Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Schmidt Bender scopes????? |
Post Reply | Page <123> |
Author | |
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree for the most part, but I sincerely believe that the folks that chose the PM II for the Marines did so out of a pure heart. |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
cheaptrick,
Okay, let me get this straight. We're emitting large amounts of vapor arguing the quality of finished product based on one post on one particular internet bulletin board? As far as S&B quality people being here in US. I'm quite certain they either don't have anyone here or they don't have any authority over manufacturing at PR. Most of S&B employees in Germany probably don't even speak English anyway, so even if they did send someone to oversee production at PR in Virginia, I'm certain there is very little they can do about the process. They can only set basic set of quality benchmarks, which would be definitely lower than their home-base factory. US-made Zeiss Conquests are good, but nowhere near as good as German-made Diavaris. Lexus just recently finally got their US assembly to reach quality of Japan-based factories. Remember movie "Gung Ho" ? Premier Reticle is official supplier of S&B designed scopes to US Marine Corps. S&B provided design and most likely provides optical glass. I don't know who makes the tubes, knobs and other metal parts, but I think it would be S&B only part of the way. Premier Reticle however is official maker of the scopes, they make the sale, they offer support. If the scope that had failed did so because of flaw of design by S&B - then sure S&B is partly to blame. If it failed due to parts sourced by PR - it's entirely fault of PR. It's up to PR to notice the problem in design, since they're the official supplier of these scope to USMC. I suspect however that what had happened is that S&B under contract supplies major components, whereis PR manufactures/sources smaller parts. Since PR performs final assembly, it's PRs product in every way. Poor quality of 1911 clones made in China would have nothing to do with John Moses Browning's design, even if they used parts made by say Springfield. To put it even in simpler terms. Suppose you have designs for Leica M camera. Unless you have been working for Leica for a long time - good luck achieving their level of quality when making that camera. Just about any company that tried had failed. Same works with every other complicated product - having plans/designs/specs is no guarantee of proper assembly. Since it seems that so far these are the only issues that affected this scope (and that PR admitted and fixed), I'd say that Marines got something they can truly rely on. |
|
Duce
Optics Master Joined: September/19/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1231 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I hope so but I know that is not always the case & I think they should try to buy American if possible.
Duce |
|
Duce
|
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Duce,
Agree with that. It's a matter of national security, so they should rely on people that have an interest in protecting this Free Nation. In real world however it's a simple fact of life that Germans are really good at optics. And that means that if the best product happens to be German-made - so be it. As far as I'm concerned, if it does the job better than anything else, I don't care where it's made - South Africa, Zimbabwe or Germany. It makes no logical sense for Marines (or Army) to source inferior products then. If the enemy is better armed or has better equipment than what US-based companies can provide, then Marines/Army have to source something from outside to get the edge. I'm sure you don't want them to fight with spears and swords, do you? :) |
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Spreader, you a HOG?
|
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Who's name is on the scope?? Premier Reticle or Schmidt and Bender??
Maybe your right spreader, maybe I'm looking at this deal all wrong. Believe it or not, I'm actually a big fan of S&B products.
The one thing we all can agree on here. We all want our troops to get the best gear available to perform their duties and come home safely. |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
cheaptrick,
See for yourself: http://www.premierreticles.com/M8541.htm :) |
|
Duce
Optics Master Joined: September/19/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1231 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Spreader I suggest you look at the real good glass in F-15s F-22 and the pilots helmets is does not come from Germany or any outside country it is mad in the US by PPG & Dow-Corning. It is higher quality than you can buy for riflescopes & much more expensive. Try pricing one of those old F-15 helments and a S&B will look like a real bargan. I feel our goverment needs to make a much bigger effort to buy American not just a wal-Mart buy American show.
Duce |
|
Duce
|
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ah damn, I walked into that one, huh??
Excellent commentary from you my friend....I still say S&B "should" have more control over the QC of the scope and if there is some flaw, however minor, S&B and who ever should correct it. Peoples lives are at risk.
I still got a hard on USO didn't get the contract in the first place....
Good shooting!! |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Duce,
First of all, I don't really know which glass in particular you're talking about, but how do you know it's actually made by PPG & Dow-Corning? Could be a deal similar to PR/S&B if you know what I mean. Second issue is - Leupold makes scopes in US, but they source the glass from outside US, most likely from Japan. Final product doesn't really compete with anything S&B has. Third issue is - glass in helmets is one thing, optical glass used in scopes (I mean any scopes, be it riflescope, telescope, spotting scope) is a totally different game. By the way, I'm sure you know that most of goods sold in WalMart are Made In China :) |
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
As far as glass goes, Schott is not the only maker in the world. They are very good, but I do not think Ohara is a distant second. Ohara makes good glass. When I worked in microoptics, after a fair amount of screwing around with Schott and Ohara glass, I ended up going with Ohara. For certain things, Schott may be better. For others, Ohara is better. Then there is Hoya which makes a lot of very nice glass used in photographic lenses.
Another good glass maker is Corning. While their catalog of optical glass is perhaps less extensive than Schott and Ohara, it is worth noting that Leica sources their highly touted binocular and spotting scope glass from Corning. ILya |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ilya,
Just as I said, Schott and Ohara have the most extensive selection. I didn't say they were the only ones. I said that Schott has the most extensive, "best", selection. Hoya photo filters are okay. I prefer B+W though. As far as Leica binocs/scopes are concerned - that's interesting information. This may explain why their spotting scopes aren't up to quality of Zeiss Diascope. Leica discontinued their spotting scopes right now. No spotting scopes are available at the moment. They're redesigning the whole line, new scopes supposed to come out in Spring/Summer 2008. Would be interesting to know which glass they use there and if they manage to beat Zeiss. |
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I do not think glass source is the reason for Leica spotting scope redesign. The point I was trying to make is that top quality glass is available from several sources and the differentiator is usually what you do with that glass.
ILya |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ilya,
Sure. Schott however has the most resources available to come out with purpose built glass types and therefore it gives Zeiss an edge over any other scope maker that has to source glass types that are available on open market. Obviously this alone doesn't necessarily guarantee the best final product, that's why S&B won USMC contract and not the Zeiss :) |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I work for a very large international company that is the most prominent in the world in its particular market sector. We have manufacturing facilities all over the world and we also outsource manufacturing to facilities all over the world and across the United States. We have language barriers to deal with, and not just one language barrier, but literally dozens of languages. We deal with it by hiring people that speak those particular languages. It's just part of doing business around the world -- we either adapt or our competitors take market share from us; it's that simple. Regardless of where our products are made or who makes it for us, it bears my company's name/logo and our engineers designed it, and as such, we are responsible for its quality. The customer only sees our logo on the product, so if something is wrong, it is a poor reflection on us and only us in the customer's eyes. Therefore, it is our responsibility to frequently audit our suppliers to make sure their work, their quality system, and their process capabilities meet our specs, and if they fail to meet our standards, they simply don't get our business.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You can specify a particular composition and if you are a big enough customer (you do not have to be a very big customer, but big enough), they will make a custom melt for you. I was buying several different glass types and one of them was a custom melt made by Ohara that was not in their catalog. Schott, if memory serves me right, was also more than willing to tweak the chemistry a little if needed.
I really do not think that glass sourcing provides much of an edge for Zeiss. ILya
|
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ilya,
No argument regarding ordering custom types. The point I'm trying to make is that since Zeiss controls the whole process beginning to end, they're in better position to make special glass types (or use existing ones in the best manner) for final product. If say Leupold had to order a custom type, that would cost a lot more money and if at the end Leupold would discover they made a mistake in their calculations, they're stuck with what they got. Zeiss on the other hand has so much experience and knowledge doing that, that little experimentation and few failures along the way won't hurt them too much since they control the whole process. For all others - it's a lot of wasted time and money. S&B is a tiny company compared to Zeiss. Big factor in their survival is the fact that they have their own glass factory, that way, just like Zeiss, they have full control over entire process. If I recall correctly, S&B as a company has a total of fewer than 200 employees. Carl Zeiss group employs more than 11,000 people worldwide. So, for Zeiss, having Schott Glasswerke is like for BMW to have their own engine casting plant. |
|
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13182 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Fair enough. Although I was under an impression that Schott was run as a separate company from Zeiss Optics.
ILya |
|
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ilya,
Carl Zeiss Foundation owns Carl Zeiss AG and SCHOTT AG . SCHOTT AG Group had 16,839 employees worldwide as of September 30, 2006. Carl Zeiss Group over 11,000 on the same date. In a sense, it's one big company with many semi-independent units. So, they're independent, but they always cooperate with each other when needed. |
|
louissr
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/15/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
As an owner of 1 Zeiss, 3 S&Bs and a Steiner, I think we are getting into really subtle differences.
I love my S&Bs (4-16 PHs), they always work and appear to be built like a T-34 but with the precision of an artificial heart, but the 3-9 Zeiss is lighter and the Steiner 2-8 a great rugged big game scope (albeit discontinued) All that said, in real world North American hunting almost any $500 or more scope will serve our needs just fine. Spend the big bucks on the binocs and spotting scope if you must prioritize as you'll spend a lot more time looking thru them. If you got the bucks then get that euro scope as you will be happy. |
|
Post Reply | Page <123> |
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 |