a good deal on it (almost $1000 off full price). I sent it in because the reticle was off center by about 0.3 mils and it bothered me once I noticed it. Minox fixed it and now I have no complaints. The image is stunning as others have said, and I put a lot of weight on image quality. I get joy out of it. I’d absolutely love a ZCO or TT or a new PMII 6-36 one day, but for the current sub $2500 used market, ZP5’s are hard to beat for what you get.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Vortex's Vets discount sucks. You can order it for the same/price cheaper and not pay tax from LO.

 

[Jackomason]

I was heavily considering the ZP5 and ZCO 527. I think I would have ended up with a better ie. More well rounded optic if I had gone zco but the price was right for the minox. The only real complaint I've had is the size. But with the beefy turrets it really doesn't look disproportionate, I just worry about the objective bell at times knowing that is a mechanical lever that can hugely effect the proformance of the scope.

It's a used optic and I think the seller was trying to dump it rather than deal with CS, I ended up contacting them about the turrets misalignment and I had a new cap in a matter of days that worked perfectly. As long as you don't have to send it to Germany the CS isn't bad.

I guess one of the things I really like about it is it's non attention seeking appearance and even it's lack of "status". Something about the consumer market bothers me lol.

I personally love the turrets (white box version) they don't lock but they are stiff enough that I don't have to worry about them getting bumped or my kids putting a Rev on when I'm not looking. Throw back to my bushy ET days. I don't feel like the detents are too close or like I over dial all that much. The zero stop is simple and is built into the cap. The second Rev is indicator is fine if I ever have to use it. The windage turret does feel different than the elevation turret.

The magnification ring is backwards from my old ET but I'm actually not sure which way it should be going. The parallax adjustment is OK but not great. I feel like the DOF on some of the kahles I've looked at was better but don't quote me on that.

The MR4 is great. If I were to buy the 527 that I've had my eye on I'd probably get the MPCT2.

The glass is beautiful and I really do notice it when picking out targets and detail in bad lighting. I've noticed that it really preforms well in low light and even just moon light. The resolution is impressive when looking at details of the farms surrounding my house.

In all I don't have any major grievances with this scope. If you buy used you'll likely recoup the cost if you decide to sell. There's just that urge to get the next thing that we all know and hate... does that go away if you buy a TT/ZCO? I doubt it..

 

[TheOE800]

The windage turret does feel different than the elevation turret.

Big TT fanboy here…but TT and ZCO samples I’ve had are the same as above. Many if not all manufacturers have this “issue” even. Ive sent a ZCO back for that actually. In fact, the two TT’s on hand right now have different turret feel from each other - still VERY good, but one is “clickier” so to speak. Call it sample variance I guess.

 

[Killer Deal]

The only real complaint I've had is the size. But with the beefy turrets it really doesn't look disproportionate.

It's a used optic and I think the seller was trying to dump it rather than deal with CS, I ended up contacting them about the turrets misalignment and I had a new cap in a matter of days that worked perfectly. As long as you don't have to send it to Germany the CS isn't bad.

Something about the consumer market bothers me lol.

I personally love the turrets (white box version) they don't lock but they are stiff enough that I don't have to worry about them getting bumped or my kids putting a Rev on when I'm not looking. Throw back to my bushy ET days. I don't feel like the detents are too close or like I over dial all that much. The zero stop is simple and is built into the cap. The second Rev is indicator is fine if I ever have to use it. The windage turret does feel different than the elevation turret.

The MR4 is great.

The glass is beautiful and I really do notice it when picking out targets and detail in bad lighting. I've noticed that it really preforms well in low light and even just moon light. The resolution is impressive when looking at details of the farms surrounding my house.

In all I don't have any major grievances with this scope. If you buy used you'll likely recoup the cost if you decide to sell. There's just that urge to get the next thing that we all know and hate... does that go away if you buy a TT/ZCO? I doubt it..

Thanks for all the personal experience and feedback. Everything you're saying makes sense. I'm with you on the consumer market aspect too. I'm a pretty mellow easy going guy so I don't care about flexing on people. I just want the best quality I can get at the best price I can afford.

My biggest interest in the Minox came from wanting to have an upper echelon level of glass for extended long range shooting. So in June, I'm shooting the NF ELR Match for the first time and I want to have an optic to help me see better at distance and something that is better at cutting through mirage. At my stage of life with other commitments I can't swing that high up at the top Teirs, normally I'd hang around $1,500 bucks or less for best middle ground stuff but 2k-2.2k is me stretching the budget which I'm willing to for a used one if it's exceptional you know because points of diminishing returns and that matters to me.

So for me the biggest things is reticle, check - MR4, then superior glass for clarity and resolving details especially Mirage, it sounds like from all the feedback it does. Everything else I'm okay if it's a little lack luster as long as it functions as intended and as what would be expected for the price I'm paying.

Thank you for your input.

 

[TheOE800]

Before I got TT or ZCO, my ZP5 was my favorite scope and objectively the best value I owned in the price range.

 

[Jackomason]

Thanks for all the personal experience and feedback. Everything you're saying makes sense. I'm with you on the consumer market aspect too. I'm a pretty mellow easy going guy so I don't care about flexing on people. I just want the best quality I can get at the best price I can afford.

I roll my eyes when I see dudes running the red cap on their NF.

But yeah I don't think I'd discourage anyone from buying the ZP5. I've thought about getting a zco 420 and moving the ZP5 to an ELR rig. But my eyes are often bigger than my wallet.

 

[TmisterE]

I have a ZP5 purchased in Oct. 2017 (Black Box) really don't think the color of the box makes a damm bit of difference, have used it a lot, not abused it. Tracking has always been spot on, turrets feel great, to me the glass is outstanding, I love the MR4 it's my favorite reticle, in the 4-1/2 years I've owned it have not had a single issue of any kind always works like it should. I don't own any of the higher priced scopes TT, ZCO, Schmidt to compare it to, for me $4000.00 + on the latest and greatest scope is just a bit out of my reach, would I like to have one of these scopes? of course but just can't justify the price. guess I feel lucky to own such a great scope as the ZP5, if you decide to go this route I think you will be pleasantly surprised and very happy with your purchase, I know I have been.

 

[Jackomason]

I have a ZP5 purchased in Oct. 2017 (Black Box) really don't think the color of the box makes a damm bit of difference, have used it a lot, not abused it.

Most of the white box scopes came on the scene with the whole blaser USA/Mauser deal. The box mostly signifies that the second Rev indicator is a little easier to get past. So not a huge deal.

 

[CSTactical]

The biggest issue is warranty. You could end up being without an optic for 4 months. That's not going to happen with TT or ZCO or even Vortex.

I seem to recall most of the CS Tactical team shooting Minox and being huge proponents of them for a few years. They all shoot ZCO and TT now, and after speaking with a few, there is a reason they don't mess with Minox anymore. I think this is what we call a hint.

I would buy a used one assuming I had backups incase/when it goes down. Otherwise spend the money on something like the new G3 razor which punches above its weight class and can be had for a similar price as a used ZP5. I shoot TT and ZCO if that matters.

And one of our guys had more rounds through a ZP5 than probably anyone on the planet at the time

We know the ZP5, Minox and Blaser pretty well...

 

[jda2631]

I got a ZP5 (White box) during their Mauser deal a few years ago. Nothing touches it for the sub $2400ish or less you can get them for used IMO. Glass is phenominal and absolutely competes with schmidt and zco (never looked through a TT), and definitely better than the mark5's. I love the MR4 reticle. Paralax was forgiving. Turrets were solid, minus one issue noted below. It tracked great.

I really only have one complaint and that is the turrets will slip a little. Meaning you will zero and tighten screws down, then while spinning them the turret cap will slip a bit from the actual turret. so now your witness marks aren't lined up making it difficult to know exactly where your scope was dialed. It wasn't much, you'd be inbetween the correct marking for where you were and the next marking, or it be off by .1 on the markings. But there were times I wouldn't have the screws tight enough and it would slip a lot, 0.5 - 1.0 mil+, that is user error on my part but still frustrating. Would have to rezero, just took more time and ammo. Again, it tracked great, turret clicks were great. It was just the cap with the hash marks on it slipping off the actual turret slightly. Being .1 off isn't that big of a deal for PRS and my usage, but it still bothered my OCD. That scope ended up getting stolen and I replaced with a zco, fwiw. I would go used Minox over a mark 5hd if they are roughly the same price. If you have a military discount or can get the mark5hd for significantly less than the minox, that may muddy the waters a bit.

 

[Guthwine]

I think the other scope manufacturers are lucky that Minox does not have much going on in their marketing department. Imho it is the best value (optical quality+reticle+made in germany) for the money you are spending.

 

[Jackomason]

I got a ZP5 (White box) during their Mauser deal a few years ago. Nothing touches it for the sub $2400ish or less you can get them for used IMO. Glass is phenominal and absolutely competes with schmidt and zco (never looked through a TT), and definitely better than the mark5's. I love the MR4 reticle. Paralax was forgiving. Turrets were solid, minus one issue noted below. It tracked great.

I really only have one complaint and that is the turrets will slip a little. Meaning you will zero and tighten screws down, then while spinning them the turret cap will slip a bit from the actual turret. so now your witness marks aren't lined up making it difficult to know exactly where your scope was dialed. It wasn't much, you'd be inbetween the correct marking for where you were and the next marking, or it be off by .1 on the markings. But there were times I wouldn't have the screws tight enough and it would slip a lot, 0.5 - 1.0 mil+, that is user error on my part but still frustrating. Would have to rezero, just took more time and ammo. Again, it tracked great, turret clicks were great. It was just the cap with the hash marks on it slipping off the actual turret slightly. Being .1 off isn't that big of a deal for PRS and my usage, but it still bothered my OCD. That scope ended up getting stolen and I replaced with a zco, fwiw. I would go used Minox over a mark 5hd if they are roughly the same price. If you have a military discount or can get the mark5hd for significantly less than the minox, that may muddy the waters a bit.

I've had pretty good luck getting both set screws to contact before tightening them up. Sucks that it got stolen though....

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

I think the other scope manufacturers are lucky that Minox does not have much going on in their marketing department. Imho it is the best value (optical quality+reticle+made in germany) for the money you are spending.

Crappy turrets, no US presence and little brand recognition. The people spending $3K on an optic tend to know what they are buying and the market.

Now had they setup here in the US with real customer service then maybe they would have gotten a foothold. They came out with a new cheaper scope a year ago and you can't hardly find it for sale anywhere (LR).

Why would anyone waste their money for a brand that will probally be defunct in 5 years or at the best, provide little/no CS. $3K gets you alot of scope today and there are a bunch of options.

 

[Glassaholic]

Why would anyone waste their money for a brand that will probally be defunct in 5 years or at the best, provide little/no CS.

Highly doubtful, Minox brand has been around longer than many American scope manufacturers, they are very strong in Europe and have military contracts with their ZP5 line.

$3K gets you alot of scope today and there are a bunch of options.

This is very true and I look at Minox similar to Kahles in that if you pay full price it is not worth the cost given the competition, meaning if you're paying close to $3k, then save up some money and get a ZCO. But if you're paying close to $2500, well that's a different story; however, I could argue in favor of the new Vortex Gen III 6-36x56 scope as this scope excels optically and can be had for close to the same ($2500ish) but with the VIP warranty to address any issues (like turret click and resistance) with a fast turn around right here in the USA. I suppose Kahles can be serviced here in USA by Swarovski; however, I still hear some scopes go back to Germany depending on the issue.

 

[Guns&WhiteWater]

Highly doubtful, Minox brand has been around longer than many American scope manufacturers, they are very strong in Europe and have military contracts with their ZP5 line.

This is very true and I look at Minox similar to Kahles in that if you pay full price it is not worth the cost given the competition, meaning if you're paying close to $3k, then save up some money and get a ZCO. But if you're paying close to $2500, well that's a different story; however, I could argue in favor of the new Vortex Gen III 6-36x56 scope as this scope excels optically and can be had for close to the same ($2500ish) but with the VIP warranty to address any issues (like turret click and resistance) with a fast turn around right here in the USA. I suppose Kahles can be serviced here in USA by Swarovski; however, I still hear some scopes go back to Germany depending on the issue.

I thought about trying the new Razor, but decided to get another used ZP5. Judging by the recent Razor reviews I've seen, the Minox still has better turrets and glass, and I much prefer the MR4 reticle and the color black. But to each their own.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Highly doubtful, Minox brand has been around longer than many American scope manufacturers, they are very strong in Europe and have military contracts with their ZP5 line.

This is very true and I look at Minox similar to Kahles in that if you pay full price it is not worth the cost given the competition, meaning if you're paying close to $3k, then save up some money and get a ZCO. But if you're paying close to $2500, well that's a different story; however, I could argue in favor of the new Vortex Gen III 6-36x56 scope as this scope excels optically and can be had for close to the same ($2500ish) but with the VIP warranty to address any issues (like turret click and resistance) with a fast turn around right here in the USA. I suppose Kahles can be serviced here in USA by Swarovski; however, I still hear some scopes go back to Germany depending on the issue.

Not as a Sport optics manufacture. At what point do they decide the ROI is not there . I Generally agree with everything you have said however.

 

[Glassaholic]

Not as a Sport optics manufacture. At what point do they decide the ROI is not there . I Generally agree with everything you have said however.

The fact they have military contracts probably secures their future for some time, now whether that translates to new optic designs for the consumer market not sure. Like others have mentioned, their 50% off deal a few years ago really upset some users as it crashed the resale market for these scopes at the time, in hindsight I'm going out on a limb but guessing Minox will not make that mistake again. Would like to see a new ZP5/GSO design from them...

 

[Glassaholic]

I thought about trying the new Razor, but decided to get another used ZP5. Judging by the recent Razor reviews I've seen, the Minox still has better turrets and glass, and I much prefer the MR4 reticle and the color black. But to each their own.

I would agree on those points - better turrets and glass. The ZP5 is almost a pound lighter as well. MR4 used to be my favorite reticle but the Gen3 XR and FML-TR1 reticles have since won me over, the EBR-7D MRAD is a very nice design and comes close to MR4, it is growing on me.

 

[HousePlant]

The only answer to this is that there are already plenty of options out there already that do the PRS and LR and ELR job... and the Minox offers nothing compelling to differentiate itself.

 

[Jackomason]

The only answer to this is that there are already plenty of options out there already that do the PRS and LR and ELR job... and the Minox offers nothing compelling to differentiate itself.

By that standard why would anyone choose a ATACR or a PMii?

 

[HousePlant]

By that standard why would anyone choose a ATACR or a PMii?

Both of the above are already firmly in the game. I see them regularly at PRS matches, for example.

Minox did a smart thing and sells a less expensive version of the ZP5... but it did not garner a strong early reputation, either. Tisk tisk.

 

[Jackomason]

Both of the above are already firmly in the game. I see them regularly at PRS matches, for example.

I get that, but is that really worth anything? Why should that factor in on the OPs decision?

 

[HousePlant]

I get that, but is that really worth anything? Why should that factor in on the OPs decision?

I'm speaking more along the lines of the discussion around why these aren't seen at the range often.

Now that the kinks have been worked out (which were probably rare given people tend to only go on forums to complain, not compliment), is it a good scope? Yeah. Assuming the quality control is consistent across the examples. At this price point, consistent quality should be underlying.

Now... could they go out and sponsor a few top shooters, pulling them away from the Vortex or Kahles train? Yes. And if they do, they need to get those guys/gals active on forums, YouTube videos, and the like. Then you'll see chatter. Then you'll see these at the range.

 

[5RWill]

Having had the ZP5 next to the Gen III I’d go so far as to say they’re pretty equal tbh. Edge to edge goes to the ZP5, contrast to the Gen III, the rest is a wash.

But i genuinely love my ZP5 and have had a pretty hard time convincing myself to list it. But i do prefer the EBR7D to the MR4. To the OP i don’t think you can wrong with one.

 

[Killer Deal]

@all

Thank you everyone for all the feedback! I know when it comes to optics there's a lot of subjective nuances that can be difficult to tease out and makes it a very passionate discussion to say the least.

I see that there are some significant draw backs for going with the Minox as well as some serious pros to acquiring it as a lightly used optic in its current market price for the glass and overall function.

My goal is to have an optic for extended long range shooting that provides the best glass and reticle I can afford in a strained budget.

I'll take some time to mull over the rest of the input and decide between either the Minox ZP5 or Vortex G3. Both are a little stretch for me personally, but if they're both significantly better than the Leupold Mark5HD I'm willing to stretch out a bit.

Thank you again for the awesome discussion and feedback from everyone.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

I'm speaking more along the lines of the discussion around why these aren't seen at the range often.

Now that the kinks have been worked out (which were probably rare given people tend to only go on forums to complain, not compliment), is it a good scope? Yeah. Assuming the quality control is consistent across the examples. At this price point, consistent quality should be underlying.

Now... could they go out and sponsor a few top shooters, pulling them away from the Vortex or Kahles train? Yes. And if they do, they need to get those guys/gals active on forums, YouTube videos, and the like. Then you'll see chatter. Then you'll see these at the range.

You are making contradictory statements, which is probably the same logic behind why more of these aren't out there.

On one hand you say kinks are worked out then say you assume QC is consistent. But its not. You have already heard from the horses mouth in this thread by some of the best shooters in the nation who ran ZP5, why they no longer run them. Oh and they just so happened to be the biggest retailer for Minox in the US until recently.

It has nothing to do with sponsorships. Hell they could donate a bunch of scopes to PRS and right after the match they will be on here or ebay.

I have been intrigued by these optics for years and got to play with some of the first samples in the US back around 2015 and at the time did not think they were worth the $3K+ they were going for. They swung and missed. Instead of spending R&D to make an even better/more robust optic, they cheapened out and came out with the LR, which looks like a huge flop as well. The single biggest failure is a 50m parallax. That really hurts these optics that could find a niche in the rimfire world with great glass.

 

[Glassaholic]

The single biggest failure is a 50m parallax. That really hurts these optics that could find a niche in the rimfire world with great glass.

TT is also 50m but doesn’t seem to hurt their use/popularity. I do not think ZP5’s have a high failure rate and outside of early QC issues with turrets they seem to have been solid, but since their mil contracts they seem to have focused more attention on that which should not be a surprise. I think it comes down to “Minox” name and poor understanding of the American market. CS Tactical was probably the best thing that happened to them but then along came ZCO and stole the show, ZCO also had some early QC issues but they understand the American market and being assembled and serviced in the USA helps a ton. Minox ZP5 is still a great value, but not many want to pay full price for them and for good reason, but even at full price they are still an excellent scope (but as previously mentioned - I would not pay full price) - best glass you will see (5-25) for the price that’s for sure and new turrets are pretty sweet, even besting Kahles IMO, still don’t like the heavy resistance between 1st and 2nd rev but could still dial if I had to. Are they a good competition scope, they can certainly hold up optically and mechanically but being serviced in Germany is a deal breaker for many serious about competition so I think “that” is the biggest reason you don’t see more in comps; however, because Minox kept the weight down I do think they make a very compelling option for a crossover scope and I think the MR4 is an outstanding crossover reticle.

 

[DellaDog]

I have both the Minox and ZCO.
I’ve since added two Minox‘s for nearly the price of another new ZCO.

I‘ve bought and sold a lot of scopes, but never sold the ZCO or Minox .

 

[CSTactical]

TT is also 50m but doesn’t seem to hurt their use/popularity. 1. I think it comes down to “Minox” name and poor understanding of the American market. CS Tactical was probably the best thing that happened to them but then along came ZCO and stole the show, ZCO also had some early QC issues but they understand the American market and being assembled and serviced in the USA helps a ton. Minox ZP5 is still a great value, but not many want to pay full price for them and for good reason, but even at full price they are still an excellent scope (but as previously mentioned - I would not pay full price) - best glass you will see (5-25) for the price that’s for sure and new turrets are pretty sweet, even besting Kahles IMO, still don’t like the heavy resistance between 1st and 2nd rev but could still dial if I had to. Are they a good competition scope, they can certainly hold up optically and mechanically but being serviced in Germany is a deal breaker for many serious about competition so I think “that” is the biggest reason you don’t see more in comps; however, because Minox kept the weight down I do think they make a very compelling option for a crossover scope and I think the MR4 is an outstanding crossover reticle.

Unfortunately there is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes in this industry than can be publicly discussed and it does not look like anyone else here understands that.

Bill, what was the early QC issues that ZCO had? You shouldn't make a statement like that without proof IMO.

- Richard@CST

 

[Glassaholic]

Unfortunately there is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes in this industry than can be publicly discussed and it does not look like anyone else here understands that.

Probably not, but we are very good at conjecture and speculation

Bill, what was the early QC issues that ZCO had? You shouldn't make a statement like that without proof IMO. maybe @gebhardt02 can chime in here.

- Richard@CST

My statement was not meant to undermine ZCO in any way as all manufacturers experience QC issues, but I am curious why you ask for proof for ZCO even though I also mentioned QC issues with Minox and you did not ask for proof of those issues?

First, let me define what I mean by QC - "Quality Control" and I think every manufacturer out there has dealt with this at some point or another, there is no one immune and there is no one with a perfect track record. If a manufacturer makes 10,000 scopes but I purchase one that falls apart, even though it is one out of 10,000 it is still a QC issue. Most of us are willing to give a pass on certain issues especially if the issue seems to be the exception and not the rule; however, if multiple units are reported with similar issues this tends to be discussed more frequently. Personally, I don't have so much an issue with QC (they happen with every mfr as previously mentioned) but it's how the manufacturer responds to them that makes a difference.

The early QC issues with ZCO I'm referring to had to do with their turrets not aligning properly as well as inconsistent feel between elevation and windage, this was well documented early on (in threads on the Hide) when ZCO first started shipping scopes, I had a couple friends who had to send scopes back to ZCO as well as a number of Hide members who did the same and wrote about it here, these scopes were promptly fixed (within a week in most cases) and since that time I have not heard of anyone else having these issues. The Minox issues also had to do with turrets by the way. I've also had QC issues with Schmidt and had to send a brand new scope back due to an o-ring not being lubed well in the field stop thus making the parallax wheel really tight, I've had QC issues with other manufacturers as well. I've heard of QC issues with Nightforce, with Tangent... again, nobody is immune to having scopes that fall through the cracks.

As far as proof, do you really want me to go dig up old threads on ZCO where these items are mentioned, do you want me to contact my friends and ask that they share their personal experience with repairs with ZCO, I'm not quite sure what is driving your statement asking me to provide proof?

In summary, every manufacturer has had QC issues so I wasn't trying to point out anything negative with ZCO - I brought that up to state that a lot of people seem to knock Minox for their early QC issues that even ZCO has had (and every other manufacturer), again this was not meant to be anything negative on ZCO because I applaud how they handled those issues and promptly addressed them, I am a huge proponent of ZCO and promote them quite frequently.

 

[CSTactical]

My statement was not meant to undermine ZCO in any way as all manufacturers experience QC issues, but I am curious why you ask for proof for ZCO even though I also mentioned QC issues with Minox and you did not ask for proof of those issues?

Well, we've had one of if not the largest sample size in the United States (Possibly the world?) of both brands

 

[TheOE800]

Well, we've had the largest sample size in the United States (Possibly the world?) of both brands

You spin the turrets of each ZCO that comes in? Excuse me, I’d like a discount…

 

[CSTactical]

The early QC issues with ZCO I'm referring to had to do with their turrets not aligning properly as well as inconsistent feel between elevation and windage, this was well documented early on (in threads on the Hide) when ZCO first started shipping scopes, I had a couple friends who had to send scopes back to ZCO as well as a number of Hide members who did the same and wrote about it here, these scopes were promptly fixed (within a week in most cases) and since that time I have not heard of anyone else having these issues. The Minox issues also had to do with turrets by the way. I've also had QC issues with Schmidt and had to send a brand new scope back due to an o-ring not being lubed well in the field stop thus making the parallax wheel really tight, I've had QC issues with other manufacturers as well. I've heard of QC issues with Nightforce, with Tangent... again, nobody is immune to having scopes that fall through the cracks.

As far as proof, do you really want me to go dig up old threads on ZCO where these items are mentioned, do you want me to contact my friends and ask that they share their personal experience with repairs with ZCO, I'm not quite sure what is driving your statement asking me to provide proof?

In summary, every manufacturer has had QC issues so I wasn't trying to point out anything negative with ZCO - I brought that up to state that a lot of people seem to knock Minox for their early QC issues that even ZCO has had (and every other manufacturer), again this was not meant to be anything negative on ZCO because I applaud how they handled those issues and promptly addressed them, I am a huge proponent of ZCO and promote them quite frequently.

1. The problem with the internet is that it can amplify one side of a potential issue, the supposed turrets not aligning was mainly (that I can personally verify) a user error from not following the directions on how to set the zero with ZCO's locking turret.

2. The inconsistent "feel" was not a QC issue, it was a rolling production change (a spring) due to user preference after the first batch was released.

3. You are correct, anything man made can and will have QC issues, but IMO ZCO's QC is some of the best I've seen in this industry with samples over 4 figures passing through my hands personally. I guess you and I see things differently on this, but I'm going off very large sample groups for the amount of scopes produced.

 

[CSTactical]

You spin the turrets of each ZCO that comes in? Excuse me, I’d like a discount…

Trust me, I do much more with yours

 

[TheOE800]

Trust me, I do much more with yours

I’ll just go get the bleach…