Rifle Scopes Scope market inside scoop...

[the once-ler]

I really don't understand the thinking behind having bulletproof lenses unless you plan on being shot thru the scope countersniper style. pun intended.
Lenses don't need to be hard as diamond, I mean how often do we hear about broken objectives and oculars. I say use use ultra high quality MgFl Fluorite lenses and tuned thickness multi-broadband coatings and give us the highest quality image ever seen in a targeting optic. Couple that with bulletproof mechanicals and you have a buyer here.

 

[mdesign]

I would like to FFP & SFP in 3-12x an the objective not larger than 42mm and great glass. Dead on turrets with zero stop and the option of either mil/mil or moa/moa. Hash mark style reticle like Vortex or Nightforce, not a big fan of the christmas tree style but the G2 would be okay. The FFP should have only an illuminated red dot in the center so the reticle has an aim point with the power is turned down and for hunting in timber or low light conditions. Only the elevation turret should be exposed, the windage should be adjustable but covered. The price should not over $1200, less would be good.

 

[jakelly]

For you guys that are requesting moa, would you want true moa or iphy?

And would you want this in a 1-6? A moa is pretty small at 6x...

IPHY would be perfect. No sense in producing a product this forward focused and choosing a subtension/turret increment not designed for ranging.

 

[the once-ler]

It would be really hard to forecast a cost per unit until they are ready to go into production. I know for sure developing the tech and tooling for ceramic lenses is gonna be a feat in and of itself, and won't be cheap. Ti material and tooling will also add a significant cost increase.

 

[xphunter]

Really interested in a functional MOA reticle when the longer range options take place.
One that can be used quickly without having to count lines or only listed every 5 or 10 MOA.
Curious to see the finished project

 

[alpine44]

I really don't understand the thinking behind having bulletproof lenses unless you plan on being shot thru the scope countersniper style. pun intended.
Lenses don't need to be hard as diamond, I mean how often do we hear about broken objectives and oculars. I say use use ultra high quality MgFl Fluorite lenses and tuned thickness multi-broadband coatings and give us the highest quality image ever seen in a targeting optic. Couple that with bulletproof mechanicals and you have a buyer here.

+1 that.

Rather than trying to distinguish a new product in the current market place by the use of exotic materials, why not have a really nice optical and mechanical "platform" (as defined in the car industry) and offer a lot of reticle, turret, ocular, color, etc. choices.

This thread makes it obvious that nobody is going to be be turned off by a scope that is mechanically solid and delivers a high quality image. The deal breaker is often that a manufacturer only offers reticles or other features that the customer does NOT want or the price asked for custom features is insane.

 

[mark5pt56]

We're really pushing to get the first few out there by the end if the summer. You never know with totally new developments like this, but that's what we're shooing for.

That's great, thanks for the update!

 

[drum13]

Really love the idea of an indestructible scope but sounds like these are going to be extremely expensive and just another great scope that I'll never be able to afford.

A lower priced steel body option would be great for cost savings over titanium and still be rugged.....but make it smaller, something with a similar to the design of the MST100 (sits low on the receiver, somewhat compact with smaller lenses) but with modern glass, reticle (MSR) and other modern features would be outstanding. If you could pack it all in a 1" tube - even better.

Still waiting to see who the first is to invent a MIL version of the Leupold M2 and M3 dial concept.

If I were able to create a new scope company, the concept would be to produce something a step above the SWFA SS models. Rugged as hell, functional and affordable. People would pay a bit more for that package with better glass and more options like the ideas the guys are suggesting here......especially if it is something MADE IN THE USA with lifetime warranty. I see a void in that area of the market that needs to be filled.

 

[hatidua]

...sounds like these are going to be extremely expensive...

That's certainly something I've gathered from the conversation thus far.

 

[diriel]

--- For those wishing for MOA... the biggest detractor of MOA ranging reticles is how much information is presented in such a small area. How do you "magically" make it uncluttered? I grew up with MOA too! Yes, change can be _Difficult_! The good news is...a Mil/Mil configuration actually ends up simplifying things. With practice in the field, it rapidly becomes familiar. Just getting up over that initial hump, can be a bit of a pain.

--- For those saying "Down Cost" it... What he really wants to provide is a very nearly *Bomb_Proof* scope. Titanium is not just lite, it has quite a few desirable traits that would benefit a scope. Downside is how difficult it can be to work with.
-^-> As for the "glass", if he can pull this off, he will literally revolutionise this part of the industry!

++ Personally, I can't wait to hear how he is tackling the Titanium problem... It most definitely can be done! It is really more a matter of knowing the right people, and driving the right deals.

++ As for down costing the tube... It would likely make more sense to use a specific type of aluminum tubing.

Just a few thoughts,
Gary

 

[jakelly]

I think the question was IPHY or MOA in addition to mils.

 

[diriel]

The actual difference between IPHY // MOA are pretty small. They are essentially "functionally" so similar as to be the same. Either one will suffer from a very cluttered Reticle Area Vs. Mil/Mil. I am not saying I do not like MOA. I was raised with MOA... and for those times where the scope used IPHY, for me, there was no functional difference *In_Field_Usage*.

 

[sawman556]

I've been thinking of picking up a Kahles k16 or something along these lines in price and quality. 2k I would be interested. 3k not so much. Should I get the k16 or wait and see what y'all have coming?

 

[mark5pt56]

The actual difference between IPHY // MOA are pretty small. They are essentially "functionally" so similar as to be the same. Either one will suffer from a very cluttered Reticle Area Vs. Mil/Mil. I am not saying I do not like MOA. I was raised with MOA... and for those times where the scope used IPHY, for me, there was no functional difference *In_Field_Usage*.

Yeah--0.47 at 1k

 

[tylerw02]

I would definitely be interested. I've been searching for a perfect AR scope for quite some time as well as a light precision scope. I intend to purchase two new scopes in 2015. My theme has been LIGHTER and SMALLER.

For an AR scope:
The USO 1-4x was what I'd been looking at. I like the dual-plane reticle with Aimpoint-like dot and good battery life, but not sure adding 20 oz to the top of my gun is worth it for only 4x on the top end. I've also been looking at the Leupold Mark 6 1-6x, but that doesn't quite seem perfect with their sub-par illumination.

One thing that is important to me is either a good BDC reticle (kind of like the crosshair ACOG reticle) OR a good mil-based reticle that illuminates so that it works like a dot on a sunny day, light weight, and durable. Optics don't have to be perfect, but the better they are, the better the scope is. I'd like to see something in the 15 oz range that isn't fragile---once it goes over 20 oz, I mark it off my list. Hell, the Trijicon Accupoint would be a great scope, even if it is 1-4x, if it had a good reticle. To be honest, 1x on the low-end isn't THAT important. I don't really see a speed penalty with a 1.25x or 1.5x on the bottom end, so long as the illumination works to help me draw my eye to the aiming point. I'd also like to see a zero-stop, but if the turrets are capped, it isn't as big of a deal. Also a big fat eye-box that is easy to grab is important to me. With my Trijicon Accupoint, I always end up grabbing the fiber-optic shade instead of magnification when I'm on the move and the dang mag ring is so small. Another consideration is to design a QD-mount that returns to zero, made to space just right with the scope and work on an M4/A4 type upper receiver that doesn't weigh a ton--keep it under 5 oz. and you'd have a winner. The Nightforce would be awesome, but I don't want to have to carry a tool to take it on and off, same with Aero. For now, I have the pig of a GDI that is awesome but heavy, and a lighter, but still heavy ADM (compared to NF and Aero).


On a precision scope:
The Leupold Mark 6 3-18x44 is a genius scope, IMO and right now leading the pack for a light precision scope for my purposes. While I'm not a super big fan of the pinch-and-turn elevation knob and lack of illumination, its probably one of the best sub-$2k scopes out there. What I like is the weight and TMR. I'd like to see 4-24x50 and 3-18x44 scopes that have simple two-turn lock/unlock elevation knobs with a zero stop set for 1 mil below zero (for suppressor flexibility), side focus with numbers marked on it, knobs that feel like Mark 4 knobs or Nightforce knobs, clicks that aren't as close together as S&B, capped windage, and an H2CMR style reticle, in a package with good glass quality (doesn't have to be S&B quality but at least as good as say a Nightforce ATACR or even Zeiss Conquest), make it come in tan and black, and keep it under 23 oz for the 3-18x and under 25 oz for the 4-24x. Big huge scopes are awesome, but rifles need to be coming in a bit lighter for positional shooting and for carrying. Don't say "go to the gym" because I do. The extra weight you save on a scope means you can have a longer barrel or add a can that gives more benefit than the marginal increase in scope quality. Add illumination if you can. Make the illumination adjustable externally and have an "off" position between every intensity setting.

One thing I think is over-looked is the possibility of adding dual-focal plane to a precision rifle scope. Once you turn the magnification down below about 8x on my S&B H2CMR, the reticle is hard to see. Perhaps a .125 MOA (or even larger) dot at 10x in the center of the reticle in the second focal plane would do it. That way it would wash out in FFP reticle as you crank up the magnification. That would greatly help the low end of the magnification range for hunting or closer-range shooting, which would make the AR10s and SPR type AR15s far more effective as dual-use guns. What use is 3x on FFP reticle anyway? The aiming point is so tiny and the hashes and dots are not useful for ranging or holds anymore. It washes completely out in brush, shadows, and as the sun goes down. I understand this would add expense to a scope, but it may be cheaper than illumination, and keep the weight down. It would definitely be worth a couple hundred bucks extra IMO. My S&B is for practical purposes a 10-25x for shooting, with sub 10x being only used for finding targets. The same is true of the 3-18x Mark 6 TMR scopes I've seen.

Anyway, there's my $0.02 on things the scope market could improve on.

ETA:

Design a scope cap that actually works. They don't need to be spring-loaded necessarily. How about a cap that you pull back out of the way and it attaches to the scope body via hook-loop or even a magnet? Just something other than the joke Butler Creeks or their "tactical" version that also sucks.

 

[HuDisCo]

Here's a mechanical design update.

We're getting closer everyday.

 

[sititunga]

Hasn't Leupold already hit it out of the park with their Mk6 1-6 offering? It's light weight and has a bright daylight visible red dot.

What I'd like to see is more makers offering FFP scopes, as I can't see the need for SFP scopes with most of the new reticle offerings, and for makers to stop offering MOA turreted scopes with Mil based reticles.

 

[tylerw02]

Lots of folks complain the mark 6 flickers when your head position moved slightly, and you lose the illumination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sititunga]

Lots of folks complain the mark 6 flickers when your head position moved slightly, and you lose the illumination.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had a good look at one at NRA in April to see if I could see the flicker people have mentioned, but I couldn't really see the issue, even when I wasn't squarely positioned behind the scope. The dot on the TMR version cranked down to x1 was very bright.

 

[tylerw02]

I dunno, I couldn't tell you for sure. I don't own one. I really couldn't tell much indoors messing with them. I know guys with them that have the complaint though. Maybe they have since improved them? The Mark 4 1.5-5x illumination has been improved though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lead ƒarmer]

Interested in an iphy/moa version

sent from my POS phone

 

[sititunga]

I dunno, I couldn't tell you for sure. I don't own one. I really couldn't tell much indoors messing with them. I know guys with them that have the complaint though. Maybe they have since improved them? The Mark 4 1.5-5x illumination has been improved though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think improvements were made to last year's production, with Leupold offering upgrades to earlier releases.

 

[Redmanss]

I think improvements were made to last year's production, with Leupold offering upgrades to earlier releases.

That was false info said by a CS rep that made its way into the forums, there was no "fix" or updated version, but it's not as bad as some say. Don't ask a FFP 1-6x to be an Aimpoint, and an Aimpoint can't come close to a 1-6x. The perfect scope is still a unicorn.

Nate, looking forward to the new scopes. Hope yours has one horn...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[drum13]

Why does the turret housing have that block shape like USO and others? Are the tubes bought like that from an outside source?

 

[HuDisCo]

That was false info said by a CS rep that made its way into the forums, there was no "fix" or updated version, but it's not as bad as some say. Don't ask a FFP 1-6x to be an Aimpoint, and an Aimpoint can't come close to a 1-6x. The perfect scope is still a unicorn.

Nate, looking forward to the new scopes. Hope yours has one horn...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Me too! We've done everything we can to maximize the eye box and bring the overall length down shorter than anything else out there.

 

[HuDisCo]

Why does the turret housing have that block shape like USO and others? Are the tubes bought like that from an outside source?

I wish there was... It sure would make things simpler.

The design ends up like this a lot of times because there's a lot that goes on in this portion of the scope and space is needed to house the various components.

From a structural standpoint, you need more material there because the center is mechanically more vulnerable, in that it has the most significant amount of potential leverage, and it requires holes cut to accommodate the turrets and illumination control, etc..

All that said, we'll probably be able to trim it down some in the final phases. We're still undergoing the requisite iterative steps and getting everything dialed in.

Really appreciate everyone's comments.

 

[HuDisCo]

one thing I think is over-looked is the possibility of adding dual-focal plane to a precision rifle scope.

All of our scopes will incorporate dual focal plane Reticles. They are all differently designed for their individual purposes, but, generally, the center reference point and main outer stadia are sfp while the ranging tools and milling/bdc portions are in the ffp reticle.

 

[HuDisCo]

I've been thinking of picking up a Kahles k16 or something along these lines in price and quality. 2k I would be interested. 3k not so much. Should I get the k16 or wait and see what y'all have coming?

I can't commit to pricing yet, but we've researched what's out there and have a pretty good feel of where we need to be. I think we'll fall right in line pricing wise. You get what you pay for when it comes to raw materials. Our choices here will require some sacrifice compared to industry standard markups, but I'm confident that the final result will make this obvious.

 

[sawman556]

I can't commit to pricing yet, but we've researched what's out there and have a pretty good feel of where we need to be. I think we'll fall right in line pricing wise. You get what you pay for when it comes to raw materials. Our choices here will require some sacrifice compared to industry standard markups, but I'm confident that the final result will make this obvious.

Well I look forward to see what y'all come out with. Let me know if you need any "scope testers".

 

[tylerw02]

I'd volunteer to see if I could wear one out :-D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[drum13]

I wish there was... It sure would make things simpler.

The design ends up like this a lot of times because there's a lot that goes on in this portion of the scope and space is needed to house the various components.

From a structural standpoint, you need more material there because the center is mechanically more vulnerable, in that it has the most significant amount of potential leverage, and it requires holes cut to accommodate the turrets and illumination control, etc..

All that said, we'll probably be able to trim it down some in the final phases. We're still undergoing the requisite iterative steps and getting everything dialed in.

Really appreciate everyone's comments.

Thanks, I've always wondered about that.

 

[HuDisCo]

I really don't understand the thinking behind having bulletproof lenses unless you plan on being shot thru the scope countersniper style. pun intended.
Lenses don't need to be hard as diamond, I mean how often do we hear about broken objectives and oculars. I say use use ultra high quality MgFl Fluorite lenses and tuned thickness multi-broadband coatings and give us the highest quality image ever seen in a targeting optic. Couple that with bulletproof mechanicals and you have a buyer here.

Apologies, I overlooked this one somehow... Anyway, the thought is not in the bulletproofing. Its abrasion resistance. Anyone that has a watch with a saphire crystal knows they are almost impossible to scratch. Spinel is even harder.

Practically speaking, you can clean it with your t-shirt at a match at not worry.

 

[lawofsavage]

Sounds similar to what the Trijicon TARS was going for except lighter, hard to scratch lenses, better reticle options, and bigger magnification ranges.

 

[BGE541]

Can someone make something like the Premier Light Tactical please?

Kahles 3-12 w/MSR-k

 

[CSTactical]

TAG..


Mike @ CSTACTICAL

 

[Rafael]

I am certainly interested.

 

[HuDisCo]

Thanks for all the comments guys! We're finalizing the design utilizing a lot of the feedback we gained here. A few of the changes pushed our schedule a bit. That seems to be the way of these sort of things... Anyway, we are planning to cut metal on these in September now. We're super stoked.

Send us your email address if you are interested and we'll keep you posted. We'll keep the group updated here of course, but we'll send an email blast out to the address we have to offer the first few to in the order received.

Looking forward to hearing from you all. Thanks again!

Nathan

 

[desert dog]

This thread makes it obvious that nobody is going to be be turned off by a scope that is mechanically solid and delivers a high quality image. The deal breaker is often that a manufacturer only offers reticles or other features that the customer does NOT want or the price asked for custom features is insane.

I read the whole thread, and this comment stuck with me the most. This is exactly why Nightforce is so popular. They make a solid product with reticles CUSTOMERS WANT, not reticles that the designer likes. I love S&B scopes and have the money to buy them, but the MOAR reticle gets my money every time.

 

[HuDisCo]

Feedback like this is great as we have not yet designed the reticles for the upcoming long range models. Suggestions will be much appreciated.

That said, we will not be looking to duplicate what’s already out there. Please make suggestions on features or configurations that you like. All feedback will be strongly considered when we enter that stage of the design process.

Thanks so much!

Best regards,

Nathan

 

[ZombieMonkey]

I forgot about this thread until today, glad to hear that this is still moving along. As long as you guys can bring this to market at a reasonable price with a locking diopter ring and some good reticle options I am still looking forward to seeing this thing make the leap from CAD plans into an actual working prototype.

My preference is to something very G2ish reticle design for the lower power scopes as I tend to do more holds than dial for closer in. In a longer range reticle I really like something like an MSR or H2CRM. Hopefully you guys can bring some similar reticles to market on these as I agree with Desert Dog, definitely needs to have some good reticle options.

 

[light1984]

Tag for future info.

If you are gathering user input still, here are my ideal scope specs.

4-16 or 3-18 power
FFP or dual focal reticle
MIL/MIL
MSR or TMR type reticle (I prefer a cross style reticle with more has marks below the horizontal axis)
maybe an off center erector from the factory. (i.e. if there is a total of 30 mils of travel, maybe have it come with 10 mil up and 20 mil down, for ease of use with inclined one piece mounts)
42 to 44 mm objective
Internally threaded objective for ARD
Zero SLOP turrets
Zero stop turrets
Capped/locking windage option
Non-locking elevation
Side focus
Threaded hole for optional cat-tail for power adjustment ring
illumination option for a REASONABLE price increase

 

[ptalar]

Feedback like this is great as we have not yet designed the reticles for the upcoming long range models. Suggestions will be much appreciated.

That said, we will not be looking to duplicate what’s already out there. Please make suggestions on features or configurations that you like. All feedback will be strongly considered when we enter that stage of the design process.

Thanks so much!

Best regards,

Nathan

Nathan, I had thought you left Hudisco a couple of years ago to become a marketing VP for Zeiss America. Have you left Zeiss and are now back with Hudisco? Were you part of that decision to offload Hensoldt from Zeiss to Cassidian?

Who is doing the design and fab for this new scope?

Phil

 

[HuDisCo]

Phil,

I never left HuDisCo. Here's a little more about the history there:

HDC, LLC (HuDisCo) is my company. It was established in late 2008 to provide firearms industry marketing consultant services which subsequently lead to us establishing a relationship with Carl Zeiss Optronics, GmbH. We quickly became the import and distribution partner for the Hensoldt line of riflescopes for the US. We had great success and the line of business was purchased from us (Didn't want to do this at all, but it was either play the game or start all over from scratch). We were employed by the new Carl Zeiss Optronics USA and our building was rented by the new company. HDC still existed in the background to manage previously established logistics like importing, GSA contract management, grounds and building, etc. and I was the Vice President Business Development and Sales.

Carl Zeiss AG is the owning body for the Carl Zeiss group of companies. As an entity, it seemed to me that there business interest had shifted away from defense industry and defense related products. This lead to them selling Carl Zeiss Optronics GmbH to Cassidian (an EADS company). The corporate climate shifted rapidly after this change. The things that were difficulties in the past had seemed to become impossibilities during this period. I felt that some of this was having an impact on my personal reputation in the community. We were building a very successful business, but I could see that things were going to go south rapidly. Sometimes it's better to retire while you’re still the champ.

So I did. I took another job in the defense industry and brought Chris on to manage the company and get HDC back up and running the way it was. Since Chris has been here we've been able to accomplish a lot. Our machining and manufacturing capabilities have increased 10 fold; we have become one most well equipped general gunsmithing service providers in the southeast; we've designed a package of improvements for the Remington 1100, 11-87, and 870 resulting in the HomeWrecker Shotgun; we've partnered with Mcree's Precision to be a depot center for the new BR10; and we've worked on developing this rifle scope for about a year now.

Things just happen sometimes, so I wanted to diversify the business. That way if we lost a line again like we did with Hensoldt, we wouldn't be forced into making any hard decisions. I never wanted to be anyone's employee after I started HDC. Everything is tracking right down the middle so far. HDC is being rebuilt on innovations. We'll be a market and technology leader in a segment or we'll move on. I'm really excited about this new scope and the direction the company is taking. As the saying goes, "Lessons learned the hard way are learned indeed." This has always been my preferred method for some reason. Hopefully going forward we can keep that down to a low roar.

As for the other question, we have several domestic partners helping us with this project. I don't know if I'm free to share specifics about those entities just yet, but I'll ask. That said, rest assured, we will build using 100% US materials and labor and have and will continue to use US engineers and design consultants. As a veteran, this is very important to me for any product that will carry the HDC logo.

Hope that clears things up. If you have any more questions about this, feel free to give me a call.

Thanks,

Nathan

 

[Irokcrawl]

I know from you, Joe and others coming from the hensoldt line of products you are accustomed to some of the best products out there which puts a lot of my faith into you guys as far as building some great optics. Hensoldt didn't listen to what a lot of people wanted and I know we represent a very small portion of the market but of course the competitors will find and take every competitive advantage they can get which I can see easily moving over to the defense virtual market. You being local also is very nice. That way when I buy an optic I can come bother you directly I still need to get over there and see what you have. A heavily abuses but perfectly fine spotter xx at a good price would fit the bill right now

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[HuDisCo]

We still have a demo spotter45 with gen 2 mil-dot I may be willing to part with.

Give us a call.

 

[Bender]

All of our scopes will incorporate dual focal plane Reticles. They are all differently designed for their individual purposes, but, generally, the center reference point and main outer stadia are sfp while the ranging tools and milling/bdc portions are in the ffp reticle.

Really?? I hope so!! my first hunting scope was a Shephards scope with a FFP AND a SFP. ya, it was before I got into long range properly. but I allways thought that would be PERFECT reticle in a tactical style with a modified mil dot on FFP and the windage and elevation on the SFP. so you can VISUALLY see the return to zero as well as have zero stops and what not. Shephards has been making ffp/sfp for 25+years. maybe they hold the patent and would not let it happen? I have no idea, that is just conjecture on my behalf. If any good company made such a product, I would stand in line for it. Here is a Shephards reticle for some who may not know. The Circles and numbers are FFP and the thick crosshairs are SFP, so when you adjust for range the FFP will move and the SFP stay put I understand the circles suck for tactical but put a SWFA style Mil-Quad in there and it would be pretty sweet. but heavy I am sure. what say you all? am I on crack? too complex?

 

[TheTrauma]

Very excited about this scope. Today I almost bought a mk 6 1-6 before reading about the flicker issue.

 

[snipe10]

me too on the Mk6 1-6, still searching for the perfect scope, was really wanting to like the MK 6

 

[HuDisCo]

Thanks to everyone for all the comments and support!

We're really looking forward to seeing all this work we've put in finally get cut out of metal.

Keep those email address coming! Thanks to those that have sent theirs in already.

 

[HuDisCo]

It's official now that our next two scopes will be a 3-18x56 and a 4-24x56. Rough mechanical and optical designs are complete. We will enter the reticle design stage for these two models shortly. As things progress I'll post up images and updates. We're in the process of combining and updating our websites to reflect all this new stuff. Really appreciate everyone's thoughts so far. Stay tuned. Some really awesome stuff is coming.