Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Kahles CL vs. 1" American |
Post Reply |
Author | |
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: November/06/2006 at 17:02 |
I've always been a fan of the Kahles 1" "American Hunter" series riflescopes, and was considering buying another, but it seems they've been discontinued in favor of the new CL series. I can get an American from the Sample List for slightly over half the price of a new CL, so this is weighing heavily on my decision.
HOWEVER, is the new CL series optically superior to the American series, and if so, in what way? The older scopes were pretty hard to beat IMO, so would I gain anything significant performance-wise with the CL to justify its higher price?
I appreciate any advice anyone can give me on this subject. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hello
The Kahles CL has a very noticible optical advantage over the Khales AH. Khlaes CL scopes also have a side focus for long range shooting. I feel that the CL is a outstanding upgrade to the AH. |
|
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I am not doubting what SVD stated, but if you can get the 3-9x42 for almost half the price I would get it. They are very nice.
|
|
ceylonc
Optics Journeyman Joined: September/13/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 514 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
To me, the Kahles CL is worth every penny. I don't want to say the the Kahles American series is an "inferior" scope but it isn't in the same class optically as the CL. The CL is significantly better in every rating catagory, such as clarity, brightness, reliable mechanics, etc. There is a noticable difference between the two lines and the CL, even at the price you are quoting, is still a heck of a deal!
|
|
ranburr
Optics Master Joined: May/16/2004 Status: Offline Points: 1082 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would save the money with the AH, unless you want the multi-zero function.
ranburr |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That's kinda the direction I'm leaning right now. I want the 2-7X36, and like the AH, that model in the CL line doesn't have it, so SF is a non-issue. As nice a feature as it appears to be, I don't want the Multi-Zero on this particular scope. A new 2-7X36 CL costs $800, while a 2-7X36 AH with "slight ring marks" on the SampleList goes for $450. I already have a 2-7X36 AH rimfire model, and it's a WONDERFUL scope. So, I'm just wondering even if it is technically "improved," what real-world performance advantage would I gain with the CL to justify the extra $350? If it's truly $350 better optically, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to spending the extra, but the AH series optics are very nice, so the CL would have to be significantly better to warrant me spending nearly double the price.
Can someone tell me specifically what optical or mechanical characteristics make the CL better?
Thanks! |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ted,
The BEST way to decide is to compare the two side-by-side. If you can not tell a difference, why pay the extra! The "rub" with my advice is that you have to get your hands on both to compare them! They are both really good products, so you really can't lose no matter which one you go with. |
|
take em!
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree Tip69, but unfortunately since the AH has been discontinued, finding someone with both in stock will be difficult. I was hoping maybe someone here had scopes from both series. SWFA obviously has both, and I live within 50 miles of them. They are strictly a catalog and internet order business without a storefront, but maybe they wouldn't mind if I visited them.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
mwyates
Optics Master Joined: June/15/2004 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 1196 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The optical advantages for the CL are very noticeable, I think mostly because the larger ocular gives you a huge, in-your-face view. I have had the 2-7X36 AH and CL side by side. It's a lot of difference in money, but if you look through the CL, your AH won't look so good anymore.
|
|
ranburr
Optics Master Joined: May/16/2004 Status: Offline Points: 1082 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There is nowhere in N.America that you would use a 2-7X36 scope that the AH would not get the job done. You have to remember a little thing called legal shooting hours.
ranburr |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Agree totally. Regardless, if the CL delivers a brighter, higher contrast image, the difference may be worth it to me, I dunno. If the CL's FOV is considerably larger, that is also a very important consideration. Another consideration is the fact the scope will be mounted on an ultralight mountain rifle, where I'm interested in shaving every ounce possible. It may not seem like much, but one of the reasons I want the 2-7 is because it's a few ounces lighter than, say, a 3-9 without much compromise on the top end (there are few big game hunting situations for which 7X isn't enough upper end magnification), and the 2X offers greater FOV on the bottom end. When you're climbing steep, high altitude country, loaded down with gear, chasing after elk, every ounce adds up!!!
One thing confuses me, though. The Kahles website doesn't show a 2-7X36 in the CL line, and it states that all CLs include side focus, yet SWFA shows a non-side focus 2-7X36 called a CL in the product description. Could this be an AH just misnamed by mistake? If so, then the 2-7X36 AH on the Sample List looks even better. Or, is the 2-7X36 non side focus a new addition to the CLs? |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
mwyates
Optics Master Joined: June/15/2004 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 1196 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Kahles website has not been updated. The 2-7X36 CL is available, and does not have side focus. I bought one.
|
|
ceylonc
Optics Journeyman Joined: September/13/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 514 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The CL has a large field of view (FOV), much larger than that of the AH series. To me, this is one of it's greatest attributes.
It sounds like you need a side-by-side comparison. Trust me when I say that you will notice the difference. I'm not kidding when I say that this scope has glass that is close to the same quality used in Zeiss Diavari VM/V scopes. I have both and while the Zeiss is better, it ain't by much and I like the duplex reticle in the CL better! |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for your input, gentlemen!
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |