??? Not sure what you mean, I was responding to Conrad's point on more surface area and mentioned if both scopes have the same ID then they're going to have the same surface area regardless of OD.There's more to it, keep thinking...
Rifle Scopes ZCO Hunter scope at the IWA event
- Thread starter CSTactical
- Start date
Pretty much like most new scope threads. Can't please anyone.
Has anyone request a 32mm tube yet? I want one of those because it sounds innovative and amazing. Might as well make it a 2-40 with a tree reticle that "isn't too busy", has daylight bright illumination (even though I never use it), wide field of view, weighs 24 ounces, is Made in the USA, and costs under 1000 bucks for us poors.
Nothing is perfect and I do have personal preferences but... I am super excited to see ZCO branch out in this direction. I'd love to see something similar come to the States.
I think it’s cool. But a 36mm tube is a lot of chonk for its mag range and intended purpose.
A 30mm tube would be more in line with its aims, and likely get it closer to the magic 24-25oz range everyone is hoping for.
But, I don’t own an optic manufacturing company and I’m sure from engineering perspective there is a lot of complication for a company to pivot away from an underpinning design (36mm tubes in this case).
A 30mm tube would be more in line with its aims, and likely get it closer to the magic 24-25oz range everyone is hoping for.
But, I don’t own an optic manufacturing company and I’m sure from engineering perspective there is a lot of complication for a company to pivot away from an underpinning design (36mm tubes in this case).
Came back to this thread and reread the whole thing. I also looked up ZCO’s specs on this new offering. The whole package has great promise to the point that if a 321 or 428 were available here, the Mrs would be beating on me with it!
I am very happy to see ZCO looking at expanding their offerings.
I am very happy to see ZCO looking at expanding their offerings.
You laugh, but there is some irony in your statement. What most people are asking for does NOT cost a lot. People are already more than capable of making shots at 1K yards with LPVO's so we don't need a Hubble telescope here. The feature set asked by many on this forum already exists elsewhere, just no one seems willing to put that set together in one scope.
How much does a First Focal Plane 30mm scope with capped windage, locking top turret, a 5x or 6x erector (2.5-12.5/3-15 or 2.5-15/3-18), a 42-50mm objective, with a decent reticle and glass cost? Not very much. You can even add illumination in there if you like, but personally, I don't want it. Don't use it on any of my scopes but I will take one for the team and just pull the battery out in this case if everything else was delivered properly. An optic built like this absolutely should NOT be weighing more than 25 ounces by design.
How much it cost would ultimately depend on the quality of glass. Give us alpha glass at 3k+ and you have buyers. Give us L.O.W. glass that sneaks in under $2k...and you have buyers. Give us glass out of the windshield of your wrecked Ford and that should get you to your $1k number...and you would still have buyers.
We are asking for a Mustang here, not a Ferrari.
Going back to @Glassaholic statement above, I think ZCO will build a crossover scope, which I also believe there is a place for and the current feature set may support that type of optic just fine.
I'm goign to play devils advocate here and say none of the above statements are obviously true.
The primary function (sin qua non) for precision rifle optic really is always zero retention and tracking. these absolutely need to be rock solid, and cutting corners in cost or weight in this regards are counter productive.
objective size, zoom range, and features like parallax also need to be taken into account because the overall design and execution of these impacts the above. it is simply critical that the optic is not compromised by flawed light gathering, parallax error, or erector issues that affect repeatability of the firing solution.
there are basically two ways to address problems in those systems, money or weight.
spend enough money and you can all of a sudden do less for more (ie using better materials, better manufacturing processes, better designs). likewise, if you overbuild, you can do more for less money (at the cost of being heavy).
I actually agree with the spirit of the post, which is that "minimalism" is another strategy for light weight and low cost.
The purpose of the above paragraphs are just to reiterate that even a minimalist solution needs to achieve specific engineering results.
We already have available to us a 4.5-22 Razor LH that fits all these specs except the requested mag range at 1999 retail. It can be done. It tracks good, the glass is better than decent and it's lightweight.
Ares BTR APRS5 Riflescope | Athlon Optics Scopes
When you want the best features from the top-tier riflescope but not break the bank, look no further than the new Ares BTR line of scopes.
athlonoptics.com
Hunter 3-15x44 - Apex Optics
THE HUNTER 3-15×44 PURPOSE-BUILT HUNTING SCOPE FOR PRECISION RIFLE SHOOTERS AVAILABLE FOR PRE-ORDER Illumination Choose an optionIlluminatedNon-IlluminatedClear – + PRE-ORDER NOW! SHIPPING SUMMER 2023! OVERVIEW | KEY FEATURES | GALLERY | HLR™ RETICLE | TECH SPECS | REVIEWS A HUNTING SCOPE...
apexoptics.co
I have the Ares and am very happy with it.
Correct.
It can be done.
The basic recipe is indeed the 4.5-22x50 LHT.
The trick is to not try to make it everything for everyone. LHT does its thing by keeping FOV and adjustment range moderate, sticking to a 5x erector ratio and keeping turrets on the simple side.
I have been running the 4.5-22x50 LHT longer than pretty much anyone outside of Vortex and it has never skipped a beat.
I do not care about the feel on the windage turret. It stays covered.
The feel of the elevaton turret is perfectly reasonable. It is no Tangent, but it is good enough and compact enough.
Current version is just under 22 ounces.
The SFP 3-15x42 weighs 19 ounces.
That means we can likely get something like a FFP 2.4-12x42 with the same feature set under 20 ounces. For my purposes, I would probably shrink the objective even further and make it a 2.4-12x36 for even more compactness.
It is imminently doable, except there is no manufacturer out there who believes that such a design would sell. I happen to think that they are wrong, but it is not my decision to make.
ILya
The durability of that scope is questionable at best.
The perception of the durability of that scope is questionable at best.
In my small circle I know of two of them that have had to get sent back to vortex for repairs. That’s two out of three people I know that own one. Not ideal but if you’re ok with having to take advantage of a companies great customer service you can enjoy a light weight variable optic with good glass.
In my circle I’ve had TT’s go down ZCO’s go down, Schmidt’s go down, NF’s go down. So apparently everyone has had to take advantage of each mfr’s great customer service.
You forgot to quantify the denominator LOL.
Nobody is arguing a low-percentage failure is any kind of problem. A low-percentage failure would actually be evidence of high quaity, since it's quantitatively...a low-failure rate.
Not really looking to argue with the experts, but lets at least be clear what is being talked about.
Damage usually happens after loss of function with my equipment..
One scope would not return to zero. Another had the elevation turret break and would jump about a half mil with no clicks. I know of another that had to get sent back because of black flakes that moves around in the field of view in the optic.
I was being purposely vague and a bit cheeky in lieu of the debate at hand, my point being that all mechanical systems are destined for failure at some point. Yes, some are prone to more failure than others, but we need more evidence than just a "circle of friends" because if that is the criteria then every manufacturer out their will be on the chopping block - someone has a friend somewhere where one brand or another has gone down. That being said, I understand the nervousness when you do see multiple units go down, but at the same time you have plenty of others who've had solid working units without issue, and these are guys who don't baby their gear. Ever since the Rokslide foolishness it seems a lot of people are quick to jump on the failure rate of the LHT but I have to wonder if this is more a psychological IIP (Internet Induced Psychosis) phenomenon than it is an actual issue for the model.
Stepping away from anecdotal information into the actual statistics: I have seen the exact data on how many of the 4.5-22x50 LHT scopes were sent to the factory and for what problems. I also know how many were shipped to date.
The return rates are in line with the Razor Gen2 scopes overall. As is usually the case, a significant proportion of the scopes that come in, are sent in for problems that can not be replicated. When I talk about return rates, I count those as well. If we were to assume that these are a user error, then the return rate would be truly abysmally low.
If it helps, I am in Wisconsin at the moment, so the data is as of earlier today.
ILya
Just waved your direction from 25 miles away
I tried waving back, but Vortex people were looking at me funny.
ILya
Exactly; this scope or others from ZCO will never be all things to all people. The complainers are loud as hell on here, but I'm super stoked about this 1.7-12 as a hunter for my bolt guns and I'll be tactikool with it on my Mk12 SPR, too. Perhaps we'll see a smaller tube, 30mm, 34mm, or some even say make it 1". But if it's 36mm I'll still buy it. Looking forward to Shot this year to see what ZCO and others have in the works
im way late but a logistics argument could be they already have ayyyythang set up for 36mm tube scopes so to redo their operations or start a new processes altogether for an unproven (market) scope thats going to push the break even point wayyy out there further than sticking with the 36mm
When it was first announced they said it would take a while to get to the USA, they never fully explained why it was only a European release... Even though it is chonky for an MPVO it would still be a nice option to have, especially if it excels optically.
With ZCO's optical quality, a 1.7-12 sounds like a winner to me. I'd prefer the 34mm tube .... but I'll take a 36 if that's all I can get.
Are they still focused on rolling out a scope to the Euro market or are they working on the USA bound scope?
My opinion is worth what you’ve paid for it… But, ZCO should go hard or go home on this.
30mm tube, 44-50mm objective, 22oz, donut of death style reticle. Capped windage, exposed 10mil turret, good eye relief/eye box, and 3-18 or something similar.
30mm tube, 44-50mm objective, 22oz, donut of death style reticle. Capped windage, exposed 10mil turret, good eye relief/eye box, and 3-18 or something similar.
What’s this little mf’er? Took a pic of a video, thus blurry
That there looks to be a ZCO LPVO...
Wonder if they used a 36mm tube for it???
I hear it’s 2-10 scope. If so I’m getting one. I’ll buy the display model!
I hope its not a 2-10. I'd rather have a 3-15 if their hell bent on the 5x. 2.5-15 would be preferable.
The 1.7-12x50 has more appeal as an MPVO than what this scope appears to be as POC - it looks like it will be a 2-10x30 just like the Leupold Mark5 which doesn't have much appeal to me, as a day scope it will likely do fantastic but I'd like a larger objective so the 1.7-12x50 holds more appeal for that reason alone. This scope is already in production, why they won't bring it to the states baffles me 
Meh gets dark add the clip on.The 1.7-12x50 has more appeal as an MPVO than what this scope appears to be as POC - it looks like it will be a 2-10x30 just like the Leupold Mark5 which doesn't have much appeal to me, as a day scope it will likely do fantastic but I'd like a larger objective so the 1.7-12x50 holds more appeal for that reason alone. This scope is already in production, why they won't bring it to the states baffles me
Relying on day scope for low light is so outdated
I’m hoping ZCO brings to market all of the above. The more choices the better.
,
However, long it takes to get it perfect.
But it exists.
Release at IWA in Feb/March perhaps?
However, long it takes to get it perfect.
