Rifle Scopes Richard Uttings scope reviews

[pitdog85]

Has anyone seen this guys scope reviews on you tube and in particular his 2017 long range scope review video?

He is from the UK and as far a step I can tell from UK forums well respected there. His scope reviews in my opinion are excellent and extremely in depth.

The question I have is he goes completely against the grain of snipers hide views in regards to IOR scopes. He basically rates the IOR recon as the best scope out there??? What's the go I'm always wary of scope reviews and who has a vested interest in what it's so hard to know who to trust who is been paid to push what etc.

Anyone seen his reviews would love to hear some thoughts? He recommends a lot of scopes that do the get much mention here ie not the mainstream nightforce S&B etc

 

[Steel+Killer]

I believe I saw his IOR scope review a while back from what I recall it seemed like a infomercial for IOR more so than a review.

 

[scudzuki]

If he rated an IOR scope as the best I suppose I'll just be running scopes that are not the best, currently Minox ZP5s.
I can't dismiss the many failures of older IOR scopes reported by my fellow Hiders or my own awful experience trying to get support for an Optolyth spotter through Val (he was the importer of Optolyth at that time and still may be). I'm also not interested in a scope built on a non-monolithic main tube with 40mm diameter that I can't get good scope rings for.

 

[supercorndogs]

If he loves IOR, I am to sure why his pet would be built in Japan for them. If he really knows his optics, I am not sure why he would say anything with a multi piece main tube, is the best on the market.

 

[ESBVader]

I have a Minox ZP5 and an IOR Recon and love them both and I am far from a shill for either of them. There are things I prefer with each of them, but from a glass and functionality standpoint, the are both perfect.

I did a 100 yard tracking test just a few days ago. I needed to add .1 mil to the Minox after travelling 3.5 mils, then it was perfect throughout its travel. The IOR was perfect with no adjustment necessary. (100 yards verified by tape and rangefinder. I used a Sniper's Hide 10 mil scope tracking target.)

I prefer the visibility of the Minox elevation turret as it is easier to read while holding a cheek weld. I find I have to move my head around quite a bit to determine exactly which turret hash mark I am on with the IOR. The clicks on both are very positive but very different. The Minox clicks are close together but easy to distinguish as opposed to the IOR where the clicks are farther apart.

While the glass is awesome on both, I find the IOR to be a bit brighter. Little to no chromatic aberration is really visible through either of them.

The reticles (MR4 and Xtreme X1) are very similar. The center dot in the IOR is quite a bit heavier though. It's not going to cover targets though, at least it hasn't for me yet. I was easily able to see a 2 inch target at 500 yards without covering it up north of 20x.

The eye relief of the Minox is more forgiving than the IOR which makes it more comfortable to get behind for me.
I will say, I do not like the finish on the IOR. It almost appears like some kind of paint like application. The Minox had a more traditional coating. I haven't seen excessive wear from either however (I recently acquired the Minox used).

I've read several of the posts about IOR here and it seems like most are upset regarding a tracking or quality issue with a run of 3-15 scopes a few years back. I can't speak for their other products, but the Recon has been amazing so far during the last 10 months of use. Having personally had experience with the IOR and if I were reviewing on turret accuracy and glass alone, I can see why Richard Utting might review them the way he does.

By the way, the Valdada G2 is made in Japan which is not made by IOR. The IOR Valdada is made in Bucharest, Romania.

Edited to correct for spelling due to typing on a little device...

 

[USAF_Engineer]

Richard seems like a very thoughtful guy who chooses his words carefully. I think he's trustworthy. I have to wonder what a guy does for a living that he can afford such a wide array of rifles and top end scopes. I'm envious...

 

[supercorndogs]

I have a Minox ZP5 and an IOR Recon and love them both and I am far from a shill for either of them. There are things I prefer with each of them, but from a glass and functionality standpoint, the are both perfect.

I did a 100 yard tracking test just a few days ago. I needed to add .1 mil to the Minox after travelling 3.5 mils, then it was perfect throughout its travel. The IOR was perfect with no adjustment necessary. (100 yards verified by tape and rangefinder. I used a Sniper's Hide 10 mil scope tracking target.)

I prefer the visibility of the Minox elevation turret as it is easier to read while holding a cheek weld. I find I have to move my head around quite a bit to determine exactly which turret hash mark I am on with the IOR. The clicks on both are very positive but very different. The Minox clicks are close together but easy to distinguish as opposed to the IOR where the clicks are farther apart.

While the glass is awesome on both, I find the IOR to be a bit brighter. Little to no chromatic aberration is really visible through either of them.

The reticles (MR4 and Xtreme X1) are very similar. The center dot in the IOR is quite a bit heavier though. It's not going to cover targets though, at least it hasn't for me yet. I was easily able to see a 2 inch target at 500 yards without covering it up north of 20x.

The eye relief of the Minox is more forgiving than the IOR which makes it more comfortable to get behind for me.
I will say, I do not like the finish on the IOR. It almost appears like some kind of paint like application. The Minox had a more traditional coating. I haven't seen excessive wear from either however (I recently acquired the Minox used).

I've read several of the posts about IOR here and it seems like most are upset regarding a tracking or quality issue with a run of 3-15 scopes a few years back. I can't speak for their other products, but the Recon has been amazing so far during the last 10 months of use. Having personally had experience with the IOR and if I were reviewing on turret accuracy and glass alone, I can see why Richard Utting might review them the way he does.

By the way, the Valdada G2 is made in Japan which is not made by IOR. The IOR Valdada is made in Bucharest, Romania.

Edited to correct for spelling due to typing on a little device...

The fact that they are painted instead of anodized is another big gripe. Multi piece tubes, stupid large parts for no reason with todays manufacturing techniques, irrelevant tube sizes. There are plenty of reasons a lot of experienced people don't think they command their top tier price tag.

So, it worked great for 10 months...then you ran a tracking test, a few days ago?

 

[ESBVader]

Not trying to start anything, just relating my experience.

I have used the scope for the past 10 months but never a longer ranges. The reason for the recent tracking test was to verify adjustments now that I am starting to look at PRS/1000+ yard targets. What I was commenting on for the past 10 months was the quality and accuracy up to 3 mils of adjustment. I was moving up to 5 mils a few weeks ago comfortably and will probably be moving up to 9 mils for targets in the coming weeks (.308) so I felt the need to validate the tracking on all my scopes.

While the paint isn't "pretty", it hasn't caused any more cosmetic issues than my other scopes. But I agree, I would have preferred a more anodized type of finish.

 

[Ledzep]

People that hate on IOR just don't have any experience with them. Top notch scopes.


Let's see what that stirs up.