Rifle Scopes Sig Tango6 3-18x44 scope

[MDStroup]

I tried looking for info on this scope. There seems to be a lack of reviews on this scope, particularly unbiased reviews. What seems to make this more difficult as well is that Sig updated this scope to make it a 34mm scope body instead of the original 30mm. Was the tube size the only thing that changed or has Sig have other features changed as well? Don't know.

What is the Hide's opinion of this optical wonder? How does it track? Optical clarity and distortion?

 

[stello1001]

If I'm not mistaken, the 34mm version is far superior from the 30mm. The second generation tango6 scopes (34mm) have much better image quality and are comparable to razor gen II by many. I have never looked through a razor but my second gen Tango6 is pretty darn clear and has good glass. I have also never looked through a first gen Tango6 but it seems that pictures show an update in turrets.
Good luck...

 

[Halberdier]

The gen2 is nicely built and has this very useful Levelplex feature -- an indicator inside your reticle that warns you if you are out of level. The major con I see is limiting the warranty on electronics for five years. I don't see the same limitation with their main competitors.

 

[smarpin]

I love mine, but it’s not without its issues. It is HEAVY, the turrets are good, but the clicks are close together and not extremely tactile. That being said optically it hangs with the big names in its price range, edge to edge clarity and color are both very good, I’ve noticed to CA in my scope. For the prices that you can find them for used it’s hard to pass up.

 

[koshkin]

I tried looking for info on this scope. There seems to be a lack of reviews on this scope, particularly unbiased reviews. What seems to make this more difficult as well is that Sig updated this scope to make it a 34mm scope body instead of the original 30mm. Was the tube size the only thing that changed or has Sig have other features changed as well? Don't know.

What is the Hide's opinion of this optical wonder? How does it track? Optical clarity and distortion?

The original 30mm scope was quite good, to be honest, but the Gen 2 is better. It is shorter, but heavier. Nice locking turrets that track well. Glass quite good for such a short design.

I like Levelplex and DevL reticle quite a bit.

Mu only issue with this scope is weight, to be honest.

ILya

 

[want2learn]

i own the first generation of that scope and to date have been pleased with it. it's my primary scope.

i did have the pleasure of taking a class with a school suppled rifle that had the new generation version of that scope mounted... and it too worked great.

I liked the leveling light feature of the second generation model, if i recall correctly they were a set of up and down arrows located at the periphery. They were a little bit sensitive but pretty easy to use and were a nice feature particularly as i was shooting a new rifle and we were extending our ballistic range.

I'm told the glass is even better on the newer generation but honestly i never found fault with the first generation variant and i can't say i noticed a significant difference...unfortunately i didn't have the 2 scopes available to me at the same time so i couldn't make a direct side by side comparison.

Both scopes tracked very well....though we only tested out to 600 yards if i recall.

I would say that the only thing i'm not crazy about is the magnification adjustment dial, while raised and easy to see with it's fiberoptic rod...is a little sharp and i occasionally hit it when rapidly working the bolt of my rifle. I don't have an extended or modified bolt so this is probably a non issue for most.

 

[FireShooter]

I have owned both generations of the scope and I liked the gen 1 better. Its a couple ounces lighter and I think it filled a niche that then gen 2 doesn't really fill. Theres not many 30mm 3-18x scopes out there and I didn't notice the weight as much because of the length of it. The gen 2 parallax was pretty much set it at infinity and roll with it. It worked good as a hunting scope. Im weird and prefered the MRAD milling reticle to the Dev-l mrad reticle as I run my scopes on lower mag most of the time and I found the Dev-L very fine on lower power. The turrets aren't super tactile and my feelings mirror what others have stated about turrets. I think they are a very functional scope, glass is good to go and they will do pretty much anything that any other scope in their class will do but at a slight weight penalty with the exception of the razor which is almost 10 oz heavier. I think they are a good scope. There is a turret grease mod that improves turret feel but I never tried it. If you search on here you can find it.

 

[BurnOut]

I have the Gen I version of this optic, and have been pretty happy with it. I'd like it better with the DEV-L reticle, but I get by with the MRAD milling a'ight. It tracks well, and the glass, while it could be better, is certainly good enough for 18x.

 

[Kickin45]

Loving my Gen 2.
it is heavy for sure, but it is tier 1 scope imho. Glass is is phenomenal and tracking is spot on.

 

[anginaprinzmetal]

I really really do not like the eye box on my gen 1...

 

[joshobean]

Late addition to this thread. I've had a Gen 2 for over 2 years now. I'm selling it. The glass was ok, looked bad though when comparing to a S&B PMII and zooming in on details from a distance. As others have said, its heavy. I had it on a POF 308, and it took an 8 pound 4 ounce rifle, and made it feel like a boat anchor with an ADM SL 20 MOA mount. What I hated the most though, was the critical eye box/eye-relief at about the 15 to 18 magnification. I don't know if it was just mine, but with even an adjustable stock you had to line things up just right to get a semi-clear picture. Out in the field especially with sunlight it was a pain to zoom on a target at the upper magnification.

I guess it looked ok on an AR being a very short scope, but I don't think with the weight and the critical eyebox it was worth it. I'm going to a Meopta Optika6 with an MRAD Christmas tree reticle instead. Its lighter, and from the reports I've seen eyebox is better, and glass is equal or better. Cheers!

I will add I have a Whiskey 5 2.4-12x56 that I absolutely love for hunting, and 2 Tango 6 1-6 Gen 2s that are perfect for ARs. I probably won't ever sell them. Cheers!

 

[stello1001]

Late addition to this thread. I've had a Gen 2 for over 2 years now. I'm selling it. The glass was ok, looked bad though when comparing to a S&B PMII and zooming in on details from a distance. As others have said, its heavy. I had it on a POF 308, and it took an 8 pound 4 ounce rifle, and made it feel like a boat anchor with an ADM SL 20 MOA mount. What I hated the most though, was the critical eye box/eye-relief at about the 15 to 18 magnification. I don't know if it was just mine, but with even an adjustable stock you had to line things up just right to get a semi-clear picture. Out in the field especially with sunlight it was a pain to zoom on a target at the upper magnification.

I guess it looked ok on an AR being a very short scope, but I don't think with the weight and the critical eyebox it was worth it. I'm going to a Meopta Optika6 with an MRAD Christmas tree reticle instead. Its lighter, and from the reports I've seen eyebox is better, and glass is equal or better. Cheers!

I will add I have a Whiskey 5 2.4-12x56 that I absolutely love for hunting, and 2 Tango 6 1-6 Gen 2s that are perfect for ARs. I probably won't ever sell them. Cheers!

My experience was completely opposite to yours. I had a 4-24 which I used extensively and absolutely loved. I even prefer it way too much over my ZP5 but this isn't fair to Minox as my ZP5 was having some issues and needs to have some warranty work in order to perform as it should. Anyhow, my 4-24 was really good for me overall.

 

[Kickin45]

“The glass was ok, looked bad though when comparing to a S&B PMII”

? No s#%t dude. Most $1000 scopes dont matchup well against $3500 scopes. ?

 

[joshobean]

My experience was completely opposite to yours. I had a 4-24 which I used extensively and absolutely loved. I even prefer it way too much over my ZP5 but this isn't fair to Minox as my ZP5 was having some issues and needs to have some warranty work in order to perform as it should. Anyhow, my 4-24 was really good for me overall.

Glad you had a good experience. I wish I'd gone with the 4-24 originally. Same weight really, and now that they don't make it there are some killer deals. Could be I just got a bad sample too. I did like the reticle, level, and illumination features. Scope seemed built like a tank too. I just couldn't get past the issues I mentioned earlier.

 

[joshobean]

“The glass was ok, looked bad though when comparing to a S&B PMII”

? No shit dude. Most $1000 scopes do match up well against $3500 scopes. ?

This made me laugh, and the Sig was $1800 when I bought it retail (I didn't pay near that). In fairness I have a Tract Toric 3-15x50, which also made the Sig look bad. I guess it uses Schott glass, but it was a $700 scope. To me the scope price doesn't always indicate how good the glass will be, and everyone's eyes are different. I paid $2,099 for that 5-25 S&B, best purchase I've made to date on a scope. I love deals!

 

[Kickin45]

You must’ve gotten a bad one. It does happen with every manufacturer. I’ve heard of even the King TT going back because of issues.
I’ve owned several Sig 6’s now and I’m very happy with the glass. Is it flawless, no. And it doesn’t compare to S&B, Minox etc etc.
It does however punch above its actual price point.
It’s really too bad you got a bad glass model.

 

[joshobean]

You must’ve gotten a bad one. It does happen with every manufacturer. I’ve heard of even the King TT going back because of issues.
move owned several Sig 6’s now and I’m very happy with the glass. Is it flawless, no. And it doesn’t compare to S&B, Minox etc etc.
It does however punch above its actual price point.
It’s really too bad you got a bad glass model.

I won't write them off for sure. My safe top kinda looks like a SIG banner with their other scope boxes and a red dot package.