Rifle Scopes Philosophy of high end optics...

[Bakwa]

Yes, probably. And I'd love any form of subjective answer based around people justifying why they choose one option over another.

I don't understand why people would go out of their way to answer a thread they apparently don't want any part in.
And yet here we are 50+ posts in to a thread where the only shit posts are from those very people who claim they hate shitposting.
Like a bunch of SJW's shutting down free speech because they think they're saving someone's feelings.

 

[seanh]

No. That’s why people keep turning these into a shit show. It’s a question that has a mostly subjective answer.

Subjective? Depends on which aspect. If you're looking at Optical quality and clarity absolutely not subjective. Optics, durability turret turning / clicks can be Quantified.

The real problem comes into the cost of testing versus retail sales results. Most people wouldn't know what they're looking at.

 

[mmlook]

Subjective? Depends on which aspect. If you're looking at Optical quality and clarity absolutely not subjective. Optics, durability turret turning / clicks can be Quantified.

The real problem comes into the cost of testing versus retail sales results. Most people wouldn't know what they're looking at.

on paper, I wouldn't expect much variance among the $2k+ scopes in terms of pure optical testing.
like transmission, wave front error, MTF

what you'll likely see the largest variance on is F number, dispersion, off-axis aberrations, etc..

imo, not really worth comparing one scope to another unless they are the exact same design.
i.e. you can compare one razor gen II to another razor gen II,
but not a tangent theta to a SB ultra short

 

[SRPowah]

I don't think lab numbers on glass would matter at all except to low light hunters, and that depends on legal hunting time, location, and a hunter's eyesight.

Look at the preference people have to the contrast from different coatings: Kahles, NF, and S&B are all visibly different when used out in the field. Subjective choice will almost always win in the end. Just depends on if the person is willing to play scope ADD and try them all or settle on their first pick.

If one can't find value in the top tier stuff, it ain't for them. Simple as that. Ain't nothing wrong with accepting you don't need it either, as I know I don't. Those that shoot more than a few weekends here and there, or push their rifle in non-ideal conditions will find the value easier. Even then, some like me are comfortable settling.

 

[W54/XM-388]

I want to start a conversation about why someone would want to pay $3500+ for optics like Tangent Theta or ZCO over $1500-$2000 options, and under what circumstances one feels justified in doing so.

I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to accomplish by this "Conversation" you want to have and really, when someone says "I want to start a conversation...." you know it's all downhill.

If you are trying to feel good about getting one of the poors scopes, don't bother, just use it, enjoy it and have fun.
On a square range, on a bright sunny day, not too hot, not to wet, with all the targets nicely laid out, you may not notice a difference.

However edge cases and shooting when the conditions get tough is where high end scopes start to shine.

Here is a good thread about that, and if you start with this post from Frank, you'll see where is showing that a $3k+ S&B scope can be worth the money over the $1K scope because the $3k+ scope may mean you get to hit your target:

Rifle Scopes - Glass quality in S&B models

Hi I was wandering if there is a difference In glass Between the 5-25x56 with dt lp turrets compared to the 5-25x56 with locking turrents or are they the same scope with just different turrets. If you look at a photo of them side by side they look different in size.

www.snipershide.com

For example,
At the range no big deal if you miss a shot, but if you paid for that once in a decade / lifetime hunt and you are out money in the $10k to $60k or much more range, you'll be happy to stump up the extra couple thousand dollars for a scope that gives you the best chance of getting your animal in bad conditions.

For some folks a great warranty is a real comfort and all you need.
For others, the warranty is almost useless if the optic goes down after a hard hit because they need to keep using the scope right then.

 

[NateSavannah]

My advice, if youre happy with the cheap stuff, never look thru the expensive. Might change your perspective on the value of what you own. Some people really cant tell the difference, nor can ever understand why someone would pay for premium optics. I have a ZCO 420 and a TT 525. I didnt start with those two scopes, its been a slow escalation in value of optics over the course of 15 plus years. Can I tell the difference? yes. Some small, some big.
But than again I have friends who cant figure out why I bought an AXSR when a Savage can do the same job of sending lead down range.
Some of us just want the best.

 

[Odogster]

I always wonder about similar characteristics with optics and how they change with price. Unfortunately my budget does not allow for $3,000 optics, my cap is $1543. Having moved from $200 optics up, the law of diminishing marginal utility definitely kicks in as the price gets higher, maybe at $3000 dollar scopes there is another big jump in quality but sadly I'll never know. I always enjoy reading posts from people whose only objective is to make someone feel bad about what they posted. Kind of reminds me of a hooker who asks you if you want to buy medication for whatever disease she just passed on to you as she's leaving. As new people join forums, or as new products come out opinions and perspectives change so although they're maybe many threads already containing similar subjects it makes sense to me to ask the question again. For example the DLO is incredibly knowledgeable and has a knack for explaining things. So IMO any questions asked b4 he was a forum participant will benefit from being asked again once he can answer. If you don't like the show CHANGE THE CHANNEL.

 

[Steel head]

Here’s my non trolling take on it.
Spotting and rifle scopes 99.90% are going to get a great value and performance with the mid level stuff.
$500-2000.

If your serious About shooting as a hobby a Swaro, Henny, Kowa, TT or ZCO are a nice luxury to have.

You’ll absolutely see a difference but it’s not like you need it to highly functional or to have an enjoyable experience.

I have limited shekels to spend and while I’d love a ZCO I can have a better overall experience spreading that across a few areas like reloading and other gear that will make a bigger positive gain on my shooting hobby.

 

[dragman]

It's all diminishing returns. Once your hit around 2000 you have 95% of what's available. Difference between 500&1000 is bigger the difference between 1000-2000 is less bit still big the difference from 2000-4000 is small
Same as cars or trucks or anything. Stay in your lane and enjoy what you have

 

[chase723]

Like has been mentioned, it’s been discussed a lot on here, but if the OP is seeking some actual insight and not just trying to stoke a shit show then I’ll offer this. I bought Tier 1 optics because optically they can keep up with my eyes. You’ll never miss a shot because of the glass quality etc in a Tier 2 optic. At that level they should all track and you’ll see what you need to see just fine in order to make impacts.

I had PRK and have, depending on the hydration status of my eyes, 20/10 to 20/15 vision. On a bad day I see 20/20. I notice chromatic aberration, if an optic can’t resolve, etc. Looking through something that doesn’t allow me to see as good as I my eye can see is irritating because the image is lower fidelity than my brain is used to and thinks it should be. Like when you get something in your eye and your vision is a little fucked up. It’s annoying. I also hate turrets where you can’t tell if it’s clicked over or which adjustment it’s on (I.e. mushy, imprecise, sloppy = suck). Combine that with the fact that you spend a couple thousand bucks on something that’s not quite up to par with the expectation and then it’s really annoying.

If your vision is such that you literally can’t see the difference then it’s probably a waste of money. There are a bunch of scopes out there that have decent feeling turrets, track perfectly, and good enough glass (as in absolutely completely fine to get the job done every time) for $1-2K. There’s only a few that are exceptional in all regards and used they all cost ~$2200 and up. Usually closer to $2500 and up. Obviously depending on your livelihood, the $200-$1000 difference to get in the door is something that might be a struggle or something you could care less about. Personally, I think it’s worth it but that’s because I appreciate the mechanical precision and haptics, can actually see the optical difference, and hate spending money twice.

 

[hafejd30]

I had a NF NXS which for a while was a heavy hitter. Not so much anymore. I ended up selling it because my Sightron SIII had better glass.

I then got into an ATACR. The ATACR has better glass then the NXS by a decent amount. Better turrets with zero stop and zero hold. Better illumination that can be adjusted easily. It is also noticeably more “built like a tank” so to speak than the NXS. Both were reliable and put bullets where they needed to go

It costed me $500 more for the ATACR than the NXS and was worth every penny to upgrade to that next tier.

I haven’t handled a ZCO or TT so I’m not sure how big of a step up in performance vs price that would be.

Do some research and compare a few tiers of same brands and tell me what you find. Better glass, more reliable, the list goes on and on.

Compare:

Vortex PST to Razor
NF NXS to ATACR
Burris XTRII to XTRIII
Sightron SIII to SVSS
Leupold MK 4 to MK5

The gains are real. But not worth it to everyone.

NOW, with that said....should I get the scope in MILS or MOA??? Its going on a 300 yard deer rifle....should I get 308 or 6.5

.....please don’t ban me!

 

[Steel head]

I had a NF NXS which for a while was a heavy hitter. Not so much anymore. I ended up selling it because my Sightron SIII had better glass.

I then got into an ATACR. The ATACR has better glass then the NXS by a decent amount. Better turrets with zero stop and zero hold. Better illumination that can be adjusted easily. It is also noticeably more “built like a tank” so to speak than the NXS. Both were reliable and put bullets where they needed to go

It costed me $500 more for the ATACR than the NXS and was worth every penny to upgrade to that next tier.

I haven’t handled a ZCO or TT so I’m not sure how big of a step up in performance vs price that would be.

Do some research and compare a few tiers of same brands and tell me what you find. Better glass, more reliable, the list goes on and on.

Compare:

Vortex PST to Razor
NF NXS to ATACR
Burris XTRII to XTRIII
Sightron SIII to SVSS
Leupold MK 4 to MK5

The gains are real. But not worth it to everyone.

NOW, with that said....should I get the scope in MILS or MOA??? Its going on a 300 yard deer rifle....should I get 308 or 6.5

.....please don’t ban me!

The ZCO glass really is amazing.
Beautiful color and contrast.
I felt it was a similar experience as looking through a Kowa 883 prominar but possibly even better color.
A solid step above any ATACR I’ve ever looked through.

Mils and 6.5 all day and twice on Sunday.

 

[Bakwa]

If you are trying to feel good about getting one of the poors scopes, don't bother, just use it, enjoy it and have fun.

I'm not quite sure why many here think I'm trying to "justify" a cheaper optic. If anything, it's exactly the opposite. But I was attempting to start this [conversation] as neutrally as possible. Deep down, I'm trying to justify a ZCO purchase over what my budget probably should allow, but I happen to have an extra $1k right now.

W54,
I do appreciate everything you've posted here.

The last 10 or so posts is how I hoped this thread would go initially. Great anecdotal information.
Shame on the rest of you.

Cheers

 

[hafejd30]

The ZCO glass really is amazing.
Beautiful color and contrast.
I felt it was a similar experience as looking through a Kowa 883 prominar but possibly even better color.
A solid step above any ATACR I’ve ever looked through.

Mils and 6.5 all day and twice on Sunday.

@Steel head don’t you do this to me don’t you fucking do this to me!!!!

I was a happy savage shooter until I joined this site! Now the AI is the only gun that leaves the safe thanks to you fluffers

 

[hafejd30]

I'm not quite sure why many here think I'm trying to "justify" a cheaper optic. If anything, it's exactly the opposite. But I was attempting to start this [conversation] as neutrally as possible. Deep down, I'm trying to justify a ZCO purchase over what my budget probably should allow, but I happen to have an extra $1k right now.

W54,
I do appreciate everything you've posted here.

The last 10 or so posts is how I hoped this thread would go initially. Great anecdotal information.
Shame on the rest of you.

Cheers

If you can afford to you will never regret buying a better optic

I have seen many threads of people who wish they would have went the best from the start. Many who post threads like this to justify buying a cheaper one when it’s not what they really want (Not saying this is you just an example)

I’ve never seen a thread where an ATACR owner looked through a NXS and second guessed there decision

 

[hellishot]

This is the same conversation with people that cannot afford high end guns say...why do I need to spend $3K on a SCAR when my PSA AR15 shoots the same thing...just go to a local gunshop and listen to the stupid, ridiculous conversations people have about this stuff (hence why I do not go to gunshops much anymore)

It comes down to:

A) Want/Desire/Need
B) Optical performance and turret features
C) Because who cares

Having personally experienced optics from $500 to $3500...there is a difference...each level up you go... the level of precision and clarity improves...

Currently, I think optics from $1200-2500ish are very close in optical performance...turrets are a different ball game as well as internal robustness and scope tubes...

Buy the best optic possible on your budget with solid warranty/track record...and go shoot and train...

This explains it best. If I had the purchasing power to buy a Scar over PSA then I’m going with the Scar and put the best scope I can afford within my budget.

My taste evolved as I got older. I enjoy thhe refinement on my big ticket purchases.

 

[Boatninja]

I continue to be amazed by the people that are tired of addressing these threads continue to respond to them and even as much or more so the fact that I continue to open them. I have to say though, that it is somewhat more entertaining than search function.

 

[W54/XM-388]

Deep down, I'm trying to justify a ZCO purchase over what my budget probably should allow, but I happen to have an extra $1k right now.

I don't have any ZCO scopes, in my case, my primary staple scope is the S&B 5-25x56 P4F, because in the used market, if you do plenty of looking, the value you get for the money is excellent.

I've talked with some folks who had the S&B ones like I had, and in their opinion, the ZCO was a significant step up from the older S&B ones like I have. A bit in the glass, but mostly in the way the turrets, controls & settings are done.

You might want to see if @Dthomas3523 has any comments on them, as I think he has had several of the ZCO and may have had a few other top notch ones recently.

 

[Bakwa]

So as to refine the discussion, would you all go ZCO or PMII for a 100m-1000m durable do all optic?

 

[Nik H]

I don't have any ZCO scopes, in my case, my primary staple scope is the S&B 5-25x56 P4F, because in the used market, if you do plenty of looking, the value you get for the money is excellent.

I've talked with some folks who had the S&B ones like I had, and in their opinion, the ZCO was a significant step up from the older S&B ones like I have. A bit in the glass, but mostly in the way the turrets, controls & settings are done.

You might want to see if @Dthomas3523 has any comments on them, as I think he has had several of the ZCO and may have had a few other top notch ones recently.

I have the good fortune of owning S&B 5-25 PMII, NF ATACR 5-25 and 7-35, Khales k624, USO, ACOGS, and most recently a ZCO. All of them have their purpose and use. I don't regret buying any of them.

I find the ZCO to be better in almost all respects when compared to the others. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy shooting behind my NF or shooting rimfire with the S&B. Is it worth the money? Only your own wallet can make that call.
Bear in mind that your final purchase will never scratch the itch on a long term basis. 18 months from now, there will be a new darling of the optics world.

It's an expensive addiction

 

[Dthomas3523]

All depends on your preferences.

ZCO has:

Locking turrets
Fast focus and locking diopter
Glass and parallax only matched by Tangent Theta
Very good durability (36mm tube gives thicker wall and such)
The best feeling controls on the market.
Awesome customer service and their QC is superb. I know what kind of things they won’t let out of their facility and they are things many of the top companies out there would let out of the door.

Reticles are subjective, so I can’t comment much. I think their reticles are the best available. But you man not.

Where you see the big difference is those high mirage days or targets way into the shadows. Everyone is complaining about being able to see them. Meanwhile the zco and tangents have no problem.

That being said, there’s plenty of people skull dragging the field with razor gen 2’s.

 

[918v]

So as to refine the discussion, would you all go ZCO or PMII for a 100m-1000m durable do all optic?

Which PM-II? S&B has a greater variety of flavors. And which company has a better chance of being around in 10 years? Who is going to fix your scope? Where is the service center? With 36mm tubes you have a restricted ring selection. ZCO may be better than a 5-25 PM-II but is it worth it considering the totality of the circumstances.

 

[Krob95]

Owning both a S&B and my ZCO, I can confidently say I would choose another ZCO and sell my S&B. Don’t get me wrong, the S&B is a phenomenal scope and for the used prices, you can’t beat them. But dollar for dollar buying brand new, ZCO all day and for the reasons listed above. You will not regret your purchase of going with a ZCO.

 

[Dthomas3523]

If you want to put a $50-$80 set of rings on your $3600 optic, then sure, there’s less options for rings for ZCO. For everyone else who typically runs ARC or Spuhr, you’re fine. Not to mention several other companies that make 36mm. Ring selection argument is at best mis informed.

Service for zco is in the US and typically a week turnaround or less.

Considering who the people that own/run zco, the odds are good they will be around. One can never know, but odds are good. The people behind it have been in the industry decades already.

 

[hlee]

"I would like to start a discussion on X, so I may see people bicker. Next up 9mm vs 45."

Wrong forum. Not appreciated. Try mrad v moa? FFP or SFP? Or lvpo v red dot? Or who makes the best RTZ QD scope mount? Thoughts on the mark 5?

 

[acudaowner]

I would love to see a actual lab test of rifle scope brands . especially now a days where almost all the glass is pretty darn close in how clear and bright they are .

 

[918v]

If you want to put a $50-$80 set of rings on your $3600 optic, then sure, there’s less options for rings for ZCO. For everyone else who typically runs ARC or Spuhr, you’re fine. Not to mention several other companies that make 36mm. Ring selection argument is at best mis informed.

Service for zco is in the US and typically a week turnaround or less.

Considering who the people that own/run zco, the odds are good they will be around. One can never know, but odds are good. The people behind it have been in the industry decades already.

There are way more 34mm rings to choose from than 36mm. Just because you like Spuhr and ARC don’t mean everyone has to like them.

Second, when deciding on odds on survival in this day and age, I’d bet on a company that’s been around longer than me with government contracts all over the planet. ZCO and other like companies are hit the hardest when the economy tanks and people stop their luxury spending.

 

[seafury]

If your spending a lot of time at that 1000m line, it seems the consensus is save up a little longer for that ZCO if it’s even remotely in the ballpark of your budget. My ZCO experience has been similar to what’s outlined above but all I have to compare to is a RZR G2 and an AMG and several less expensive scopes.

Also, maybe just mount it on a rifle that’s twice as expensive as the scope and that ZCO price tag won’t seem so bad after all.

Maybe describe for us the best you can your objectives for this rig and the kind of performance you want out of it?

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

There are way more 34mm rings to choose from than 36mm. Just because you like Spuhr and ARC don’t mean everyone has to like them.

Second, when deciding on odds on survival in this day and age, I’d bet on a company that’s been around longer than me with government contracts all over the planet. ZCO and other like companies are hit the hardest when the economy tanks and people stop their luxury spending.

+1
Then add the fact many think their high end equipment will allow buying in vs knowing something. Move them out of their one trick pony shooting on their home range an see how all the buy in money stacks up for them.

 

[k-space]

If this is your game and you have the means, it should be an easy and comfortable decision. If it's not, you're not there yet.

 

[Bakwa]

Maybe describe for us the best you can your objectives for this rig and the kind of performance you want out of it?

I'm a hunter and a self taught long range shooter.
I have two 800m ranges and a 1000m range at my disposal depending on where I'm at in FL.
I eventually want to take some long range classes but want to seek the best avenue. [Many advanced classes require their own in house basic class as a prerequisite, so I might want to pick the right basic course to set me up.]

Scope wise,
I want objectively great glass/coatings. [I've looked through a S&B (idk what model it was) on a bad day next a PST, Mk4, & Steiner Predator. I want to chase that level of clarity and usability under harsh conditions.]
50mm objective.
35oz max weight.
I'm still reticle shopping, but I'm used to very basic mil reticles. So most anything will be an upgrade. I'd like something for easier holdovers but I don't like a cluttered picture. I'm studying and leaning towards the MPCT2 or MPCT3. The 2 being less cluttered looking and the 3 appearing easier to use.
A locking turret would be very nice but not necessary.
Zero stop of some sort.
Not as concerned with tube size as I'll be running ARC M10's.
It has to be FFP. [It's going on a 22" 6.5CM I'm having built and I was either going to move a FFP over from another shorter rifle and grab a NXS as an appropriate workhorse for that shorter rifle, or buy a higher end FFP just for this new rifle. That's really why I started this thread.]
I want the parallax to be forgiving.
The controls just have to be usable. [I don't need TT clicky's to make me feel better about this one.]
And the last thing but perhaps one of the most important, I need for it to be durable. [I want to have the best chance of me never having to send this optic in after I've abused it for years to come.]

Perhaps I just described an ATACR too. I've shot from one a few times even. Great scope. It just didn't wow me like the S&B did. And the ZCO has my attention based reviews alone.
I just wanted to know why many of you jumped to that next tier of optic. I know all of you can't be just that rich.

Cheers

 

[Bakwa]

If this is your game and you have the means, it should be an easy and comfortable decision. If it's not, you're not there yet.

It's certainly not comfortable. These types of purchases are things that I have to plan for and think hard about. Unfortunately I'll never get to a point where it's "comfortable" with my career.
I just shoot a lot. I'm outdoors a lot. I'm rough on my equipment. And I'm forced to buy nice equipment if I want anything to last or work well when I need it to.
I invest in durable boots, durable watches, good sunglasses, knives I don't have to sharpen everyday, guns that I know will work in the field, etc..
I'm thinking of this as a potential investment. Not one with a monetary return, but with the return being usable features under harsh conditions that will help me "hit my mark" for years to come.

 

[brianf]

the more one shoots the cheaper the equipment becomes, its a one time purchase/sunken cost

most people on here are shooting some sort of match ammo ( not a bulk 50BMG can of 22-250)

that ammo usually costs $1 or more

the difference of a 2500 and $3500 dollar scope is less than a 1000 rounds

if you plan to keep your scope for 5 years...thats 200 rounds a year

if you shoot every other week that comes down to 8-10 rounds a range session MAX....

if your shooting a 338 is only 3-4 rounds per session

people keep stating diminishing returns which could be correct depending on review criteria, but there has not been one post of regressive returns.

what if the ultimate scope on the planet was $500 6X non variable SFP, but it surpasses any and all other scopes ever made?

if you need more than 6X, than that scope while superior and very price competitive will not suit your needs.

if the more expensive products were not a superior product the market price would have a correction

my personal experience from the cheapest of cheap crap to literally the most expensive scopes one can buy has continually been, the newest model at the highest price point more often then not has been a superior product.

and if its not a superior product its in the top 3, but again that is for my criteria.

 

[thehun]

So the most clear optic I've ever looked through was my S&B 12-50X56...that thing was ridiculously awesome...I only sold it because I don't have access to 600+ yards...and I do not own a long range gun...

It had zero CA, resolution was amazing, color was spot on, butter smooth parallax...turrets are great...mine was the P4FL/MOA...but the one below is MRAD based.

Schmidt Bender 12-50x56mm PM II P P4F 1/4cm cw MT / ST Riflescope 878-911-972-A6-62

Schmidt Bender PMII Riflescope 12-50x56 P P4 Reticle 34mm 0.25mrad MT CW FFP 878-911-972-A6-62 | Only at EuroOptic.com!

www.eurooptic.com

 

[SRPowah]

Perhaps I just described an ATACR too. I've shot from one a few times even. Great scope. It just didn't wow me like the S&B did.

That is the problem with subjective preferences. I love my ATACR, but there is no doubt it didn't wow me like my old Kahles K624i and not even close to the S&B I owned. BUT it does what I need so well that I recently bought another 4-16. Chasing the wow factor can cause you to spend more than you need to.

 

[Huskydriver]

I have had a version of all top teir scopes except a Henny and have shot behind several TT.... First time I looked through a zco and ran the turrets at a match I was sold.

ZCO 5+25
Best eye eye box I have every looked through period.

Turrets are great click feel, spacing everything

Integrated mag ring shark fin... Really why is this so hard for other companies to do? You almost don't need it with the zco though the tension is like butter to rotate.

Great reticle choices

Unreal low light capability. When I was getting ready to switch to a zco, I had both my top of line SB up at the range early at dawn and late in the evening. I thought the SB was fantastic at low light gathering until I looked through them both side by side. The zco was noticably brighter.

Paralax and illumination knob pretty much perfect.

I still feel like a used gen 2 razor is a phenomenal value especially used however and was quite happy with the 3 or 4 that I owned over the years.

Buy what you can afford be grateful for what you have. Work hard towards what you want but enjoy where your at but seriously....................................
















AI with a zco on top or GTFO!!!!!

 

[thehun]

That is the problem with subjective preferences. I love my ATACR, but there is no doubt it didn't wow me like my old Kahles K624i and not even close to the S&B I owned. BUT it does what I need so well that I recently bought another one. Chasing the wow factor can cause you to spend more than you need to.

I agree...I think German glass picks up where Japanese start to lack...to me...to my eyes...is clarity/resolution down range...my Mk6 3-18 gets close to my old SB 3-20 US...but it still lacks just a little bit behind the S&B...

Still...the one glass that has blown me away for the price...Bushnell's LRTS 3-12 line...

 

[RTH1800]

I am slightly surprised at the hostility to your question. If folks are tired of it, why click on it?

Here is my perspective on scopes.

I like optics. Binocular, microscopes, riflescopes, spotters, magnifying glasses, loops for near vision. I enjoy shooting, hunting, bird watching and do surgery. My life is centered around vision.

I like precision for precision’s sake.

I prefer to be organized and have systems for everything.

With all that being said I have two scopes that I utilize. The NF 2.5-10x24. It’s small, light, precise and has the features I need for field use. Price originally ran 9-1100 but when I can get one now it runs from 1500-2k. Have owned 15 or so of them and have 6-8 now.

The other scope I find useful is the S&B 5-20 Ultra Short. It again has the features, size, weight and quality that I like. I have had about 15 of them as well and still have most of them.

I went through the S&B 5-25’s for a while, sold most off and went to the S&B 4-16x42. When the Ultra Short came out I sold off the 4-16’s. They were very long and I preferred the 20x.

That is my scope journey. Are they better than Xx brand? I have no idea. Are they worse than YY brand? Again no idea. They do exactly what I want. Like Ray Charles said “What they won’t get I don’t need”

If you have any questions please PM me. Sorry for your shoddy reception here.

 

[Poorboyr]

I have owned or used pretty much every scope in every level out there. To answer your question is simple, yes the most expensive scopes are the best in the business. I prefer the Theta over the ZCO. Is it worth it, that answer everyone has to make on their own. To me, I don’t think it is.

I lean more towards turrets and reticles than optical clarity. Every tier 2 scope (USO, Schmidt, Leupold, Kahles,......) will be pretty close. Each user has to decide what matters to them and get the scope that fits them. Not what fits me.

The tier 2 scopes are so close to the tier 1 it’s up to you to decide. Yes, the glass is better. But maybe something else isn’t.

Simply this, you aren’t going to miss something because you have a tier 2 scope instead of a tier 1 scope. Well, maybe depends on which one...... Get the scope you like based on options. Not one scope can be the best at everything.

 

[regency]

There are way more 34mm rings to choose from than 36mm. Just because you like Spuhr and ARC don’t mean everyone has to like them.

Second, when deciding on odds on survival in this day and age, I’d bet on a company that’s been around longer than me with government contracts all over the planet. ZCO and other like companies are hit the hardest when the economy tanks and people stop their luxury spending.

If what you say is true, then why are ZCO's so hard to get right now and why do they resale for only $200-$400 off original price? The demand for their new reticle is nuts. Are you aware of ZCO' background with Nightforce and Kahles? This is one very misinformed post.

 

[Bakwa]

If what you say is true, then why are ZCO's so hard to get right now and why do they resale for only $200-$400 off original price? The demand for their new reticle is nuts. Are you aware of ZCO' background with Nightforce and Kahles? This is one very misinformed post.

I'm very curious about ZCO's background story with NF and Kahles. Can you please inform us or post a link? Or PM if it's not supposed to be public knowledge.

 

[RTH1800]

Remember the obvious purpose of a scope. It’s a simple method of aligning a rifle to hit a spot. It can have features to make the job more simple. Turrets that track, reticules, illumination, quality glass, zero stop, rugged build etc.
I would suggest starting with a list of needed features and a budget. Plug in scopes and see what fits. Watch PX and buy a clean used scope.
If your choice hits your target, holds zero and tracks well you are done until it fails to do so. It’s not as complicated as some make it seem.
If your scope company has a good track history you can depend on timely, quality service.

 

[seansmd]

I'm very curious about ZCO's background story with NF and Kahles. Can you please inform us or post a link? Or PM if it's not supposed to be public knowledge.

I would encourage you to listen to Frank's podcast with Jeff @ZCO, they interview his passion and commitment convinced me to spend money on a piece of gear I may never see the full potential of based on my skill level and hobby use.

Edit: https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/jeff-huber-of-zero-compromise-interview.6996137/


I am one who read your original post as, why spend the money, the cheaper ones are just as good. This sure and many sites are littered with justification threads on the cheaper version, and justification threads on the expensive options. Better title after reading your responses would have been... "I want to buy a ZCO help convince me to buy once, cry once!"

 

[Lesch]

So let me ask this. If we are just punching hole in paper or banging bullets off steel. Does the difference between reading the grain structure of the steel or paper matter if everything else holds its own? I can understand the $50 Ebay vs $500 insert name brand glass. Should if I like the crosshairs up and thr bullet hit where I aim all that matters? Now unless a come into a windfall of money will never be able to afford a $2000+ optic and probably wouldn't spend that much if I could. I have Lee's than that is rifle and scope that hit what I aim at. I guess if I was shooting 2-3 miles like the creedmore guys I might need one....

 

[hafejd30]

So let me ask this. If we are just punching hole in paper or banging bullets off steel. Does the difference between reading the grain structure of the steel or paper matter if everything else holds its own? I can understand the $50 Ebay vs $500 insert name brand glass. Should if I like the crosshairs up and thr bullet hit where I aim all that matters? Now unless a come into a windfall of money will never be able to afford a $2000+ optic and probably wouldn't spend that much if I could. I have Lee's than that is rifle and scope that hit what I aim at. I guess if I was shooting 2-3 miles like the creedmore guys I might need one....

If what YOU have works good for what YOU want to do with it and YOUR happy with it than no YOU don’t need it.

You can do the same thing with iron sights if it achieves your goal

 

[seansmd]

If what YOU have works good for what YOU want to do with it and YOUR happy with it than no YOU don’t need it.

You can do the same thing with iron sights if it achieves your goal

As mentioned here, many in this game would whoop my ass with a 308rpr fresh out of the box, factory ammo, with a $1k optic vs my custom Gucci gun and ZCO on top. My skills continue to define what I am capable of accomplishing.

 

[hlee]

As mentioned here, many in this game would whoop my ass with a 308rpr fresh out of the box, factory ammo, with a $1k optic vs my custom Gucci gun and ZCO on top. My skills continue to define what I am capable of accomplishing.

But it’s really nice to know that the gear isn’t limiting your progress...

Lots of butt hurt about what others spend their money on, and no less butt hurt about what others think about what we spend our money on. T’is the nature of social media, I guess.

 

[Huskydriver]

So let me ask this. If we are just punching hole in paper or banging bullets off steel. Does the difference between reading the grain structure of the steel or paper matter if everything else holds its own? I can understand the $50 Ebay vs $500 insert name brand glass. Should if I like the crosshairs up and thr bullet hit where I aim all that matters? Now unless a come into a windfall of money will never be able to afford a $2000+ optic and probably wouldn't spend that much if I could. I have Lee's than that is rifle and scope that hit what I aim at. I guess if I was shooting 2-3 miles like the creedmore guys I might need one....

If a house is just a place for going to sleep at night does it matter my neighbors house is 30,000 SQ ft compared to my humble 2800 SQ ft house lol? Y'all are silly....you guys act like a central planning committee should allocate resources or something so that resources are not wasted.....

 

[seansmd]

But it’s really nice to know that the gear isn’t limiting your progress...

Lots of butt hurt about what others spend their money on, and no less butt hurt about what others think about what we spend our money on. T’is the nature of social media, I guess.

But when I miss it's crystal clear!

 

[Lesch]

If a house is just a place for going to sleep at night does it matter my neighbors house is 30,000 SQ ft compared to my humble 2800 SQ ft house lol? Y'all are silly....you guys act like a central planning committee should allocate resources or something so that resources are not wasted.....



View attachment 7385464

I would just as happy with my 2400sqft house and myvranch in Wyoming and my fishing boat in the Keys as the guy in his 30,000sqft house. For me it's about bang for the buck......not bragging rights. I just cant see why seeing the hair on a nat's nutsack at 2 miles is so much more important than just seeing his nutsack? I fully understand quality, but at some point there's diminishing returns .....I think.
Hey if ya got it...spend it! The economy needs tha help!