Rifle Scopes Schmidt & Bender "implosion"?

[BigJimFish]

My Thoughts on S&B and high end optics in general:

Price: Lots of folks are running up the prices right now. I have heard from several makers that they are running backlogs. Maybe they are bullshitting me, maybe not, but it gives good reason to run up the prices. As long as more people want your product than you can service raise the price. That's basic economics. For my part I wouldn't buy one of these $3k + scopes. They just don't offer enough advantage. Of course I might change my mind if I made $150k a year.

Quality: I am hearing less about problem turrets, and Frank mentioned a reasonable fix. Also, the 3-20x ultra short looked fine to me unlike the 5-20x ultra short last year. I'm not convinced of any real QC problem.

New stuff: I'm not really sure what folks want. In the last few years new optical designs have been falling from the sky like rain. Lots of money from sales combined with new high powered design tools have completely changed the landscape of optical design. If anything, there are a glut of models on the market. It looks to me like S&B is focusing a good bit of their design energy on next gen optoelectronic stuff and bird in hand military requests. Despite that they still came out with the 3-20x ultra short (which has new turrets as well) and the 12.5-50x56 field target II (with accurate parallax markings). Here is a photo of the optoelectronic prototype. The scope function fully independently from the electronics with an LCD HUD that works on similar technology to beam splitter illumination.

.

The 1-8x: I have been following this soap opera for close to 4 years now. There is no question that this is a black eye. Standards that are possibly too high, failures to deliver, and now bad product decisions. It's just a mess. I disagree with any assertion that the 1-8x market is small. It is not, it's just small at $4,000.

Competition: Good, better, and best are much closer than they have ever been. Leupold, March, Kahles, Vortex, Steiner, and Nightforce have totally changed the game in the last three years. Vortex seems to be making a huge play on the high end market with the Razor Gen II's at $2.5k, and Leupold could have taken an even bigger chunk if they hadn't jacked up the Mark 6 3-18x price $1k for illumination.

Putting those $2-$4k competitors aside, Burris has stepped up with the XTR 2 scope and delivered a gen 2 ffp mildot, matched 8 mil per turn ZS knobs, and parallax knob integrated illumination for $1,200. The glass looked good alone and I am anxious to get it next to some comparisons. I'm sure it won't be earth shattering but if these prove durable, that much functionality at that price is very compelling. Yea, I know, that (unspecified Asian manufactured Burris) scope is no S&B but lets not pretend that first tier scope buyers always buy first tier for all their guns. Sometimes a good scope at a great value means more money for other parts of the budget. Good, better and Best are much closer and far more functionality can be had at lower prices than before despite the much higher prices charged by some makers.

To summarize: Is S&B imploding? No, they had some initial problems with a new turret design, the 1-8x project blew up, and the 5-20 ultra short sucked. The only one of these problems to affect a core product seems to be solved and the other problems are a peripheral model I expect them to soon drop and project that is more of a pr embarrassment than anything else. I don't know their books, but their product line up seems healthy to me.

 

[Lowlight]

I wonder how you write off the quality and the optics of MARCH.

Sourced and made in the same place as NF, Vortex, some Bushnell... No one questions that scope's overall quality, and yet it's $1200 less than your German counterparts.

The new 3-24x with the bigger objective is a winner. It's glass is Japanese ...

Claiming one source is worth the money over another is pretty near sighted, the economy in Hungary is not worth the increase in price, neither is building in Romania. One step from 3rd world, Japan has a higher cost of living that would point towards more money being spent.

 

[hk dave]

isn't IOR Romania, and again, Zeiss uses Asian glass for the Conquest line.

I still don' t see how its any better from a company LOW in Japan... they spec glass, you have Canon & Nikon from there.

It's splitting hairs, a perception issue. You perceive "German Glass' as being better, but just showed everyone it is not actually sourced from German but several other places.

So the guys like Vortex who's new Razor HD line is fantastic, which is sourced from Japan, is no different than companies who source it from Hungary or Romania... Coatings are chemicals, it's not magic, and the glass is the just that. Why do you think the new NF ATACR, BEAST, and Vortex are so heavy, cause they upped the quality of the glass. From the same places.

I know this isn't the same thing but I'm guessing it is relevant. I'm with Frank with this.

I used to test camera lenses as part of my job for a living. We had an assignment where we needed to test lenses to produce the absolute highest resolution possible. According to the world of high end photography and cinema, Zeiss and the "German" glass was untouchable. This was common knowledge. We purchased multiple copies of the same german lenses with the best reputation to try and find the one with the best resolution.

During the process I was in touch with Zeiss engineers as well as Hasselblad/Fuji Japan division. It was explained to me by the Japanese division that it's all marketing and that it ends up having to be to what level the glass was "specd". They told me flat out, their Hasselblad Fuji division lenses were leaps head of the German stuff.

Honestly, I couldn't believe it... i had grown up thinking Zeiss, Schott etc were untouchable... but we wanted to know because the german lenses didn't seem to resolve enough detail for the digital back we were testing.

Long story short, we ordered the Japanese lens... first one we tested made the best of the German lenses look like a complete dog.

We learned from the very expensive lesson and I stopped buying glass based on what "country" it's from.

Ok... i know i know... cool story bro.

 

[Lofty]

Ok... i know i know... cool story bro.

Actually it was a cool story....relevant to the topic as well.

I will say that in my experience with photography, Zeiss lenses were optically superior to the Japanese stuff in many ways but it usually had to be determined by a machine rather than the human eye. Of course different lenses render photographs differently....not necessarily better, just different. Zeiss does have a distinctive optically quality to it and it was up to the end user if they actually liked the image it presented.

There is no doubt S&B is top tier......if the one I had had an MSR reticle in it instead of the H59 I purchased it with, I would probably still have it. On the other hand, the only reason I bought it was because I got a smoking deal on it second hand and I knew I could sell it for more than I paid. I didnt see anything in it optically, functionally or from a precision perspective to justify a $1000 premium over other scopes on the market.

 

[Edsel]

Ok... i know i know... cool story bro.

 

[Starbuck]

My Thoughts on S&B and high end optics in general:

Price: Lots of folks are running up the prices right now. I have heard from several makers that they are running backlogs. Maybe they are bullshitting me, maybe not, but it gives good reason to run up the prices. As long as more people want your product than you can service raise the price. That's basic economics. For my part I wouldn't buy one of these $3k + scopes. They just don't offer enough advantage. Of course I might change my mind if I made $150k a year.

Quality: I am hearing less about problem turrets, and Frank mentioned a reasonable fix. Also, the 3-20x ultra short looked fine to me unlike the 5-20x ultra short last year. I'm not convinced of any real QC problem.

New stuff: I'm not really sure what folks want. In the last few years new optical designs have been falling from the sky like rain. Lots of money from sales combined with new high powered design tools have completely changed the landscape of optical design. If anything, there are a glut of models on the market. It looks to me like S&B is focusing a good bit of their design energy on next gen optoelectronic stuff and bird in hand military requests. Despite that they still came out with the 3-20x ultra short (which has new turrets as well) and the 12.5-50x56 field target II (with accurate parallax markings). Here is a photo of the optoelectronic prototype. The scope function fully independently from the electronics with an LCD HUD that works on similar technology to beam splitter illumination.

.

The 1-8x: I have been following this soap opera for close to 4 years now. There is no question that this is a black eye. Standards that are possibly too high, failures to deliver, and now bad product decisions. It's just a mess. I disagree with any assertion that the 1-8x market is small. It is not, it's just small at $4,000.

Competition: Good, better, and best are much closer than they have ever been. Leupold, March, Kahles, Vortex, Steiner, and Nightforce have totally changed the game in the last three years. Vortex seems to be making a huge play on the high end market with the Razor Gen II's at $2.5k, and Leupold could have taken an even bigger chunk if they hadn't jacked up the Mark 6 3-18x price $1k for illumination.

Putting those $2-$4k competitors aside, Burris has stepped up with the XTR 2 scope and delivered a gen 2 ffp mildot, matched 8 mil per turn ZS knobs, and parallax knob integrated illumination for $1,200. The glass looked good alone and I am anxious to get it next to some comparisons. I'm sure it won't be earth shattering but if these prove durable, that much functionality at that price is very compelling. Yea, I know, that (unspecified Asian manufactured Burris) scope is no S&B but lets not pretend that first tier scope buyers always buy first tier for all their guns. Sometimes a good scope at a great value means more money for other parts of the budget. Good, better and Best are much closer and far more functionality can be had at lower prices than before despite the much higher prices charged by some makers.

To summarize: Is S&B imploding? No, they had some initial problems with a new turret design, the 1-8x project blew up, and the 5-20 ultra short sucked. The only one of these problems to affect a core product seems to be solved and the other problems are a peripheral model I expect them to soon drop and project that is more of a pr embarrassment than anything else. I don't know their books, but their product line up seems healthy to me.

So the 5-20 Ultra Short is now on the S&B website, as well as being offered FS now by Euro Optic. Ugatz on a 3-20 Ultra-Short...

Would someone kindly clarify: Is the 5-20 Ultra Short going away in favor of a 3-20 Ultra Short, as mentioned here by Big Jim Fish? If so, any photos? ETA?

 

[Lowlight]

I thought Marsha said both would be available but it might be going away.

I don't recall 100% now, SHOT was a bit of a blur.

In the Ultra Short, if the high end is the same, does it really matter they were nearly identical. Who use 3x or 5x on their bolt gun anyways.

 

[Lowlight]

I am all about cool lenses, and glass with a name, heck I use this for my videos,

If they weren't so damn expensive I would have a complete set, but for now, I buy them when I can.

But still, if you look on the sidelines of any sports event, it's all Japanese.

 

[Edsel]

Take your pick of Nikons or Canons...

 

[Starbuck]

I thought Marsha said both would be available but it might be going away.

I don't recall 100% now, SHOT was a bit of a blur.

In the Ultra Short, if the high end is the same, does it really matter they were nearly identical. Who use 3x or 5x on their bolt gun anyways.

Good point on the low end of the mag range. BJF had also mentioned something about a different elevation turret on the 3-20 as opposed to the 5-20. WTF with that?

 

[918v]

I wonder how you write off the quality and the optics of MARCH.

Sourced and made in the same place as NF, Vortex, some Bushnell... No one questions that scope's overall quality, and yet it's $1200 less than your German counterparts.

The new 3-24x with the bigger objective is a winner. It's glass is Japanese ...

Claiming one source is worth the money over another is pretty near sighted, the economy in Hungary is not worth the increase in price, neither is building in Romania. One step from 3rd world, Japan has a higher cost of living that would point towards more money being spent.

I didn't say that.

I did not say that all Japanese scopes are low quality. I never said all Japanese vehicles are fragile. You and your peeps twisted my words into a Strawman and then set him on fire.

What I said is that companies like Bushnell and Vortex build scopes in Japan out of Chinese parts. And that's why they can afford to sell them to LEOs for 60% below retail. Because they are made out of cheap low quality components.

Does Nightforce March use Chinese parts? I doubt it. Do they sell their scopes to LEOs at a 60% discount? Does a $3200 March cost $1400 to make?

You say that Chinese parts are made to spec, therefore they're good. I say that Parts made to spec in Germany or Hungary or Japan are better.

Scopes assembled in Japan out of Chinese parts are not as good as scopes assembled in Japan out of Japanese parts. Vortex/Bushnell vs Nightforce/March.

I'm not a China hater. I own Leupolds and will continue to buy some of them. But I don't kid myself either.

 

[BigJimFish]

So the 5-20 Ultra Short is now on the S&B website, as well as being offered FS now by Euro Optic. Ugatz on a 3-20 Ultra-Short...

Would someone kindly clarify: Is the 5-20 Ultra Short going away in favor of a 3-20 Ultra Short, as mentioned here by Big Jim Fish? If so, any photos? ETA?

I didn't say that its going away, I said that it's "strangely still offered" and that was on another thread. I said this because it only costs $170 less than the 3-20x ultra short and, in addition to having less power range, it has a miserably cramped eye box. I don't expect them to sell any so I don't expect it to be offered for long. They were adamant to me that they have no plans of scrapping it, I just expect them to change their mind.

Good point on the low end of the mag range. BJF had also mentioned something about a different elevation turret on the 3-20 as opposed to the 5-20. WTF with that?

Both of the ultra shorts have the new, low profile turrets. Here is a profile shot of the 3-20 next to a Leupold CQBSS in Bobro Cantilever mount for size reference.

 

[Lowlight]

You are clearly confusing lines...

The Razor HD is not Chinese, and most people offer a substantial LE Discount.

The Trijicon TARs is US Made with really expensive glass, it retails over $4k and has close to a 50% LE discount...

All scopes are about 1/3 of their cost to make. A $1500 USO was $300 to make... if they don't have that kind of markup you are not staying in business.

The MST 100 (Unertl M40 Scope) was sold to the USMC for $700. They are $2500 if you want to buy one, including those not off USMC rifles.

You're overlaying your impression vs the reality of business.

 

[mckenzie]

Leica...out sources some lens glass to japan, they build there lens in batches because some of the glass takes time to cure and is only made small batches. they have done so well since the m9 they have a new factory, i think hoya makes there filter glass

It would not surprise me, it's just a spec and companies are happy to outsource when possible.

Zeiss uses Asian glass on some models

 

[orkan]

It's kind of funny reading threads like this. I wonder just where everyone thinks S&B parts are made.

 

[Lowlight]

The funny part, someone was walking around with a Sub $1000 scope that they will be offering and it was the identical body to the S&B 3-12x... LOL.

There was even a nudge and wink along with it.

 

[Opticsspecialist]

I saw a lot of good responses, but I want to address the question.
I don't think the company is imploding, I just think they are bit out of touch with the market and dealer base at times. Schmidt and Bender had some interesting things at the shot show, but some of the same old annoying problems creep in. I'll be honest, I'm not excited about the new huge magnification scopes, I just don't see paying double the cost for little performance enhancement. from a dealers prospective the market is small and margins thin, it's simply not worth the trouble for the most part. this is me being honest as i always am.

looking at the new stuff, i'm impressed with the 5-20 and the 3-20 short scopes. I really like them and we're working on our own private labeled mounting system to accompany them. I can't wait to get them out in the field

the 1-8 is finally, here, the problem is it's in several configurations. you have a true 1-8, but it's second focal which will no double upset a lot of people, you have a 1.1-8, which is front focal, but you lose true 1x magnification. there is another configuration with a slightly larger objective and high lower end magnification, in addition to the hunting 1-8 scopes. it's simply too many scopes, it's confusing which scope would preform better for which task etc. there were also reticle options found in one scope that would have come in handy in the other, but that was

another disconnect is with the hunting line, they are going with magnifications that are popular with European hunters and shooters and ignoring what the U.S. market demands. it's a difficulty you find with a lot of European companies unfortunately.

 

[Lofty]

Where is the drool icon......Thats a nice piece of glass sir.

The reason you'll see Jap glass on the sidelines in because the auto focus on most cameras wont work with aftermarket Zeiss, so they cant manually focus fast enough for sports. and Zeiss mainly does primes lenses, those guys need zoom.

Most guys use Zeiss lenses for architecture and landscape photography. Zeiss definitely has a distinctive rendering character to its photos, some dont like it for portraiture either.

I am all about cool lenses, and glass with a name, heck I use this for my videos,

If they weren't so damn expensive I would have a complete set, but for now, I buy them when I can.

But still, if you look on the sidelines of any sports event, it's all Japanese.

 

[Jmilera]

What I have gathered is that I will not be making a mistake by sticking with SBs, I just wish I had a chance to raccoon finger some of these other scopes to compare them before I spend the cash! It is to bad my local FFL dealers carry SB, hennys, leupys and not some of the ones mentioned.

 

[nhm16]

I am all about cool lenses, and glass with a name, heck I use this for my videos,

If they weren't so damn expensive I would have a complete set, but for now, I buy them when I can.

But still, if you look on the sidelines of any sports event, it's all Japanese.

Interestingly, Zeiss CP.2 lenses are made by Cosina in Japan, like the ZF/ZE/ZK lenses.

 

[scatsob]

Seriously? If this is true and the turrets are at least kind of similar to SB turrets and it's not a piece of crap I'm in. It's hard to stomach $3k+ for the 3-12 I will need to complete my M40A3 build.

The funny part, someone was walking around with a Sub $1000 scope that they will be offering and it was the identical body to the S&B 3-12x... LOL.

There was even a nudge and wink along with it.

 

[Jmilera]

Seriously? If this is true and the turrets are at least kind of similar to SB turrets and it's not a piece of crap I'm in. It's hard to stomach $3k+ for the 3-12 I will need to complete my M40A3 build.

I am also interested to see what this scope is, I like SB but if I can get the same performance for less then why not.

 

[orkan]

Seriously? If this is true and the turrets are at least kind of similar to SB turrets and it's not a piece of crap I'm in. It's hard to stomach $3k+ for the 3-12 I will need to complete my M40A3 build.

That's not really the point.

The point is that if people had a clue where S&B's are really manufactured, the perception of where quality parts are made would change instantly, as would the definition of which brands make the highest quality scopes.

 

[dtibbals]

Well I have a S&B 5-25 and am in love with it! Bought it last year, love the MTC turret and the glass quality is simply amazing! I know prices are going up, it isn't the first time nor the last time. It is called inflation, plan on everything getting more expensive. I saw an interview once with the President of S&B and he said an S&B is an investment, over time they are worth more then you paid. This is true, as the dollar weakens against other currency and materials increase etc prices go up and will continue to go up. Hell a new pickup truck is 35-65K...how much was that same truck 10 years ago? Get used to it...I wouldn't be surprised if someday we see $10k scopes and guess what we will be paying it and missing the $7k scopes. Anyone miss $0.79 gas? that was 17 years ago, I bet S&B weren't $3-4K back then.

 

[Notso]

I am a self admitted S&B fanboy but I ended up getting a Steiner military 5-25 instead of another S&B primarily because the 2yr warranty scared me off. Let's face it, even the best scopes sometimes break. So the peace of mind of a lifetime warranty sealed the deal. It didn't hurt that I got the Steiner for about almost $1000 less than the 5-25 PMII.

 

[dms416]

That's not really the point.

The point is that if people had a clue where S&B's are really manufactured, the perception of where quality parts are made would change instantly, as would the definition of which brands make the highest quality scopes.

Ignorance is bliss, right?

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

That's not really the point.

The point is that if people had a clue where S&B's are really manufactured, the perception of where quality parts are made would change instantly, as would the definition of which brands make the highest quality scopes.

Where are Schmidt and Benders really manufactured then? I am curious myself.

Meanwhile, the Schmidt and Bender is the best damn scope I have ever owned. These arguments are interesting in that it is like a bunch of people arguing over which super car is the best: No no no.. the Bughatti Veyron is the best…. really why Ferrari? They only have a 2 year warranty, so why would I take a chance with that? The Aston Martin? They are made in England for christ's sake!!….. and so on…

We are really splitting hairs here, aren't we? Anything over $2,000 is going to be very useful and pretty darn amazing.

 

[918v]

It's more like:

Your Ferrari has a Chinese engine vs my Aston has Hungarian transmission. The retort is that my Aston was built by an illegal Moroccan.

 

[TxShooter63]

I spent the week of SHOT working with Val at the IOR booth. I wasn't really sure what to expect as I have only been a dealer for IOR about 12 months. I have been using the scopes for nearly 10 years and have owned 8 different models. BigJim it was nice to meet you at the show. Frank, I wish you would have stopped by. Your opinion that our scopes are "junk" is interesting given what I saw this week but this is the internet and all opinions are equal here. The day before the show I was contacted by an SF Sergeant that has some of our scopes in his unit and he said the boys love them. Marines are also using a few. I was also contacted at the show by another Spec OPS group with interest in our products. I think what surprised me that most was that of the scopes we sold to retail customers, almost 100% already owned one of our scopes. In the end, what matters is that the people buying a product, like the product! If the customers of a company are happy with the products they have purchased then the company is doing a good job. In that regard, IOR is clearly making good products as are many other companies.

Long range shooting is about solving problems. I don't post on SH often but you don't have to look through many of my post to see me repeatedly pointing out that a different piece of gear isn't the answer to hitting things at long range. There are many high quality optics availble in the market place and because we each use our equipment differently, no one company builds the answer to every person's problem. I would strongly encourage all shooters to do their own evaluation when considering the purchase of any piece of shooting equipment. We each form opinions based on our experience with a product. A person may buy a great piece of gear and try to use it for something it was never designed for and end up with a negative opinion about a rifle, scope, caliber, or just about anything other shooting product. There are many great companies building optics of exceptional quality. Before you buy any optic or other piece of equipment from any company, determine honestly what your needs are then see who makes the best product for your particular application. What worked best for me or anyone else may be of no value to what you are trying to accomplish. Keep an open mind and do your home work. Then.....practice, practice, practice!

 

[orkan]

Meanwhile, the Schmidt and Bender is the best damn scope I have ever owned. These arguments are interesting in that it is like a bunch of people arguing over which super car is the best: No no no.. the Bughatti Veyron is the best…. really why Ferrari? They only have a 2 year warranty, so why would I take a chance with that? The Aston Martin? They are made in England for christ's sake!!….. and so on…

Comparing half million dollar cars to scopes, isn't really the best analogy. Even if it fit, then it would be like finding out that bughatti, ferrarri, and lambo were all built in the same factory by the same company... then your analogy would fit better.

We are really splitting hairs here, aren't we? Anything over $2,000 is going to be very useful and pretty darn amazing.

Says who? It scares me just how similarly people look at politicians and rifle optics. Price determines how much it costs. It has no bearing on quality in and of itself. Name brand also determines how much it costs, and can have a bearing on quality, but is still a thing of its own.

 

[buckey]

Enough with all the AREA 51 secrets of Schmidt & Bender = if you're gonna post about it, let everyone in on the "insider" stuff - if not, don't post about it!!

 

[Lowlight]

@TxShooter63

History has never been in IOR's favor when it comes to reliability and trying to act like the Military is using it is BS. A few guys buying it with their own money is not the military. Show me a contract win and we'll Talk... The USMC uses S&B & Premier... a Jarhead who pays his own money to get one is not the USMC. Same with SF.. sure some units can buy what they want, but that doesn't mean the Army has approved it.

I had an IOR, it died after 200 rounds, all you have to do is look at the history of the failures to see. Good glass does not make a good scope. Reliable internals do, and when you are up to GEN 4 of the same scope to fix problem, after problem, I highly doubt the worm has turned in your favor.

You can very well have solved 99% of the reliability issues in the past, but the question is, who wants to spend their money on it to be the guinea pig ? Not me, which is why I will not recommend them.

 

[orkan]

Well said in regard to IOR. The hype generated by some whom have not the experience to tell quality scope from not, keeps their sales up. I know that I've sampled 3 of their scopes in the last 5 years, and each time it has been a mistake. I think a $200 vortex has better turrets than a $2000 IOR. The only one that I wouldn't look at as a total loss was the 2.5-10, but it too was completely unimpressive compared to other options available.

 

[phillip61]

Well said in regard to IOR. The hype generated by some whom have not the experience to tell quality scope from not, keeps their sales up. I know that I've sampled 3 of their scopes in the last 5 years, and each time it has been a mistake. I think a $200 vortex has better turrets than a $2000 IOR. The only one that I wouldn't look at as a total loss was the 2.5-10, but it too was completely unimpressive compared to other options available.

It's no secret that some folks Don't like IOR's. Some of the people that don't like them are well recognized in the industry. Thats great, I understand. But every statement is "they use to be bad", "back when I owned one they were crap"....ect. It's all in the past tense. Or the excuse is "it took them 4 generations to get right". I for one don't know what generation scope I have, all I know is that it works.

If the military will let you buy a scope if you don't like the scope that was issued to you then I think it says way more then could ever be discussed here when a few Marines ditch there issued scopes for an IOR. Said Marines meet up with some 10th SF guys and tell them about the scope and the 10th SF guys gets them some IOR's. One of the 10th SF guys will post on this site with some regularity about how much his group loves the scopes and how well they hold up. But the nay sayers around here wil lcome back with "Back when I had one.....". or "when they get a military contract we'll talk". That is BS and totally side steps the issue that there are military people and civilian people that are using them and no complaining about any issues. Why does that bother ya'll so much? I saw a post by Scott at Liberty Optics that read "I have sold more IOR's than anyone in the country and have had only one returned". When Frank read that he said "How do we know they were not returned to someone else"? Really. Thats not much of an argument. Why can't it be that no-one had any problems? Why can't it be that the scopes work fine and the customers had no reason to send them back? Why do we have to make up an argument like How do we know they didn't send them somewhere else to be fixed. It's almost as if some of you take it personal when others don't agree with you, and you have some need to jump in and tell them how wrong they are? I don't get it.

Opinions are an individual thing and cannot be wrong. My opinion is that tacos taste good, your opinion is that they taste bad. No-one is wrong. Stats mean nothing except to a statistician. The relevant part of all this is that the people that own IOR's TODAY are happy with them. The vast majority of posters that own them TODAY that post on this site have great things to say about them. Some people that use to own them that post on this site don't like them. OK, we get it, some of you don't like them. Great, move on with your lives.

Frank said just a few days ago "It's your money, buy what you want and be happy with it, fly your flag". The thing is every time someone flys the IOR flag people including Frank shows up with the flame torch??? We let ya'll fly ya'lls flag in peace, why can't we?

 

[Magnumdood]

I had a 6X IOR that I sold, among other scopes, to step up into the world of S&B. I've bought and sold a LOT of scopes, and financially, that has cost me a small fortune. The one scope I most regret selling is the 6X IOR. I had it on a slug gun for deer hunting. The optics were in a word, phenomenal. Granted, one isn't spinning turrets while hunting with a weapon that shouldn't be shot at anything much over 200 yards, but it also held its zero for 8 seasons before I sold it.

 

[Lowlight]

Bull Fucking Shit...

the USMC does not let you "ditch your scope" you can't fucking touch an M40... period. The end user can just about pull the bolt out. I went to Sniper School, deployed as a USMC Sniper, don't try spinning this and blowing smoke up my ass.

I have also trained many a Special Operations guy, they have a variety of stuff, when in the grand scheme of things means absolutely nothing. You can buy what ever you want, just carrying it doesn't mean it works well enough for everyone to use it. The Military does not use IOR period... end of discussion. The Military just put out trials and calls for new Scopes, IOR was not on the list.

There are millions of guys in the military, finding a handful who have personally owned shit and trying to hold that up as something worth talking about is, crap. Nothing but crap. I had a cheesy Colt 4x on my M16, does that mean the Colt is something to hold up as combat proven ? In fact when the war started I gave it to a friend;s son to deploy with, that and $3 will get me coffee at Starbucks

You don't know what you are talking about. If an Infantry Marine puts an IOR on his M16 that is one thing, but no Marine Sniper is ditching a scope... does not happen.

I hate to tell you, it wasn't "That long ago" ... we are talking issues in the last year, two... you don't see posts about them because people are tired of taking the chance on them. Nobody uses them but a few die hards that are barely shooting anything to know better.

People barely complain about Weavers too... doesn't mean anything. Do a search, "weaver and customer service" see how many threads are on it.

The History of IOR is fact, it's not up for debate. If you constantly pull people in, then pull the rug out from under them, eventually they stop showing up.

If 1% of the IOR users are happy, and tell people, they are the only ones talking.

Risk your money, not mine and certainly not the next guy.

 

[phillip61]

Bull Fucking Shit...

Read the post directly above yours.

 

[Lowlight]

Why... he knows I can careless if 1 scope worked... one scope does not define a brand.

10 guys in the military does not define the Army or Marines, especially when there are millions serving.

The USMC used a $700 Unertl 10x for 40 years and loved it. Today that scope would not be considered on a .22

 

[Lowlight]

Units bought the Horus in the cheap ass Chinese Hakko Scopes too... doesn't mean you'd recommend one.

 

[phillip61]

Why... he knows I can careless if 1 scope worked... one scope does not define a brand.

10 guys in the military does not define the Army or Marines, especially when there are millions serving.

The USMC used a $700 Unertl 10x for 40 years and loved it. Today that scope would not be considered on a .22

Come on, you had a good argument going, don't start crawfishin' on me now!

 

[Andy27AL]

I hate to hop in this, but I have to say, a scope used in a hunting environment is probably equivalent to just a couple matches for a scope used in a rough competition style environment. Not exactly a valid argument ground for scope quality.

 

[phillip61]

I hate to hop in this, but I have to say, a scope used in a hunting environment is probably equivalent to just a couple matches for a scope used in a rough competition style environment. Not exactly a valid argument ground for scope quality.

Would you consider the 10 SF group that has used the scope in multiple countries in virtually all conditions on multiple weapon systems grounds for a good argument?

 

[Lowlight]

You keep saying the group...

On what Rifle is the 10 SF group using this scope ?

Cause they have about 4 rifles each if they want, and I have trained SF guys... never saw IOR.

Are you talking that 1 GUY in 10 SF or the WHOLE group ... cause they get their rifles from a place that is not outfitting them with IORs..

They use Leupold, might have a Crane NF, and certainly a few Horus... but across the board IOR, I am not buying it.

They have M24s, XM2010s, M110s, SCARs, M16s, what rifle specifically. For all you know that one rifle can sit unused for the whole deployment

 

[phillip61]

Units bought the Horus in the cheap ass Chinese Hakko Scopes too... doesn't mean you'd recommend one.

Very true, but the soldier in the 10th SF unit "IS" recommending them. He has been on this site several times saying how much they like the scope. To quote him in a post just a few weeks ago he said his unit was "Astonished" by the scope.

I don't know why we can't just believe what he says and move on?

 

[10fp]

Come on, you had a good argument going, don't start crawfishin' on me now!

dude IOR is junk give it up. Crap, i just checked and i still have an old 2.5-10 ior in the safe. I think i had 6 or 7 of them at one point. 10 years ago IOR was in the running, today with cheap good scopes like NXS and Vortex why the hell would anyone buy IOR.

 

[Lowlight]

Again, that one guy, or the whole group... you say 10 SF Group, like they are all using it, and if so, on what rifle ?

 

[Lowlight]

SF Rifles

More SF Rifles

This are pictures I took... not off the internet

I know what rifles they have and where they come from, including what optics they use.

We talk all 3 Ranger Battalions, they used

Leupold, Nightforce, USO, S&B, Horus, no IORs.

 

[KYS]

SF Rifles

More SF Rifles

This are pictures I took... not off the internet

I know what rifles they have and where they come from, including what optics they use.

We talk all 3 Ranger Battalions, they used

Leupold, Nightforce, USO, S&B, Horus, no IORs.

I know a SF group that uses IOR……. to hold down their trash cans in a wind storm!

 

[TxShooter63]

I am certainly not in a position to argue with anyone on their own website. What I can tell you for a fact is that having met hundreds of people at SHOT, not one who owned an IOR scope had any problems to report with one exception. The exception was a hunting scope that was nearly 10 years old and Val took it from the guy and agreed to fix or replace it for free. I made it very clear that the military use of the IOR scopes was very limited. In fact, neither Val or I know how the scopes they have were bought. They seem happy with them so that is a good thing. I am one of those "elitist" PRS shooters and I can tell you that I have used 6 different IOR scopes in the last year with no issues. I tested each for correct calibration of the turrets and the holdovers using the reticle. Every scope was dead on accurate. The internet is full of opinions so I try to stick to facts anytime I post, especially on this website. Big changes are coming in the next 12 months at IOR Valdada and I think you will see some real innovation coming in the next few years. Again, always buy what works best for your application and do so based on your own findings. There are many great scopes on the market from a number of different mfg's.

 

[matt2143]

"I don't know why we can't just believe what he says and move on?" Because 99% of us KNOW BETTER!!! That is why no one believes ONE 10th group guy. WAY too much history to just believe one guy when hundreds on here have been around the block more than a few times with IOR. I killed all of mine on a .308!

Also Scott said this "I have sold more IOR's than anyone in the country and have had only one returned" because he explicitly has you send them directly to Val unless it is a return unit for refund (usually once you have it it's yours). I still have all my emails back and forth about IOR's going for repair or replacement.

Buying an IOR is like ordering from BOTACH Tactical. It may seem like a good idea, you may get lucky once, but the odds are not in your favor! A company that uses buyers as guinea pigs to test a scope design is not your friend. The first gen 3-18x42 FFP scope had I believe 100 scopes and they ALL failed but one or two (hows that for a quality product!). Scott at Liberty was pretty upset with having to hear from his customers as the scopes continued to fail for 2 MORE generations to the point where it seemed he was going to brake away from IOR if they couldn't fix their product.

BTW- I used IOR scopes before I knew any better. For the same damn cost I could have had a NF or non illuminated S&B for the cost of the IORs and shipping via fedex for all the returns.

ETA: I try never to post negative comments unless I feel it may greatly benefit another. The reality is, I have seen a number of shooters in comps have one problem or another. It is very frustrating for that shooter, if a scope takes a dump and it is not immediately evident then that shooter has a hell of a time second guessing themselves wondering what is causing their shots to fly way off when everything on the outside looks good. IOR has a track record, buy at your own risk!

Also the 10th group guy stated he was home on leave and knew about IOR scopes for 10 years but never used one so on 11/21/13 he ordered one. Sounds more like a personal item he may have showed around vs a 'TEAM' thing. So he has had this IOR for a month or so and they have used it where? Not trying to be a dick, just do not go leading people into thinking an IOR is some end all be all tough scope.