-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes US Optics Foundation series
- Thread starter koshkin
- Start date
The three or four old company versions I own have all worked well over the last eight years or so. ( had them out in bad weather too/lol) took a 338 with a 3x17 out to 1000 a couple of times and the rifle printed well. No scope issues. The reticle is a bit thick at power on the 3x17 , I agree. The glass is B+,to A . They are heavy and customers service was not great.. I like the old style Erek. Never had a mechanical failure or adjustment issue. They are not PMll's but they are also not $4800 per unit.
Have not tried the new stuff from the company that bought them. Always bought my USO's used at 50c on the dollar and was never disappointed. They are tanks. If they only had S&B and Leupold's service commitment and tech. I own a significant number of higher end scopes (leupold,, S&B's, Premier, Hensoldt, Nightforce etc) so that is the context within which I submit my experience with this brand. Just another opinion and a different experience. Shot a higher end IOR that they gave me to try the other day.. Nice glass, clean adjustments, heavy.. If you are serious about accusing them of making crap maybe you should read this ranking of hugh end glass article compiled by a pro.: Tactical Scopes: Field Test Results Summary & Overall Scores - PrecisionRifleBlog.com
US optics ranked in the middle of all the heavy hitters and in the upper quarter in a few catagories.
Have not tried the new stuff from the company that bought them. Always bought my USO's used at 50c on the dollar and was never disappointed. They are tanks. If they only had S&B and Leupold's service commitment and tech. I own a significant number of higher end scopes (leupold,, S&B's, Premier, Hensoldt, Nightforce etc) so that is the context within which I submit my experience with this brand. Just another opinion and a different experience. Shot a higher end IOR that they gave me to try the other day.. Nice glass, clean adjustments, heavy.. If you are serious about accusing them of making crap maybe you should read this ranking of hugh end glass article compiled by a pro.: Tactical Scopes: Field Test Results Summary & Overall Scores - PrecisionRifleBlog.com
US optics ranked in the middle of all the heavy hitters and in the upper quarter in a few catagories.
Last edited:
Bringing this thread back instead of starting a new one.
Does anyone that's used one of the new Foundation scopes have any updates?
Are they being delivered. Are they reliable?
Does anyone that's used one of the new Foundation scopes have any updates?
Are they being delivered. Are they reliable?
I have a few of the new foundation scopes and have been using them pretty hard. No issues at all. Track true and have great glass. They made a winner with this scope.
The FDN 25 has been awesome for me. I’ve got probably 6000 rounds under them last season. Tracking has been flawless and glass quality is excellent.
Eyebox is very easy to get in. I find the parallax to be pretty forgiving and don’t mess with it much at matches. Definitely not anymore than other scopes
hopefully that helps. If you go FDN you won’t be disappointed
Eyebox is very easy to get in. I find the parallax to be pretty forgiving and don’t mess with it much at matches. Definitely not anymore than other scopes
hopefully that helps. If you go FDN you won’t be disappointed
I am quite happy with the FDN 17x I’ve been beating up for a good number of months now.
Another happy camper with the FDN25x. Bullet proof all last season for me and the JVCR is fantastic.
Mine also has the JVCR. It is a nice reticle.
Have a FDN 17. Good fit and finishing.
Tension on the zoom and parallax has very well balance good tension and is nice and smooth throughout. When i received mine I observed that from 2~5 mils range the erek was a little stiffer than rest of range. I applied some “green slime” grease to orings (recommended from another member on here) and tension is now even throughout the range. Its possible it may have worked itself even over time and use though.
Glass is very good. I had it out the other day and in sunny bright and snow covered conditions it was worked well with image and handling CA. These conditions have usually been a good true test for me of distinguishing good versus bad glass.
The JVCR reticle is really nice. I really like the balance of reticle thickness. Its easily visible on the low end. On top end it is thicker than other reticles out there but target coverage isn’t problematic as its a floating dot (not really sure how to better phrase this). But comparatively speaking though it is different in terms of being a little thicker on upper end than some of the other scopes i’ve used. So that might be a change from what someone else is used to.
I’ve only had it out a few times so I cant speak to long term durability yet. I do have a USO B17 that is no safe queen and it has held up just fine so hopeful this does the same.
Tension on the zoom and parallax has very well balance good tension and is nice and smooth throughout. When i received mine I observed that from 2~5 mils range the erek was a little stiffer than rest of range. I applied some “green slime” grease to orings (recommended from another member on here) and tension is now even throughout the range. Its possible it may have worked itself even over time and use though.
Glass is very good. I had it out the other day and in sunny bright and snow covered conditions it was worked well with image and handling CA. These conditions have usually been a good true test for me of distinguishing good versus bad glass.
The JVCR reticle is really nice. I really like the balance of reticle thickness. Its easily visible on the low end. On top end it is thicker than other reticles out there but target coverage isn’t problematic as its a floating dot (not really sure how to better phrase this). But comparatively speaking though it is different in terms of being a little thicker on upper end than some of the other scopes i’ve used. So that might be a change from what someone else is used to.
I’ve only had it out a few times so I cant speak to long term durability yet. I do have a USO B17 that is no safe queen and it has held up just fine so hopeful this does the same.
ILya,
Given the unusual 3.2-17x magnification range, I suspect this is the same optical design as the USO SN3 3.2-17x was as well as the ER17 etc. After looking at them, do you think that is the case? I still have a few of the SN3's around since by brother and dad both use one and still use them as comparison scopes. I like the design and always have. I was actually surprised this past year to prefer the USO SN3 to an S&B PMII 3-20x50 that I had in as a comparison scope. The S&B was better in a number of areas such as resolution but it's CA was quite poor and so the overall experience with the USO was preferable. I suspect the S&B PMII 3-20x50mm model was not one of those done by the Optronika guys before they left. I expect this year I will run the old USO SN3 beside some of the ~$2k scopes I will be looking at to see where they stack up.
How is the FDN 17x performing optically when it is well off center? I see these are now listed with 35 mils of travel when the SN3 iteration was not even close to that so on the examples I have you cannot go anywhere near that far off of optical center.
I suspect that the optical design is not much changed, but the mechanics look to have been re-worked. It also seems that the baffling is a little different. Old SN3 scopes I have seen had some problems with flare, while the FDN-17x has it under control. I still do not like the tunnelling and the scope is long, but the new turret is very nice to use, JVCR reticle is good, and FOV above 5x is very good.
My Tangent Theta is a better scope, but also a much more expensive one. I have a strong suspicion that the FDN-17x will end up on my list of recommendations shortly.
At a bit under $3k, it basically goes up against ATACR F1 4-16x50, Minox ZP5 3-15x50, and maybe a couple of other upcoming designs.
FDN-17x absolutely belongs in this group and can really hold its own.
I am sorta treating US Optics as a new company after all the changes and relocations, so I am taking my sweet time looking at the scope, but so far it has not skipped a beat.
ILya
I got mine over a year ago, when these were first released, so my info is likely outdated. It took me about 5 months though.
@Kyleigh from US Optics is on here occasionally. Perhaps she can shed some light on their current backlog.
@Kyleigh from US Optics is on here occasionally. Perhaps she can shed some light on their current backlog.
Last I heard they are running 6-8 weeks. I ordered my second one back in mid-March and am expecting to see it early-mid May.
Hi everyone! We are currently at a 2-3 month back log, but we are expecting most orders to be out around 2 months. We like to overshoot our ETAs just incase anything happens.
Do you have any experience with the 1.8-10? Been looking at this as a general purpose scope between a semi-auto and hunting gun. 800 yards max on steel.
@Kyleigh
Annnnnnnnd....two days later from when we spoke, a custom FDN sunshade from USO
Best CS in the business in my own experience.
Annnnnnnnd....two days later from when we spoke, a custom FDN sunshade from USO
Best CS in the business in my own experience.
Attachments
This has been my experience as well.
When I was considering my scope options for my FN SPR, Kyleigh was the face of the company.
I was pretty indecisive too. I kept changing my mind, called her back several times for a different reticle, different color illumination. She probably wanted to beat me with a knotted rope a couple times.
I've never had better customer service, anywhere.
I have nothing but good things to say. She should have been given a raise after dealing with me
Last edited:
Had both 5-25 and 7-35 ATACRs. Clarity and resolution are a wash, but my eyes preferred the color in the USO.
Where the FDN really sets itself apart from the NF for me is with the JVCR reticle and internal bubble level. The Mil-XT was alright but still a little busy in my opinion. I’m able to pick up the .2 wind hashes in the Vibbert reticle much easier, it makes for quicker holds, and has more open space for spotting misses because of the .5 hashes on the vertical stadia. The internal level seems like a very small thing but having used it now it’s significantly faster and easier to use than external mounted levels.
Just an all around better layout and design.
Anyone know what the minimum parallax on the 17x model is? I've got the 525, and the parallax doesn't go down to NRL22 distances. I'm wondering if the 17x does. I'll probably end up parting with my 525 for that reason, but I'd still like to run a USO if I can.
A few weeks ago I traded my FDN for a k525i and am missing the USO. I liked the the zero setting and that it definitely doesn't use an internal knob that can get dimpled or something, and the overall ergos and fitment on top of my rifle seemed better to me. Most of all, the JVCR is just better than the SKMR3 by a long shot. I like to be able to spot my wind marks easily and know what I'm holding.
I'll be ordering another here in the next few weeks. The question is - should I get a 25x or a 17x? Which would lend itself better to PRS shooting? I rarely take my scopes beyond 16x, unless I'm shooting at a mile or at paper. Would the 17 have a better FOV at 10x than the 25?
I'll be ordering another here in the next few weeks. The question is - should I get a 25x or a 17x? Which would lend itself better to PRS shooting? I rarely take my scopes beyond 16x, unless I'm shooting at a mile or at paper. Would the 17 have a better FOV at 10x than the 25?
Not sure about the FOV specs but I rarely find myself above 18x with my B25 during matches. I sometimes wish I opted for the B/FDN 17
I like the larger magnifications in matches for a couple reasons
- heavier
- the higher magnification will usually have better glass at the 15-18 range than the lower mag scope at same zoom (maxed out)
- really nice having the higher mag when zeroing the rifle
- no idea on fov my guess is the 17 would have higher fov but i bet it would be close....great Q now im gonna find out.
-
GL!
DT
- heavier
- the higher magnification will usually have better glass at the 15-18 range than the lower mag scope at same zoom (maxed out)
- really nice having the higher mag when zeroing the rifle
- no idea on fov my guess is the 17 would have higher fov but i bet it would be close....great Q now im gonna find out.
-
GL!
DT
I'm kind of wondering about that. I'd almost rather have a good FOV without tunneling at 5x from the 17, vs the 25x and tunneling at 7xish. I just dig the long boi look of the FDN 25x.
I have a B25 with a H102 reticle it had 1 issue during a squirrel hunt , when I first got it , I aimed at a squirrel and thought my flip cover was on , I saw nothing but it was open I called uso and they RMA it and said ocular tube broke loose and blocked the lens 100%, I thought for a $2900 dollar MSRP scope damn I have had hundreds of scopes from swfa to SB ior tangent zco , I have had issues with many but never this where it became unshootable ,they did fix it and I had them install internal level , while when I sent a OM 2 back for something in lens it was back ion gun in 2 weeks and swfa when i had a issue with one was back in under 1 week , the USO took 4 months and chasing them , but since returned It has never let me down and I like the internal level , however for a combat scope this could be fatal to have such a thing happen , and also it was on a pcp gun which has zero recoil not a 50bmg , but i like the lens and reticles and it always tracks and holds poi even if banged around
One thing for a hunting scope like small game I love it but if I was in a combat situation and my life was on line , this would not be my optic of choice .
LOU
One thing for a hunting scope like small game I love it but if I was in a combat situation and my life was on line , this would not be my optic of choice .
LOU
Last edited:
Resurrecting the thread, sorry for anyone who goes back and reads the three pages of d loop wasting your time.
I ran the FDN 25x all of the 2022 season with zero issues. It has tracked perfectly for 1800 rounds, has no CA when you're in the eye box, etc. I swapped my m7xi for one and bought a 17x for my grendel too.
I prefer it over my 7-35 ATACR despite the turrets on the ATACR being way crisper and clickier. FOV and reticles matter more to me than turret feel.
I ran the FDN 25x all of the 2022 season with zero issues. It has tracked perfectly for 1800 rounds, has no CA when you're in the eye box, etc. I swapped my m7xi for one and bought a 17x for my grendel too.
I prefer it over my 7-35 ATACR despite the turrets on the ATACR being way crisper and clickier. FOV and reticles matter more to me than turret feel.
I have well over 10k rounds through rifles that wear FDN scopes. The 5-25 has been the most durable optic I have seen. I am around the range and PRS a ton and I have see pretty much every scope out there and compared them to my FDNs. I feel the FDN is the most underrated scope out there
I think most of the relative “underratedness” comes from USO’s QC issues from like 5-7 years ago with some of the later ER25s and B-Series optics.
The FDNs are nothing like those scopes and much more akin to the older SN-3/T-PAL optics which had/still have excellent reputations.
The FDNs are nothing like those scopes and much more akin to the older SN-3/T-PAL optics which had/still have excellent reputations.
I am still running my USO SN3/T-Pal. Good to hear you guys are happy with them!
Last edited:
Does anyone have a through-the-scope picture of the internal bubble level? I'm thinking of getting another FDN, and the internal level seems like an interesting idea. I've heard that they can obstruct FOV, but I can't find any pictures demonstrating what they're talking about.
It’s sorta tough to make out in pictures since camera either wants to focus on level or sight picture. But these should at least give you an idea.
What I will say is that the level is actually easy to miss at first. You won’t think it’s there, especially if you’re looking at it indoors or something where the lighting is not great. But once you become accustomed to it and you’re in daylight, you’re able to use your peripheral vision without taking your eye off the target.
It’s really extremely well done.
What I will say is that the level is actually easy to miss at first. You won’t think it’s there, especially if you’re looking at it indoors or something where the lighting is not great. But once you become accustomed to it and you’re in daylight, you’re able to use your peripheral vision without taking your eye off the target.
It’s really extremely well done.
Glad to hear they’re doing well. I’m interested in this internal level. But wish they would decrease the size of the 5-25
I am loving my USO Foundation 3.2-17x with MPR reticle.
That being said, does anyone know if the reticle looks the same in the magnification shared between this model and the 5-25x, i.e. at 5-17x?
Also, where does the tunneling end on the 5-25x model?
Any information would be appreciated.
Thank you.
-Stan
That being said, does anyone know if the reticle looks the same in the magnification shared between this model and the 5-25x, i.e. at 5-17x?
Also, where does the tunneling end on the 5-25x model?
Any information would be appreciated.
Thank you.
-Stan
The 17 and 25 look the same to me. The tunneling ends between 5-7 on the fdn25.
Similar threads
