-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
ZCO vs S&B
- Thread starter Dm6
- Start date
Can you PM me the details? I'd be interested in hearing how you're running a S&B with illum on a lefty rifle.
Every scope these days is generally pretty tough, in that price point. They usually will take a good bump or 10 and you'll retain zero. You'll see more failures with bigger lots of manufacturing though. By far the most popular scopes for PRS matches seems to be the Razor Gen II series....well...just about every pro match, a handful of guys have trouble with their scopes. That's what happens when 60% of shooters use them. A far bigger lot size means more possible individual samples failing. I'm sure if more dudes shot AI's we'd see more failures (I just made every dude who knows me gasp from shock.) I saw 4 razors go down in a single match. As stated, it was the mechanical adjustments that go bad. One of my squad mates did state his scope had 18,000+ rounds through it...and he dials ever target. So at minimum that's about 9,000 up and down adjustment cycles, but more like 12,000ish when you add single round engagements per target on some stages, and a wash on some stages that there's only one target. That's a lot of adjustment on a mechanical part, and I wonder if a lot of it is due to lack of lubrication.
Kahles is known for their turret screws coming out (mainly because people aren't torquing them tight enough after zeroing.)
My close friend has the dreaded parallax issue with his Schmidt PMII. He bought that scope in 2008. It just flat out stopped working. He sent it to VA to have it serviced, 3 day turnaround, and when he started shooting it, everything felt great and brand new.....and then the glass got hazed. He chocked it up to fogging, but the next day he looked at it and it looked the same. Well, he sent it back and comes to find out they went a little too happy with the lubricant for the internals and it happened to get on the glass somehow possibly from reassembly. They obviously fixed it with no charge to him.
I haven't heard a single problem about the ZCO's yet.
If you're a hold over boi like me, you may never ever need warranty work done on any scope for mechanical failure. But most manufacturers will have issues eventually because it is a machine, and it'll eventually break.
Kahles is known for their turret screws coming out (mainly because people aren't torquing them tight enough after zeroing.)
My close friend has the dreaded parallax issue with his Schmidt PMII. He bought that scope in 2008. It just flat out stopped working. He sent it to VA to have it serviced, 3 day turnaround, and when he started shooting it, everything felt great and brand new.....and then the glass got hazed. He chocked it up to fogging, but the next day he looked at it and it looked the same. Well, he sent it back and comes to find out they went a little too happy with the lubricant for the internals and it happened to get on the glass somehow possibly from reassembly. They obviously fixed it with no charge to him.
I haven't heard a single problem about the ZCO's yet.
If you're a hold over boi like me, you may never ever need warranty work done on any scope for mechanical failure. But most manufacturers will have issues eventually because it is a machine, and it'll eventually break.
I bought an S&B 525 PMII about 5 years ago. Loved the glass. Turrets were ok but a touch heavy IMO. Really loved it, but on a Tahr hunt in the NZ Southern Alps, about 2 years ago, the parallax failed on the first day for no apparent reason. That was my trip done and dusted! It was fixed under warranty, but I no longer had faith in it. I sold it and bought a Kahles. Next purchase will be ZCO. The turrets are soooo much better than S&B.
I have both, ZCO527 and SB525 with DT turret.
Regarding the turret, I can't tell which is better. SB DT turrents are heavy and clicky while ZCO turrents feel mussy and heavy too.
The locking mechanism for ZCO is both good and bad. IF the internal gears for ZCO turrents are machined correctly then the turret should lock into place everywhere on any clicks and align with painted marks outside. However this is not always the case where even the later batch from this year, the alignment issue still exists and happen to the first scope I received -- no matter how I micro adjust the turrent cap, there is no way the turret can smoothly lock into place in all clicks.
Luckly the customer service is good and they offered the free replacement in the end.
Long time lurker, but I can chime in with experience on a few good scopes. I've had a trio of S&B 5-25 PMii's, a Kahles 624i, Burris XTR's, Vortex RZR HDii, IOR Valdada Recon, a Delta Stryker HD, and now running a ZCO 420 that I picked up second hand.
Glass wise, the S&B's have always had a beautiful image for me; warm, clear, excellent lack of aberration, edge to edge. The ZCO is cooler, a little less saturated, but retains all the contrast and is very crisp at full magnification.
The Kahles has the best ergonomics IMHO. I've tried but never owned the new 5-25, and in the right hand windage with the parallax on the elevation turret, it was for me the most comfortable and intuitive to use.
The IOR's glass was impeccable, very similar to the S&B, but perhaps a hair sharper in good light. It's a massive scope, even dwarfing the ZCO, and was just a little ungainly on lighter rigs.
The Vortex is a solid 9/10 across the board, but I just didn't love it.
The Delta was an eye opener(thank you Richard Utling!), but in the end, the reticle delaminated or something and it was plagued with issues after moderate use.
The ZCO 4-20 is a large, beefy optic. The MC3 reticle is fabulous, truly. The sight picture is good enough to not warrant getting the 5-25. You can make out magazine type on the cover at 500 yards. The diopter lock is a great feature, and it's a veritable tank. I don't like the lift to unlock turrets and wish there was an override. The new style clicks are subdued but crystal clear, the parallax is refined. The zoom housing has a bit of a gap that I could see accumulate dirt; time will tell.
I would buy another ZCO in a heartbeat. If I wanted to save some cash, I'd go with a Kahles 525. I will probably buy another S&B, but because they're pretty; I run Klassik's on my 1970's vintage Sako in 6.5X280ai, and love them.
I'll sum it up with my woman's statement after we ranged some targets at 1100 yards; she's an ophthalmologist, for what its worth, who loves pricey lenses on her Leica cameras: "Holy fuck, that's sharp!".
Glass wise, the S&B's have always had a beautiful image for me; warm, clear, excellent lack of aberration, edge to edge. The ZCO is cooler, a little less saturated, but retains all the contrast and is very crisp at full magnification.
The Kahles has the best ergonomics IMHO. I've tried but never owned the new 5-25, and in the right hand windage with the parallax on the elevation turret, it was for me the most comfortable and intuitive to use.
The IOR's glass was impeccable, very similar to the S&B, but perhaps a hair sharper in good light. It's a massive scope, even dwarfing the ZCO, and was just a little ungainly on lighter rigs.
The Vortex is a solid 9/10 across the board, but I just didn't love it.
The Delta was an eye opener(thank you Richard Utling!), but in the end, the reticle delaminated or something and it was plagued with issues after moderate use.
The ZCO 4-20 is a large, beefy optic. The MC3 reticle is fabulous, truly. The sight picture is good enough to not warrant getting the 5-25. You can make out magazine type on the cover at 500 yards. The diopter lock is a great feature, and it's a veritable tank. I don't like the lift to unlock turrets and wish there was an override. The new style clicks are subdued but crystal clear, the parallax is refined. The zoom housing has a bit of a gap that I could see accumulate dirt; time will tell.
I would buy another ZCO in a heartbeat. If I wanted to save some cash, I'd go with a Kahles 525. I will probably buy another S&B, but because they're pretty; I run Klassik's on my 1970's vintage Sako in 6.5X280ai, and love them.
I'll sum it up with my woman's statement after we ranged some targets at 1100 yards; she's an ophthalmologist, for what its worth, who loves pricey lenses on her Leica cameras: "Holy fuck, that's sharp!".
Attachments
In the circles I am in there is consensus that SB scopes are not that durable.
Like Theis mentioned, I would say they cannot necessarily take a beating, but many have sent theirs for repair for out of the blue issues, one guy twice. Still, they like them very much. I have not seen ZCO on anyone yet, which is a wonder, but people here usually are not into latest and greatest, they just know PM to be a good glass and stick with it.
I run Athlon Cronus that seems to have an outstanding image without any upsetting features and do not see a reason to upgrade unless the glass is really indeed better. I have kind of disappointment from the views I have gotten from the PM. The diopter was not set up for me but was quite close. I hope to get to properly test a ZCO to decide if it warrants the price or should I maybe try the March wide angle..
Like Theis mentioned, I would say they cannot necessarily take a beating, but many have sent theirs for repair for out of the blue issues, one guy twice. Still, they like them very much. I have not seen ZCO on anyone yet, which is a wonder, but people here usually are not into latest and greatest, they just know PM to be a good glass and stick with it.
I run Athlon Cronus that seems to have an outstanding image without any upsetting features and do not see a reason to upgrade unless the glass is really indeed better. I have kind of disappointment from the views I have gotten from the PM. The diopter was not set up for me but was quite close. I hope to get to properly test a ZCO to decide if it warrants the price or should I maybe try the March wide angle..
I mean the fact all these "vs Zco" threads keep popping up should tell you something about the common denominator...
And you know this how Terry?
You have done 810G/H environmental test on ZCOs or even taken a S&B or ZCO apart for inspection to determine mechanical and design "robustness" ?
Please expound on on your professional data and not a Dodge is tougher than Ford blanket statement.
I don’t know why people continue to beat on guys like @Terry Cross
These guys are working in professional environments and there’s no need to take a scope apart to look inspect it. The scope works or it doesn’t
They base their opinions on a multitude of scopes that come through their training classes. Scopes run through the same training and see first hand which hold up better
Not saying I don't believe you due to your low post count because this is easy to confirm, but the way you describe the turrets does not sound like you're familiar with a ZCO nor spoke to anyone that would have explained it to you if there was a "problem." From the manual:
5. Finally, follow this three-step procedure for proper turret
locking operation: First, in the unlocked position, loosen the
turret set screws then rotate the turret clockwise and align
the zero mark with the reference line on the scope body.
Second, lightly tighten the turret set screws then push the
turret inward to the locked position to ensure proper spline
engagement. Third, loosen then re-tighten the turret set
screws to 0,5Nm or 4,5 in/lbs. Your turret will now have
proper spline engagement as well as alignment with the
reference mark.
My 5-27 and 4-20 line up just fine using the proper procedure as described above.
Man, this sharfshutz guy sounds like a real jerk.
The internet is a "playground" of sorts. Some feel the need to find the biggest person on the playground, and regardless if that person has antagonized them, they seek to try and pick a fight.
Or...he could just be a douche. It's a coin flip, really.
Probably shoots with a chinese scope and a nagant.
and has a stubby weiner covered in Cheeto dust in mom’s basement.
decent guess anyways.
ZCO >>>>>Bender.
maybe I got 2 bad ones but I had a 5-25 and 5-45 and my Nightforce’s look better let alone my zco
maybe I got 2 bad ones but I had a 5-25 and 5-45 and my Nightforce’s look better let alone my zco
Thats just crazy. The 5-45 was worse too? What didn't you like vs the NF and ZCO?
The image was brown/dark. Nightforce is crisp / blue. Same for ZCO but more
2 other eyes agreed on the 5-45 suckage
That's a shame. And here I thought the 5-45 was the master race to rule them all.
Did you compare low light performance?
I found my ZP5 was better on high mag during the day vs my M7Xi, but the M7 could resolve more in low light using the same mag for both scopes.
The serial number was DA187 and the unit was sent back to your Austria factory you can check for any inspection record.
I have talked to the technical director and followed every instruction provided but I could not get the painted mark and locking slots aligned and I was still unable to lock in place at every elevation level.
That was why I returned my old unit and get the replacement back. The replacement unit worked significantly better in the end.
With my limited experience, I will say that I still have confidence in Schmidt & Bender. Allthough I have seen two go down at competitions, one of them was a 3.5-27x56 PM2 high power wich seems to be a bit more prone to trubble than their other designs.
My friend and I each bought a 5-25x56 PM2 a few years ago. Mine never had a problem but something came loose in my friend scope and it has been down in Germany for a repair. It was done very fast and professional just as one would expect, with a few weeks turn around time. I think that you guys in the US with your own service center gets things done a bit quicker?
Anyhow, I have been reading (a lot) and looking at anything and everything about the ZCO scopes just like anyone else here at the hide and at a big competition about a month ago I had the opportunity to look through a 5-27x56 ZCO. As it is I am shooting with a brand new Kahles K624i, but have had a PM2, a Delta Stryker, a Vortex Razor G2 and a Hensoldt 4-16x56 and has looked through a bunch of other high end scopes. So I turned the dials and twisted the turrets, looked through the ZCO and scoped some targets at one of the bigger stages of that competition. And while I can say that I was in no way dissapointed with what I saw, there was really nothing that made me feel that it would be worth spending another 1500$ over what I just spent on the Kahles to get one either. And my older Schmidt PM2 is on par with both of them.
I am turning more and more into the crowd that states that alpha-glass is alpha-glass. Pick a reticle that you like and spend as much money as you are comfortable with. You wont be able to buy more hits with a switch between a PM2 and a ZCO or a ZCO to a March or any other hight end scope for that matter, it just does not work that way. To me, the worst scope to look through was the Vortex Razor G2, but your milage may vary.
My friend and I each bought a 5-25x56 PM2 a few years ago. Mine never had a problem but something came loose in my friend scope and it has been down in Germany for a repair. It was done very fast and professional just as one would expect, with a few weeks turn around time. I think that you guys in the US with your own service center gets things done a bit quicker?
Anyhow, I have been reading (a lot) and looking at anything and everything about the ZCO scopes just like anyone else here at the hide and at a big competition about a month ago I had the opportunity to look through a 5-27x56 ZCO. As it is I am shooting with a brand new Kahles K624i, but have had a PM2, a Delta Stryker, a Vortex Razor G2 and a Hensoldt 4-16x56 and has looked through a bunch of other high end scopes. So I turned the dials and twisted the turrets, looked through the ZCO and scoped some targets at one of the bigger stages of that competition. And while I can say that I was in no way dissapointed with what I saw, there was really nothing that made me feel that it would be worth spending another 1500$ over what I just spent on the Kahles to get one either. And my older Schmidt PM2 is on par with both of them.
I am turning more and more into the crowd that states that alpha-glass is alpha-glass. Pick a reticle that you like and spend as much money as you are comfortable with. You wont be able to buy more hits with a switch between a PM2 and a ZCO or a ZCO to a March or any other hight end scope for that matter, it just does not work that way. To me, the worst scope to look through was the Vortex Razor G2, but your milage may vary.
Last edited:
More like the guys in the squad that win most of the matches resquaded and called their new squad ZCO
Hardly the people behind ZCOs first match.
The thing with ZCO, they are long time experts in the optical industry
Jeff comes from NF and Robert from Swarovski and Kahles, they are not "new" nor are they rebranding an OEM
They have history, experience, and the right industry partners behind them to make a successful scope out of the gate. They were the minds behind some popular scopes. Just like Andy who did the S&B 5-25x and the Tangent Theta, nobody said Andy needed to prove himself with the other optics he designed.
They don't need "time to prove themselves" they already did that with their previous companies... These are the guys behind the Most popular scopes ... who do we think designed them for NF and Kahles ?
These two ...
Jeff comes from NF and Robert from Swarovski and Kahles, they are not "new" nor are they rebranding an OEM
They have history, experience, and the right industry partners behind them to make a successful scope out of the gate. They were the minds behind some popular scopes. Just like Andy who did the S&B 5-25x and the Tangent Theta, nobody said Andy needed to prove himself with the other optics he designed.
They don't need "time to prove themselves" they already did that with their previous companies... These are the guys behind the Most popular scopes ... who do we think designed them for NF and Kahles ?
These two ...
You don’t like the Ranging Uterus ???
You’re in luck they came out with a new one that gets rid of that and adds some more vertical holds.
Don't need vertical holds either. MPTC-1 satisfies my feeble brain.
If you don’t like the Flying Vag
, then you’re probably a little gay.
Tis a joke
, then you’re probably a little gay.Tis a joke
But forreal, it’s nice that ZCO takes into account what the people want and they listen to their customer base. Now if only they could make non locking turrets 
No homo.If you don’t like the Flying Vag
Tis a joke
Maybe you can get a ring to stick under there so it doesn’t go down.But forreal, it’s nice that ZCO takes into account what the people want and they listen to their customer base. Now if only they could make non locking turrets
like a wedding ring but bigger
I tried to petition @Tyler Kemp to make a printed one and I think he had a prototype but I’m not sure what ever came of it
What came of it is you just reminded me we need to get these on the site! I did them for ZCO and Razor Gen II. Please email [email protected] and tell Darlene I've been majorly slackingI tried to petition @Tyler Kemp to make a printed one and I think he had a prototype but I’m not sure what ever came of it
Ayyyyyyy thanks homieWhat came of it is you just reminded me we need to get these on the site! I did them for ZCO and Razor Gen II. Please email [email protected] and tell Darlene I've been majorly slacking
Will do! Can’t wait to get one!
Many of my thoughts. I'm in full agreeance with you on the razor gen Ii. I think it's used price reflects where it lands.
I don't like moving scopes. I tend to zero them and leave them on the rifle. 1 rifle for matches, and a growing collection of them for various sized hunting (.22's up to 280ai currently, trying to fill in every gap).
I find myself going back to the Mark 5's, the nx8, and anything I find used locally in that price range. They're plenty good enough, have the feature set, and I can outfit 2 rifles instead of 1. Every time I get the idea I can buy a "cheap" scope I get disappointed in it. However, I can't see the difference with my eye between the ZCO/S&B/Kahles, etc. So I'm still buying a "cheap" scope at half the cost, yet they're so close I'm not ending up disappointed.
There is a big gap in price to performance once you crest the $2500 mark. Just have to decide if it's worth it on an individual level. I have a collection of toys to play with, and I'm realistic that I can afford many more if I spend less individually.
So far the vx-5 in htmr/mil is 100%, and couple mark 5 5-25 tmr mil are 100%.
For the money, they're hard to beat. I may change my mind if I get a bad one someday.
Now, if I won a sizable lottery tomorrow, I'd have CS send me about 15 ZCO's to outfit my current fleet.
But forreal, it’s nice that ZCO takes into account what the people want and they listen to their customer base. Now if only they could make non locking turrets
They are listening to customers and that is a request being taken seriously
I might have missed this being said.
Honestly, it's not about what scope has "better glass" or a turret that has nicer sounding clicks; and yes all scopes can have a failure.
The ZCO delivers a behind-the-scope experience that is different than older optical designs. Just as the newer Swaro NL-Pure or Mavin B.2; forgetting the raw resolution on what glass is "better", both provide the image to the eye in an easy and forgiving eye-box that appears to be almost frameless like a new-gen big screen frameless TV in your house. This sets these binos apart even from others even within their own product line.
While the ZCO may or may not be one of the top on a resolution chart, it is the viewing experience, seemly wider FOV than it really is, incredibly natural and forgiving to sit behind; it really set this scope apart. Added to the other feature set, this scope is very hard to beat.
Honestly, it's not about what scope has "better glass" or a turret that has nicer sounding clicks; and yes all scopes can have a failure.
The ZCO delivers a behind-the-scope experience that is different than older optical designs. Just as the newer Swaro NL-Pure or Mavin B.2; forgetting the raw resolution on what glass is "better", both provide the image to the eye in an easy and forgiving eye-box that appears to be almost frameless like a new-gen big screen frameless TV in your house. This sets these binos apart even from others even within their own product line.
While the ZCO may or may not be one of the top on a resolution chart, it is the viewing experience, seemly wider FOV than it really is, incredibly natural and forgiving to sit behind; it really set this scope apart. Added to the other feature set, this scope is very hard to beat.
I agree that this exposure to a vast range of scopes (used in real world conditions) would be a good way of getting a feel for what's lasting and what isn't.
Similar threads
