Frank says to choose your scope, fly your flag and be proud. So I would suggest to fly the flag of the best damn scope on the planet, bar none. Period.
IOR baby, if it's good enough for the 10th special forces group, it's good enough for me.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Schmidt & Bender "implosion"?
- Thread starter dms416
- Start date
Frank says to choose your scope, fly your flag and be proud. So I would suggest to fly the flag of the best damn scope on the planet, bar none. Period.
IOR baby, if it's good enough for the 10th special forces group, it's good enough for me.
Peter the Great did the most to try and bring Russia "into Europe" but their history with the Tartars is a hard one to overcome. Interesting how the past is still the present. Switzerland was a great base to travel from though and get out and about on the Continent. Shame I was young and stupid and didn't take full advantage of the chances service provided me. Some day I will get back to Geneva to have a beer at the Lord Nelson and cross the border to hike the Jura. I didn't realize Heinz Guderian stopped on his tour of France to view Switzerland from just about the same spot where I cooked beans on a Coleman stove.
My S&B has the MTC turrets. I like them. Its the only scope Ive used since my Tasco bought 30 odd years ago on my Ruger 10/22. That Tasco is still working by the way. I can understand the problems that were met with the MTC when it first came out. I also fully understand how a guy that had dialed forever without MTC would be put off by the milestone. I look at my scope when I dial and I still skip to .2 when I have to pass a klunk. Comp guys must hate that but for what I do its not an issue.
Its easy to find posts about other manufacturers that have turrets fail or the scope wont track. I think the feeling S&B is failing has more to do with the fact they are no longer so head and shoulders above the competition but they are by no means becoming the new CounterSniper.
As good as glass is right now I have a hard time imagining what more can be done to step to the next level. I think the next technology will involve some type of viewing screen with a digitally "corrected" view. There was a joke post about this recently involving an Iphone but I think it will be real. Who would have guessed 35 mm film would be replaced by digital cams? I used to love my film pictures and the anticipation of getting them developed to only find I suck at taking pictures. A digi scope could incorporate a microprocessor to read mirage - I dont know mirage may not even be something glass sees but something our brain interprets - so I suppose the user would have to dial in windage still but they could help the operator buy providing a feature to help read the amount needed. Maybe just a vertical line that moves with your windage turret and you line it up with the angle of mirage and a microprocessor does the rest. The Remington 20/20 (I think that's the name) and the $20K scope its derived from may be the first of whats to come. It remains to be seen if they can make the gear survivable with as good a view. If they can I bet people will be paying the asking price one way or another to have the latest and greatest.
Glass can still be made better I suppose and coatings can be improved on, construction can be made stronger and lighter but the differences between quality made scopes will be measured in small increments that really will be hard to judge because our eyes and differences between individual users will be subjective.
I understand it has been noted that the engineers at S&B may have changed or have some complaints but I have not heard the company is becoming insolvent. Implosion to me would involve financial failure and a resulting scavenging of reputation trying to milk the cow for the last drops it will produce before it goes to the sick animal shed to be made into dog food. Based on how well they service people on this site I dont feel that's a concern.
Just my opinion.
I would assume that is a Masters degree. That is awesome. I took one class a semester for about 7 years and finally got a an associate degree in quality management. I have always been a welder. So after my college career I got certified as a Certified Welding Inspector, A level III Visual Inspector, An API 510 (unfired pressure vessel) inspector, and a Ultra sound level II NDT inspector. Now I am the welding instructor at the local community college. So it should go with out saying that it will be awhile before I can afford a PM II.
I have my own business on the side doing welding inspections, welder certs, and writing welding procedures, thats how I'm about to fund a new 6.5 creedmoor build.
I for one have reached my limit on money for a scope purchase. I will never spend more that 3500.00 ish. I spent 3200 on my S&B and would buy one more for my next project but that scope will never cost 4000.00. If I can't hit my target with a scope for under 4 grand, "Houston we have a problem".
I am going to have to say that if anything is "imploding", it is Premier Reticles Ltd. They were purchased last year by Tangent Theta Inc. Now there is a new line of Tangent Theta scopes. I agree that Premiers are great scopes, but if anyone's attention should be drawn to any implosions, it is Premier. When companies are acquired, that indicates that they are nearing the end of their own business life cycle. I am sure a lot of Premier Reticle scope owners are hoping that Tangent Theta can turn that company towards more profit. I for one would be concerned if a company changed names.
I see nothing on the horizon regarding a name change for Schmidt and Bender.
OP, if you are concerned about Schmidt and Bender, don't be. They are still the scope that everyone compares to and they will be around for a very long time.
I see nothing on the horizon regarding a name change for Schmidt and Bender.
OP, if you are concerned about Schmidt and Bender, don't be. They are still the scope that everyone compares to and they will be around for a very long time.
I am with the majority that bitch about prices going up, but we as a sport are progressing. 10 years ago 1500yards was ELR, everyone was shooting 600-1000. Today 1500yards with a 260/6.5/etc is no big deal and 2500yards+ with 338lm/cheytac/etc is done daily. Point is, we will always want better glass, more ele, smaller packages etc...
Operating Long Gun Training we see all types of scopes with students, Frank is correct find out what works for you, gain confidence with it and be proud. Scopes as in anything, for consumers has two sides; the technical, specs and durability side and the marketing side. S&B has been on its own marketing wave for some time, maybe it has crested but they still are quality from where I sit. Are there other manufacturers and brands out there that seem to coming up? Sure there are. Personally, I really like what I saw at SHOT with the new Steiner line and they are direction I have chosen to go and will suggest to any students looking for advice. Talking to Steiner they have plans to listen to shooters and improve on what is already a quality tier 1 scope. At Long Gun Training we run Steiner, S&B, Vortex and US Optics on our bull pen of rifles in the company. News flash, prices go up on everything, testing the limits is marketing strategy; any of you would do the same, testing the market in that position.<o
></o
></o
Last edited:
Interesting thought regarding Premier/TT, I guess time will tell.
Also, I wouldn't say that I'm "concerned"...rather, I'm "disappointed."
I'm disappointed that their bare-bones, old tech stuff like this 3-12x PMII w/ P3 reticle and not illumination is just shy of $3k
I'm disappointed that they delayed the 1-8x for so long only to not deliver, but still ask for the full amount for only 1/2 of the concept when $3.75k is pushing it for the whole package (if it had worked in the first place)
I'm disappointed to know the reputation they had...back when Frank was tossing them around like nothing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQd5VVRASBY
only to hear now about his recent and frequent dealings with customer service.
Every purchase I've made, S&B has been able to deliver a superb optic that either fit my needs perfectly or came close enough that I could live with the price. It disappoints me that we are no longer living in those days.
As human beings run companies and customers determine how they spend their dollars, no one should be surprised to see markets and merchandise change.
Few guns are around that resemble their predecessors (and those that do like the M1911A1 aren't produced by the same folks and companies from a hundred years ago. Colt's has gone through how many generations of owners and at least one bankruptcy, and today's Colt Government Model has more than a few plastic parts).
25 years ago few manufacturers made a military-grade scope with a ranging reticle. Today there are dozens and they are just now catching up to where their designs are competitive with each other where nuances make the difference between a sale, a major military contract, or just an honorable mention (after the requisite 18 months as vaporware after being intro-ed at the SHOT Show).
With the current administration declaring Peace in Afghanistan in 2014 I predict there will be a whole lot fewer .mil contracts as the Army pink slips 85,000 troops over the next five years.
Fewer contracts will mean slower sales, and to make up for those in soft economies and markets they'll have to think of best bargain-for-the-buck offerings.
Few guns are around that resemble their predecessors (and those that do like the M1911A1 aren't produced by the same folks and companies from a hundred years ago. Colt's has gone through how many generations of owners and at least one bankruptcy, and today's Colt Government Model has more than a few plastic parts).
25 years ago few manufacturers made a military-grade scope with a ranging reticle. Today there are dozens and they are just now catching up to where their designs are competitive with each other where nuances make the difference between a sale, a major military contract, or just an honorable mention (after the requisite 18 months as vaporware after being intro-ed at the SHOT Show).
With the current administration declaring Peace in Afghanistan in 2014 I predict there will be a whole lot fewer .mil contracts as the Army pink slips 85,000 troops over the next five years.
Fewer contracts will mean slower sales, and to make up for those in soft economies and markets they'll have to think of best bargain-for-the-buck offerings.
Gotta tell you Frank, that is about the most logical and reasonable reply regarding the subject of optics choice for shooters I have ever read.
I have owned and or used optics from just about every manufacturer out there....except Steiner. The differences in quality and features is getting so minute it really is become harder to tell which is better when comparing top tier scopes with other top tier offerings.
Personally I am throwing my hat in the ring with Vortex. Their new Gen II stuff seems very exciting, they support the shooting sports tremendously and their prices are unreal considering the quality.
Lofty you bring up a good point. The difference in quality between the Vortex HD line of scopes, and the S&B, Hendsolt, Steiner, March, the Beast is really close. The big difference is in the price. Vortex has them beat by a $1,000+ dollars, and the overall quality is very close. I for one am gonna take a hard look at the 4.5-27 Vortex Razor HD for my new .50 BMG, I may need that great warranty service.
The front runner is always the one who everyone else sets their sights on, and they will eventually lose ground. Until they take the lead again with something new.
Is S&B trying to catch other manufacturers, or are the others trying to catch them?
Is S&B trying to catch other manufacturers, or are the others trying to catch them?
How would you know?
To me, a $1000 difference in price means compromises were made affecting durability or precision or both.
I don't believe in arbitrary pricing. I don't believe that a teeny company can deliver an equal product at 2/3 of the price.
I know...Ive owned S&B, Vortex, Nightforce, USO, Premier, Bushnell to name a few and I have shot through just about everything else.
Sure, the S&B was nice.....but I thought my Premiers glass was better. I thought my USO and Premier were both built better, more rugged. My Vortex was outstanding and gave up little to the S&B.....it didnt have as nice of an eye box as the S&B though, or it would still be on my rifle. The new Vortex Gen II's apparently are even better then the previous versions.
So what performance metrics do you believe you have lost by buying a new Steiner that costs $2600 VS a S&B that costs $3600?
How have you quantified it?
Do you just believe it because if it costs more then it must be better?
Yes.
I doubt Steiner is being charitable by using premium components and forgoing the profit just to make people happy.
I doubt Steiner is being charitable by using premium components and forgoing the profit just to make people happy.
Understand something
The term "implosion" was based on some personal changes and issues that happened during shot.
There was an incident last year at SHOT that reverberated throughout the community. It's more of an insider thing.
However some of the personal changes were being pointed at as a reason for the increase in issues experienced.
I believe most of the effects have stabilized, but my use of the term and the average guys' use are more than likely two different things.
Think of it the same way when you hear something and someone says its an inside joke... same thing, insider info.
The term "implosion" was based on some personal changes and issues that happened during shot.
There was an incident last year at SHOT that reverberated throughout the community. It's more of an insider thing.
However some of the personal changes were being pointed at as a reason for the increase in issues experienced.
I believe most of the effects have stabilized, but my use of the term and the average guys' use are more than likely two different things.
Think of it the same way when you hear something and someone says its an inside joke... same thing, insider info.
Pricing is what the market will bear. That's it. It isn't arbitrary, it's based on what people are willing to pay, and one of the ways you can affect that is via marketing. Demand gen lets you raise prices or lower them to gain MSS.
If you want MSS you lower prices, if you want ASP you add features, raise prices and market to segments rather than TAM.
it can happen ,for instance camera optics, Zeiss make some lens that are dirt cheaper that the similar Leica lens, some think are better, leica optics are great but expensive
I really didn't want to come out and say...."what drama?" as I am a little late to the party to be bringing up year-old threads. Thanks for some degree of context on that one.
Now it's back to see how this AW vs. 700 thread plays out. It's a fucking soap opera over there.
Last edited:
But for what camera?
It's not just the lenses. It's the housing for the lenses. You can't compare a Zeiss lens for a Contax SLR to a Leica M and say Zeiss is just as good optically but cost half as much. They are different animals. The latter is more expensive to make.
It's not just the lenses. It's the housing for the lenses. You can't compare a Zeiss lens for a Contax SLR to a Leica M and say Zeiss is just as good optically but cost half as much. They are different animals. The latter is more expensive to make.
Zeiss make a range of lens for the Leica M (Zeiss ZM) which do compare. i.e. 21mm,25mm,35mm and a 50mm and other lens. some people prefer , can't beat there price
Zeiss zm is not a direct equivalent to a current Leica M which uses aspheric lenses. The optics are completely different and that's why the creased cost.
Last edited:
Here is a direct example:
If you read Koshkin's evaluation on opticthoughts.com you'll note that a Premier 5-25 pulls ahead of the Steiner 5-25 past 15 power.
Do you think this is a coincidence? Or maybe Premier has a better optical formula using better glass.
If you read Koshkin's evaluation on opticthoughts.com you'll note that a Premier 5-25 pulls ahead of the Steiner 5-25 past 15 power.
Do you think this is a coincidence? Or maybe Premier has a better optical formula using better glass.
How many Japanese cars have you seen in Police or Taxi service over the years? Maybe you don't recall, but Sacramento Sheriff gave Toyota their Camrys back after they could not hack it.
Exactly!! The Japanese figured out how to make an excellent product for equal or less money. Why do we refuse to believe the same can't or shouldn't happen in the scope business. Change your process, rethink the old way of manufacturing and a company can't make an awesome scope without costing a fortune? Are we in a rut and think it HAS to be obscenely expensive in order to be quality.
The Japanese do not make an equivalent product. Well they do. It's called March F. It costs just as much.
That's a wild conclusion.
I was a cop for 13 years....many of which were stuck in a patrol car. Police departments don't make decisions based on durability. They make decisions based on price and vehicles that have the ability to do the job, the japs don't build vehicles that are big enough for a a cage and all of the ancillary equipment. That and all the manufacturers that build all the aftermarket equipment for police cars build it for certain models....American made models.
The point is I've won enough money with a cheap Bushnell XRS mounted on my gun to pay for it twice. A "better" optic wouldn't have faired any better.
In the end is a S&B 5x25 optically superior to a Steiner 5x25? Maybe, to some infinitesimal degree. Is it $1200 better.......no way.
If you don't think there is at least a 25-30% mark up just because of their name, you're dreaming. Businesses do it all the time, from restaurants to clothing to electronics and even optics.....price their products based on brand name. Having prestigious government military contracts doesn't hurt either.....it doesn't mean their product is enough better to justify the ridiculous increase in price.
I'd encourage you to look at this thread linked below. It's filled with all kinds of facts that will help avoid speculation. Premier isn't "nearing" the end of their businesses, it has ended. It wasn't a name change, but an acquisition in order to legally purchase patented technologies, infrastructure, and intellectual property from a bankrupted company.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...9801-tangent-theta-professional-marksman.html
Give that thread a good read if you haven't already. If any questions remain, just let me know if I can help in any way.
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...9801-tangent-theta-professional-marksman.html
Give that thread a good read if you haven't already. If any questions remain, just let me know if I can help in any way.
You don't get it. The Camrys were donated. Hey we're inappropriate for rough use. My current employer bought a bunch of Honda Hybrids a few years ago. More than half didn't make it past 50K in our use. Japanese cars are fragile.
As far as your Bushnell goes, if you're happy with it fine. That does not make it the equivalent of a S&B.
A lot of people in the world today mistakenly think high price means high quality. When nothing could be farther from the truth. But there is a ton of companies that prey on people that think that way.
A friend of mine use to raise Black Labs for duck hunters. He had a few "High Quality" dogs he breed and would sell the pups for $500 a piece with no training at all. One of his other female dogs of "lesser quality" got loose one time and got pregnant from a non registered lab next door. He ran the puppies in the local paper for $75.00. He sold one of them, He was about to kill the rest when a friend of his said "they ain't sellin' cause the price is to cheap". With nothing to lose my frien ran them in the paper the next week for $500 a piece. Sold them all in three days.
I will never say S&Bs, Premiers, March, on and on and on are crap scopes. The problem is people that own those scopes just refuse to accept the fact that a scope of a lesser price "May be" of equal quality.
Also some times price is not a indicator of quality as much as it is of supply and demand.
A friend of mine use to raise Black Labs for duck hunters. He had a few "High Quality" dogs he breed and would sell the pups for $500 a piece with no training at all. One of his other female dogs of "lesser quality" got loose one time and got pregnant from a non registered lab next door. He ran the puppies in the local paper for $75.00. He sold one of them, He was about to kill the rest when a friend of his said "they ain't sellin' cause the price is to cheap". With nothing to lose my frien ran them in the paper the next week for $500 a piece. Sold them all in three days.
I will never say S&Bs, Premiers, March, on and on and on are crap scopes. The problem is people that own those scopes just refuse to accept the fact that a scope of a lesser price "May be" of equal quality.
Also some times price is not a indicator of quality as much as it is of supply and demand.
What you're saying is that the Japanese are pillars of humanity who don't mark up their products excessively like those evil Germans.
Wake up! Hey are both business people. They exist to make a profit.
Wake up! Hey are both business people. They exist to make a profit.
Japan's auto industry imbraced Deming's "Total Quality Management" theories in the 80's and that paved the way for their success. While mass producing Germany's precision methodologies. All while the unions destroyed our automobile manufacturing improvement process. So, that example is not really valid.
The reality is still you get what you pay for and that has been around, and will still be around, for ages. Whether it be steel fence posts, food, quality of booze, where you sit on a plane, reloading dies, etc.
The reality is still you get what you pay for and that has been around, and will still be around, for ages. Whether it be steel fence posts, food, quality of booze, where you sit on a plane, reloading dies, etc.
The Zeiss zm do compare ,i have the current 50mm f2.0 summicron which they have just raised the price again, $2350.the lens has an optical design of 35 years old.the Zeiss planer 50mm f2.0 does compare , both Zeiss 35mm biogon's f2.0($1050) and f2.8 ($850)are great lens and compare to the 35mm summicron asph. at $3200. the 28mm f2.8 Zeiss biogon does compete with the leica 28mm f2.8 elmarit asph. I would like to finish with,i have over 35 years in the photo. business the extra gains in buying the leica glass are minor if you compare these lens mentioned,also the Zeiss 21mm f4.5 is a smoking lens on film and a great buy at $1200. i have a bunch of Leica glass and a couple of Zeiss lens and use film and digital Leicas , it is nice to have the leica glass but it is not worth 3x the price even though i buy it, the Leica BRAND makes STRONG KOOLAID and i do drink it ,but in all reality Zeiss is a fantastic lens for the money.
Last edited:
Are you saying that the price difference is arbitrary or that the gains are minimal? Or both? If that's the case why are going to buy the Leica lens then? You should sell all your Leica glass and buy Zeiss.
Everyone should sell their shit and buy Bushy and Vortex cuz they are all the same.
Stop it.
Everyone should sell their shit and buy Bushy and Vortex cuz they are all the same.
Stop it.
... because they aren't. If they were, we'd all be using them instead, and the higher priced scopes wouldn't exist.
The problem isn't with people that own high end scopes, or people that own low end scopes. The true problem is that people are content forming opinions, and passing those opinions on, with very limited experience. Those that can't afford or choose not to own expensive scopes can always be found badmouthing the high dollar stuff and the "lack of need" for them. Those that have only owned one or two high end scopes can always be found badmouthing lower end scopes, and any high end scope that doesn't wear the same logo as the one they bought.
What I'd like to see is for people to stop offering "advice" when their experience is severely limited. Just a couple weeks ago, I had a guy tell me that his Leupold MK4 from 6 years ago is still the best riflescope in existence. It wasn't open for discussion. He had absolutely no experience with any of the other top brands we all know today. He is the "gun guy" among the people he shoots with, and he hands out this "advice" with a certainty that he is correct.
So what leads people in this sport to hand out so much "advice" when it can be proven they have next to zero real experience with competing products? I know people on this forum personally that do the same things. When did it become acceptable to advise others when we have no experience? When did it become so important to sound like an authority on something, when we're not?
Take the mid-range scopes, like bushnell, vortex, IOR, etc... put them in the same room with TT, S&B, Steiner, Nightforce, etc. As many of each as required. Then bring in 100 people, and tell them that they must use each scope for 1 hour, and then choose their favorite. That favorite scope, would be theirs, for free. Would you tell me that people are going to be choosing HDMR's or Vortex PST's and Razor's instead of TT, S&B, or Steiner? I seriously doubt it. They would be choosing the high end scope of their dreams, that has all the features they've always wanted.
My point her is when you remove price from the equation, the truth can be seen. The expensive scopes have more features, better glass, and more rugged components. The true question is whether or not that is worth it for the end user. If you can afford it, and you demand more of your gear, then it is. If you cannot afford it, or simply don't demand that much, then it is not. However, to say that the need for them does not exist, is to appoint yourself king of needs, and decide for others what they desire. Yet need, has very little to do with most of the purchasing we do. Desire on the other hand, has a great deal to do with what we purchase. A good shooter can probably accomplish more with a toilet paper roll and some string through it than a poor shooter and a $4000 scope. That doesn't mean we should use a toilet paper roll as a point of pride.
Instead, these choices should be made like any other choice in our life. We decide what we require/need, and then we decide what else we want in addition. Then we see how that matches up with our financial situation. For some, compromises must be made. For others, no compromises are necessary. If compromise is necessary, then that does not automatically degrade the quality of the options which are out of their price range.
Yet there can be no doubt that the performance delta between different price-points gets narrower as you reach the top. This is true in everything, not just rifle scopes. You end up paying a lot for that last little sliver of performance. Yet if you desire it, and can afford it, it can be yours!
The problem isn't with people that own high end scopes, or people that own low end scopes. The true problem is that people are content forming opinions, and passing those opinions on, with very limited experience. Those that can't afford or choose not to own expensive scopes can always be found badmouthing the high dollar stuff and the "lack of need" for them. Those that have only owned one or two high end scopes can always be found badmouthing lower end scopes, and any high end scope that doesn't wear the same logo as the one they bought.
What I'd like to see is for people to stop offering "advice" when their experience is severely limited. Just a couple weeks ago, I had a guy tell me that his Leupold MK4 from 6 years ago is still the best riflescope in existence. It wasn't open for discussion. He had absolutely no experience with any of the other top brands we all know today. He is the "gun guy" among the people he shoots with, and he hands out this "advice" with a certainty that he is correct.
So what leads people in this sport to hand out so much "advice" when it can be proven they have next to zero real experience with competing products? I know people on this forum personally that do the same things. When did it become acceptable to advise others when we have no experience? When did it become so important to sound like an authority on something, when we're not?
Take the mid-range scopes, like bushnell, vortex, IOR, etc... put them in the same room with TT, S&B, Steiner, Nightforce, etc. As many of each as required. Then bring in 100 people, and tell them that they must use each scope for 1 hour, and then choose their favorite. That favorite scope, would be theirs, for free. Would you tell me that people are going to be choosing HDMR's or Vortex PST's and Razor's instead of TT, S&B, or Steiner? I seriously doubt it. They would be choosing the high end scope of their dreams, that has all the features they've always wanted.
My point her is when you remove price from the equation, the truth can be seen. The expensive scopes have more features, better glass, and more rugged components. The true question is whether or not that is worth it for the end user. If you can afford it, and you demand more of your gear, then it is. If you cannot afford it, or simply don't demand that much, then it is not. However, to say that the need for them does not exist, is to appoint yourself king of needs, and decide for others what they desire. Yet need, has very little to do with most of the purchasing we do. Desire on the other hand, has a great deal to do with what we purchase. A good shooter can probably accomplish more with a toilet paper roll and some string through it than a poor shooter and a $4000 scope. That doesn't mean we should use a toilet paper roll as a point of pride.
Instead, these choices should be made like any other choice in our life. We decide what we require/need, and then we decide what else we want in addition. Then we see how that matches up with our financial situation. For some, compromises must be made. For others, no compromises are necessary. If compromise is necessary, then that does not automatically degrade the quality of the options which are out of their price range.
Yet there can be no doubt that the performance delta between different price-points gets narrower as you reach the top. This is true in everything, not just rifle scopes. You end up paying a lot for that last little sliver of performance. Yet if you desire it, and can afford it, it can be yours!
At the end of the day quality is no more than what the customer perceives it to be. That is why there is many scope makers with many models to choose from. If quality was simply who has the highest price there would be some scope makers selling scopes for $126,000. No body could afford one but everyone could say "man, those things must really be awesome".
You apparently don't understand how business works. You make it sound as if companies have some form of 3rd party controlling their pricing to ensure they are properly priced and not overpriced.
You also make it sound as if there aren't suckers out there that pay for a brand name. That's just ridiculous.
The business world is replete with examples of this.
I used to own a moving company and I used to charge 50% more per hour than my competitors. I had better marketing and sales. I used to joke with the other owners within the franchise that it was nothing more than my ability to convince people that my Mexicans were better than their Mexican.
Walk into a Starbucks one morning and look at all the schmucks paying $5 for a cup of coffee when Dunkin Donuts is better for
a 1/3rd the price.
Please don't be so simple minded as to think that price is always determined by quality.
Not always.
But please don't try to convince people that high end German scopes are arbitrarily overpriced.
I'd bet that if you took your Bushnell apart and compared it to a disassembled S&B you'd change your mind. Made in Japan is like made in America. It means nothing.
But please don't try to convince people that high end German scopes are arbitrarily overpriced.
I'd bet that if you took your Bushnell apart and compared it to a disassembled S&B you'd change your mind. Made in Japan is like made in America. It means nothing.
in my opinion other manufacturers have steadily been reeling in SB on glass...they had long row to hoe
where they are passing them handily is with features- turrets, >>> reticles<<< per dollar spent
its still VERY impressive to me how far ahead benders design was, I will always respect them for that.
I think it all goes back to what Lofty said , "are they $1000 better?"-especially compared to 2014 product lines.....NOPE
do they put glass on the prize table even remotely as much as other mfg's do?.......NOPE
SB seems to be asleep at the wheel, but what a difference a year can make. i have thought the same thing about other optics mfgs and they ARE BRINGIN IT, IN 2014!!!
we as shooters are ultimately the ones who are winning, pretty awesome stuff in the optics world now.
where they are passing them handily is with features- turrets, >>> reticles<<< per dollar spent
its still VERY impressive to me how far ahead benders design was, I will always respect them for that.
I think it all goes back to what Lofty said , "are they $1000 better?"-especially compared to 2014 product lines.....NOPE
do they put glass on the prize table even remotely as much as other mfg's do?.......NOPE
SB seems to be asleep at the wheel, but what a difference a year can make. i have thought the same thing about other optics mfgs and they ARE BRINGIN IT, IN 2014!!!
we as shooters are ultimately the ones who are winning, pretty awesome stuff in the optics world now.
Last edited:
