Print Page | Close Window

SWFA Scope Scale Discussion Thread

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=7452
Printed Date: March/19/2024 at 04:19
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: SWFA Scope Scale Discussion Thread
Posted By: Chris Farris
Subject: SWFA Scope Scale Discussion Thread
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 14:27

The scale below was formed by SWFA sales staff, customer service, pro-staff and owners using personal experience, customer input and facts supplied by the manufacturers.  The ranking system is based on the following criteria (in order of importance and weight).

 

1.  Optical Quality - How bright and clear the scope is.

2.  Specifications - Field of view, eye relief, weight, adjustment travel, etc.

3.  Durability - How do they with stand the test of time.

4.  Special Features & Options - Proprietary items (reticles, design, turrets), Zoom ratio.

5.  Warranty & Customer Service - How good are they.

6.  Value - Bang for your buck.

 

In order to maintain the scale's simplicity we are not listing every single manufacture and only major manufactures will have several of their brands listed.  This scale also does not have discontinued brands or products like the old U.S.A. made Redfields, Japan Tasco or Japan Simmons Aetec.

 

This scale will be kept current with changes that the manufacturers are making that affect their rank.  Many of the lower end companies have been bought and sold a lot recently and while the names have stayed the same......the product has not.

 

 

2007 Riflescope Rating Scale

 

10 - Swarovski Z6, Zeiss Victory

9 - Kahles C - CL & CSX, Schmidt & Bender

8 - Kahles KX, U.S. Optics, Swarovski PH & American, X.O.T.I.C.,  Zeiss Classic

7 - Leupold VX-7, Nightforce, IOR Valdada

6 - Bushnell Elite 4200, Nikon Monarch, Zeiss Conquest

5 - Leupold Mark 4 VX III & VX-L

4 - Burris Black Diamond Signature Select XTR & Euro Diamond, Meopta, Pentax Lightseeker, Sighton, Super Sniper, Trijicon, Weaver Grand Slam

3 - Bushnell Elite 3200, Leupold VX-II

2 -  Burris Fullfield II, Leupold Rifleman & VX-I, Millet, Mueller, Nikon Buckmaster, Simmons

1 - ATN, Barska, Leatherwood, Swift, Tasco

0 - BSA, Leapers, NcStar



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com



Replies:
Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 15:42

Looks like you have it nailed I would agree with all of them, it sure would be nice to see test like they do for camera lens with resolution etc.

 

Duce 



-------------
Duce


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 17:06
I agree with most of your rankings, and where I have small disagreements, it is arguable since customer service can differ for different individuals. 

Two things that, I think, I would change are the following:

1) I would move Burris FF2 a step up.  To me it is clearly better than the rest of the scopes you put at 2 points.

2) Weaver Grand Slam scope line seems to have deteriorated substantially in the last year or two.  I do not know if the manufacturing facility has changed, but the glass on several recent Grand Slams I have seen is not the same as it was three years ago.  Besides, I think Weaver's customer service is subpar (at least when I call to ask a question).

ILya


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 17:54

Damn, it's been awhile since I checked in to the rating scale but I have a few major disagreements - for posterity.

 

1.  Nightforce should move up 2 steps at least.

2.  Conquest and Moonarch don't belong in the same category.

3.  No Leupold I have seen/used/owned belonged anywhere near a Nightforce, much less higher on a rating scale.

 

 

All this is, of course, subject to person experience and "soft measure" observation.

 

I am a huge fan of Nightforce and US Optics; that neither scope is available here is a disappoint - I am sure for Chris as well as me and others - but if we are to rate only the scopes available for sale here, that's cool; but don't mark down a great scope for its distribution channels - it is a disservice to those genuinely looking for the best scope in a particular application.



-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 18:19

Thanks for posting the scale, Chris.  I agree with Rancid that NF should move up, but I'd probably move it up one step if it were me.  I think it's noticeably better than the others in it's ranking, both optically and mechanically.  I found it to pretty much be on par with IOR, maybe slightly behind IOR in twilight performance, but ahead of it in other categories.  I also agree with Koshkin that the Weaver Grand Slam doesn't impress me as being as good as it was 5 years ago and the Burris Fullfield seems about equivalent to the Elite 3200.  Otherwise, everything else seems pretty reasonable, though I might reverse a couple of the 9 & 10 ranked models around when illuminated model scopes are considered.  But, we all value different features for different reasons, so there will always be a lot of subjectivity involved.

 

Not trying to nitpick, but the Kahles C series didn't make the list.  Would expect to see it up there in the 8 or 9 range.

 

Thanks again for putting together the scale!

 



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Blackbird
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 18:45
I'm no optic expert, but I have to disagree with 2 scopes in particular vs. the Leupold Mark 4, and VX III. The Bushnell Elite 4200 has a BRIGHTER sight picture than the 2 mentioned Lupy's. But, 1. it has less adjustment of moa in elevation and windage. 2. It has less reticle choices than either Lupy. 3. I believe the warranty is for 1 year replacement on the 4200, vs. lifetime for the Lupy's. Everything above pertains to the Nikon Monarch, except I don't see the sight picture any brighter with the Monarch. (The resolution might be better) And now Nikon has the forever warranty. As far as durability, someone has to explain to me why an Elite 4200 & Monarch are more durable than a Mark 4, or VX III.


Posted By: army_eod
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 19:36

Chris

 

You the man.

 

Thx



-------------
Princes and governments are far more dangerous than other elements within society.

Niccolo Machiavelli


Posted By: Brander
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 20:48

Interesting.

 

IMO, Nightforce is better the Bushnell Elite 4200 and should be ranked above it.

 

Also, the Burris Black Diamond is better than the Weaver Grand Slam and at least as good as the Bushnell Elite 4200.



Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: August/07/2007 at 23:12

And a straight-up 0 for BSA?  They make fine boat anchors and dog toys, that should be worth a .25 or something.

 

Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but I own a 4200 and a few Conquest and like them allot, but neither begins to compete with my Nigthforce NXS.  The reticle is better, the adjustments are better, the glass is better ( though there is that turning ocular thing) and it warrants serious consideration for anything short of a full-on deployment weapon.

 

And for clarification, the 4200 has a 1-year "no questions" warranty in addition to a lifetime warranty - just in case someone thought the 1 year was all you get.  Now, having the warranty and honoring the warranty are very different.



-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 06:07
Originally posted by Blackbird Blackbird wrote:

I believe the warranty is for 1 year replacement on the 4200, vs. lifetime for the Lupy's.


The 4200 has a lifetime warranty just like leupold, the "no questions asked" one year warranty also offered with the 4200/3200 gives the owner the additional chance to return the 4200 in the first year and get their money refunded for any or no reason what so ever. I don't know of any such additional offer from leupold that compares to bushnell. I have actually used the no questions asked warranty on a 3200 elite and other than it taking about eight weeks to complete it worked exactly as stated.I wish all companies offered a one year "if you don't like the scope just send it back for a refund offer"............I would have sent the vari x lll that develped tracking issues back home instead of having it warranty repaired and then having to sell it to recoup my money.

Sorry....didn't see you already made that point RC.

 I will say that when this site rates or ranks scopes I tend to find it way more inline with my own personal experience than any other site. I'm sure Chris gets a much better look overall as to what brands are preforming to what level and the criteria is multi-fold so where a scope may test to one level with its optics it may preform below par in another area. I do agree meade is taking the grand slams down, and  I'm real anxious to see where the new monarchs fall in the ratings..........

     focus

   


-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 08:30

One interesting thing worthy of note that this scale highlights is what a truly exceptional value the Swarovski and Kahles 1" tube scopes represent if you're in the market for a high end scope.  The fact that the Kahles and Swaro 1" scopes are ranked right in there with the "big 3" 30mm scopes and the fact that "Swarovski PH and American" was lumped together as one category on the list validates the observations of many of us that optically, they are in the same league as the best 30mm scopes.  Their only real shortcoming is the fact they have 3X zoom rather than 4X zoom of their 30mm cousins.  No, they aren't inexpensive in absolute terms, but when considering the scopes they compete with optically, they are a bargain!

 



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: gman1332
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 08:57
In my opinion, the T-bone scale is a far more accurate representation of the true scale.  When inside sales reps start ranking scopes, the scale becomes skewed due to bias from being paid higher commissions by certian manufacturers and to the push money and incentives given to them to sell certain brand scopes over another.

-------------
gman1332


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 09:11

Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

In my opinion, the T-bone scale is a far more accurate representation of the true scale.  When inside sales reps start ranking scopes, the scale becomes skewed due to bias from being paid higher commissions by certian manufacturers and to the push money and incentives given to them to sell certain brand scopes over another.

 

gman, do you know this is true in this particular case?  A rather harsh accusation, don't you think?

 

Actually, this scale is reasonably close to the "T-bone" rankings, but different people's scales will likely be different, often dramatically so, since there's no way to do such rankings in an absolute, non-subjective way, especially when factors such as value, customer service, and product features are used.  No matter what scale anyone comes up with or what criteria one uses to base the scale on, some will disagree with it for one reason or another, even if the rankings were based on scientifically conducted testing of optical performance with instrumentation.



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: gman1332
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 11:53

Ted,

 

My opinion doesn't constitute an accusation.  It's just an opinion.  I've been a manufacturer's sales rep in 5 industries over the last 20 years and the same sales strategies are used in those five and so since I'm batting a 1000, I can make the inference that it's the same in the optics industry (one industry was digital cameras, a very close industry).  I agree with your statement though.  No one scale is absolute.  There are too many variables used in the equation and so no-one will come up with the same answer.  Everyone is an expert and everyone has an opinion, which is a good thing. Otherwise, this world would be a very boring place to live in.

 

So to answer your question, take for example the Bushnell 4200, which in my opinion is the best scope for the money in the industry.  This scope is listed in both tables as a model of a particular manufacturer.  Since most manufactures have a good, better, best type of line-up  in order to appeal to different income levels and needs, this "model" of Bushnell is listed.  However, Simmons, Millett, Meopta, Sightron just to name a few are listed by manufacturer name only, not by model.  

 

Such as the case with Meopta, being ranked 7.5 as a model in the t-bone scale and then a 4 as a manufacturer in the newest ranking.  Apparently, when customer support and others get involved in the process, Meopta is discounted 3 full levels.  This doesn't make sense.  I'm not trying to pick apart the ranking but it needs to be one or the other, models within a particular manufacturer or just the manufacturer rankings. Leupold is another great case in point.  Most of their models are listed and cluttering up the newest ranking and yet they are not cluttering up the t-bone ranking since models are being compared.  As a consumer, I would rather see the models listed and make my choice from that instead of just a manufacturer ranking.   I will stick with the t-bone scale since models are listed and this for me consitutes a true ranking scale.  More apples are compared with apples in the t-bone scale.  These are my observations backing up my statement.



-------------
gman1332


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 12:22
Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

Ted,

 

My opinion doesn't constitute an accusation.  It's just an opinion.  I've been a manufacturer's sales rep in 5 industries over the last 20 years and the same sales strategies are used in those five and so since I'm batting a 1000, I can make the inference that it's the same in the optics industry (one industry was digital cameras, a very close industry). 

 

I totally understand and in general agree with what you're saying about the validity of opinions where potential sales are involved.  I've had 4 different sales jobs and I also deal with sales reps nearly every day in my current job.  My point is that you don't know that SWFA is intentionally skewing the rankings to their benefit, and since they are our hosts who provide this forum for us, that's perhaps not the most prudent thing to openly say.  I've bought several optics from them on site and have found their dealings to be nothing but honorable, and they've never tried to sway my decision of one optic vs. another.  They are also entitled to their opinions as well, and may place heavier emphasis on certain criteria that you or I wouldn't weigh as heavily.



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 13:47

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

I agree with most of your rankings, and where I have small disagreements, it is arguable since customer service can differ for different individuals. 

Two things that, I think, I would change are the following:

1) I would move Burris FF2 a step up.  To me it is clearly better than the rest of the scopes you put at 2 points.

2) Weaver Grand Slam scope line seems to have deteriorated substantially in the last year or two.  I do not know if the manufacturing facility has changed, but the glass on several recent Grand Slams I have seen is not the same as it was three years ago.  Besides, I think Weaver's customer service is subpar (at least when I call to ask a question).

ILya

 

1) They used to be prior to The Beretta Group acquisition.  The current Philippine made models are not the same quality.  The half scale was not too popular so the ones that were in the half range had to go up or down.  The current Fullfield II is not as good as a 3200 and its not as bad as a Millet but it fits closer with the Rifleman and Buckmaster.  As we run into things like this we may consider bringing back the half scale.

 

2) Meade's acquisition of Weaver, Redfield and Simmons is responsible for what you have noticed.  I agree completely with you on their decline and bad customer service.  The scale has been adjusted.

 

 



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 14:03
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

Damn, it's been awhile since I checked in to the rating scale but I have a few major disagreements - for posterity.

 

1.  Nightforce should move up 2 steps at least.

2.  Conquest and Moonarch don't belong in the same category.

3.  No Leupold I have seen/used/owned belonged anywhere near a Nightforce, much less higher on a rating scale.

 

 

All this is, of course, subject to person experience and "soft measure" observation.

 

I am a huge fan of Nightforce and US Optics; that neither scope is available here is a disappoint - I am sure for Chris as well as me and others - but if we are to rate only the scopes available for sale here, that's cool; but don't mark down a great scope for its distribution channels - it is a disservice to those genuinely looking for the best scope in a particular application.

 

1. I agree NF should move up, but not to the Kahles / Swarovski level.  I moved them up one level.

2. This is the new 4x erector Monarch, totally different scope than the one it replaced.  They may end up above Conquest in a year or so.

3. Have you seen the VX-7 and compared it with a NF?

 

As you noted yourself, you are a huge NF fan and rooting for the home team....so to speak.  They have a fine scope, their line is not very deep, the illumination is not as good as their competition and their custom service is notorious for not be easy to work with.

 

We are not just rating scopes that we sell and definately not downgrading any that we don't sell.  This healthy discussion is precisely why I started this thread.  Thanks for the input Koshkin and R.C.

 

I added USO too.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 14:18

Just trying to help.



-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 14:27
Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

I agree with most of your rankings, and where I have small disagreements, it is arguable since customer service can differ for different individuals. 

Two things that, I think, I would change are the following:

1) I would move Burris FF2 a step up.  To me it is clearly better than the rest of the scopes you put at 2 points.

2) Weaver Grand Slam scope line seems to have deteriorated substantially in the last year or two.  I do not know if the manufacturing facility has changed, but the glass on several recent Grand Slams I have seen is not the same as it was three years ago.  Besides, I think Weaver's customer service is subpar (at least when I call to ask a question).

ILya

 

1) They used to be prior to The Beretta Group acquisition.  The current Philippine made models are not the same quality.  The half scale was not too popular so the ones that were in the half range had to go up or down.  The current Fullfield II is not as good as a 3200 and its not as bad as a Millet but it fits closer with the Rifleman and Buckmaster.  As we run into things like this we may consider bringing back the half scale.

 

2) Meade's acquisition of Weaver, Redfield and Simmons is responsible for what you have noticed.  I agree completely with you on their decline and bad customer service.  The scale has been adjusted.

 

 



That is interesting about FF2.  I have seen several scopes made very soon after the move to Phillipines, and they seemed to be at about the same quality level as Colorado made ones, but the quality may very well have gone downhill since then.

The Grand Slam has been a disappointment to me lately, since the new production scopes seem to be very bright, but less clear, resulting in bright, but washed out images.  While I think you have the Grand Slam in the right spot for now, if these problems persist it may have to move down another step.

Another comment on Nightforce et al: of the three scopes you have there (VX-7, Nightforce, and IOR), I have little experience with VX-7, but quite a bit of hands on time with IOR and Nightforce.  Between those two, optically IOR is better (measurable advantage in resolution).  Mechanically, both are very good, although IOR is still hampered by some past problems which I think are a thing of the past. Same for the customer service: IOR customer service has improved vastly.  I've had a fair amount of interaction with Val and Scott and they have been very helpful.  I have had less interaction with Nightforce customer service, but I do not have any complaints about it.

One thing that I do see though is that IOR is very open to change and to new products, and they seem willing and able to listen to the market place when designing new products.  In the future, I fully expect IOR to move up the foodchain (which they are already doing with their tactical scopes).

Nightforce, I think, has a nice niche with competition shooters, but I do not know if it will be easy for them to become a major player in other markets.

Both IOR and Nightforce need to redesign their reticle illumination.

VX-7 I have only seen briefly, so time will tell, but from what I have seen, it is a very good scope that is priced too high.  It would be very competitive if it was priced about 30% lower.  As it is I do not expect to buy one until Leupold realizes that they messed up and we start getting various "one time 40% off deals" and such.  Also, 34mm tube in a hunting scope is a mistake, I think.  They should have come out with 30mm hunting sopes and 34mm tactical scopes.  Time will tell, of course.

ILya


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 14:30
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Thanks for posting the scale, Chris.  I agree with Rancid that NF should move up, but I'd probably move it up one step if it were me.  ................ I also agree with Koshkin that the Weaver Grand Slam doesn't impress me as being as good as it was 5 years ago and the Burris Fullfield seems about equivalent to the Elite 3200. ........................

 

Not trying to nitpick, but the Kahles C series didn't make the list.  Would expect to see it up there in the 8 or 9 range.

 

Thanks again for putting together the scale!

 

 

Moved Up NF one, Weaver Grand Slam down one, left FFII alone for now.

 

The Kahles C is the same as the CS, CL, CSX, KX and CBX optically.  The CL and KX are their flagship models and why they are listed.  It goes back to not wanting to dilute the scale with too many makes and models.  I'll include the C and CSX along side the CL.  The CSX is very innovative and has the best illumination system hands down, so it deserves to be up there too.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 14:49

Originally posted by Blackbird Blackbird wrote:

I'm no optic expert, but I have to disagree with 2 scopes in particular vs. the Leupold Mark 4, and VX III. The Bushnell Elite 4200 has a BRIGHTER sight picture than the 2 mentioned Lupy's. But, 1. it has less adjustment of moa in elevation and windage. 2. It has less reticle choices than either Lupy. 3. I believe the warranty is for 1 year replacement on the 4200, vs. lifetime for the Lupy's. Everything above pertains to the Nikon Monarch, except I don't see the sight picture any brighter with the Monarch. (The resolution might be better) And now Nikon has the forever warranty. As far as durability, someone has to explain to me why an Elite 4200 & Monarch are more durable than a Mark 4, or VX III.

 

I don't really know how to reply to your inquires because I don't completely follow what you are saying.  Are you disputing that the 4200 is brighter or agreeing?  The 4200 is easily brighter and shaper than the Leupold.  It is the fact that Leupold has so many options that got the Mark 4 and VX-III to the level they are on the list as well as their industry setting customer service. The Monarch listed on the scale is the new Monarch.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 15:53

Originally posted by Focus Focus wrote:

...................... I will say that when this site rates or ranks scopes I tend to find it way more inline with my own personal experience than any other site. 


     focus

 

Most people do and its because we don't pull any punches and don't have a hidden agenda......we call a spade a spade.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 15:56
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

One interesting thing worthy of note that this scale highlights is what a truly exceptional value the Swarovski and Kahles 1" tube scopes represent if you're in the market for a high end scope.  The fact that the Kahles and Swaro 1" scopes are ranked right in there with the "big 3" 30mm scopes and the fact that "Swarovski PH and American" was lumped together as one category on the list validates the observations of many of us that optically, they are in the same league as the best 30mm scopes.  Their only real shortcoming is the fact they have 3X zoom rather than 4X zoom of their 30mm cousins.  No, they aren't inexpensive in absolute terms, but when considering the scopes they compete with optically, they are a bargain!

 

 

The 1" Swarovski and 30mm PH use the exact same glass and coatings, the 1" are assembled here which is less expensive and there is no duty (18-20%) because only parts are imported.....this is why they are such a value FYI.  Same for the Kahles.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 16:28

Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

In my opinion, the T-bone scale is a far more accurate representation of the true scale.  When inside sales reps start ranking scopes, the scale becomes skewed due to bias from being paid higher commissions by certian manufacturers and to the push money and incentives given to them to sell certain brand scopes over another.

 

Here is the T-Bone scale that he created:

10 - Zeiss VM/V, Swarovski PH, Schmidt & Bender

    9  - Swarovski PH, Schmidt & Bender

    8  - Swarovski A-Line

    7  - Zeiss Conquest, Kahles

    6  - Leupold VX III

    5  -Leupold Vari-X III

    4  -

    3  -

    2  -

    1  - BSA

 

 

I took his idea and turned it into this on my own back in 2005:

tbone rating scale 

 

   10 - Zeiss VM/V, Swarovski PH, Schmidt & Bender

    9  - Swarovski PH, Swarovski A-Line, Schmidt & Bender

    8  - Swarovski A-Line, Kahles, IOR

    7  - Zeiss Conquest, Kahles, Elite 4200, IOR

    6  - Leupold VX III, Weaver Grand Slam, Nikon Monarch, Bushnell Elite 4200, Burris Euro & Black Diamond

    5  - Leupold Vari-X III, Weaver Grand Slam, Nikon Monarch, Burris Signature Select

    4  - Burris Fullfield II, Bushnell Elite 3200, Simmons AETEC, Leupold VX-II, Nikon Buckmaster

    3  - Simmons, Redfield, Rifleman, Leupold VX-I, Nikon Buckmaster

    2  - Simmons, BSA, Tasco

    1  - BSA, Tasco

 

The evolution of the t-bone scale was done exclusively by our sales staff, owners, customer service and senior OT members and here it is.

 

2007 T-Bone Riflescope Optical Rating Scale

 

10 - Swarovski Z6, Zeiss Victory

9.5 - Kahles CL MultiZero

9 - Schmidt & Bender, Swarovski PH & American, Zeiss Classic

8.5 - X.O.T.I.C.

8 - Kahles KX

7.5 - Zeiss Conquest

7 - Leupold VX-7, IOR Valdada

6.5 - Bushnell Elite 4200, Nightforce, Nikon Monarch

6 - Leupold Mark 4 VX III & VX-L, Weaver Grand Slam

5.5 - Burris Black Diamond XTR & Euro

5 - Burris Signature Select, Meopta, Pentax Lightseeker, Super Sniper, Trijicon

4.5 - Sightron

4 - Bushnell Elite 3200, Leupold VX-II, Simmons Aetec (pre-Meade)

3.5 - Nikon Buckmaster

3 -  Burris Fullfield II, Leupold Rifleman & VX-I, Millet, Mueller, Redfield USA

2.5 - Leatherwood, Simmons, Swift

2 - ATN, Tasco

1.5 - Barska, Leapers

1 - BSA, NcStar

 

So it's kind of amusing when you say, "In my opinion, the T-bone scale is a far more accurate representation of the true scale."

 

You're other comments are not even worthy of a response.  You obviously don't know much about me or my company Mr. Lindsay.  You are new here and started off with zero

-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com



Posted By: SAKO75
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 16:36
chris

i called swarovski in rhode island today and they told me thay even though they own kahles, they are the "2nd-tier" line. they also told me that getting kahles to service something in a timely manner was hard to do because they dont work on any kahles stuff in the USA. it all has to go back to austria. her quote was that it could take "months" for a repair. that really dissuaded me from kahles especially coming from their sister company. have you heard different regarding kahels????


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 16:46
Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

................ I've been a manufacturer's sales rep in 5 industries over the last 20 years ..............

 

That pretty much says it all.

 

 

Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

So to answer your question, take for example the Bushnell 4200, which in my opinion is the best scope for the money in the industry.  This scope is listed in both tables as a model of a particular manufacturer.  Since most manufactures have a good, better, best type of line-up  in order to appeal to different income levels and needs, this "model" of Bushnell is listed.  However, Simmons, Millett, Meopta, Sightron just to name a few are listed by manufacturer name only, not by model. 

 

Like I stated in the first post, we do not want to dilute the scale with every model from every mfg.  Bushnell is unique in the fact that they offer the low end crap all the way up to the Elite 4200 series.  As most people are not concerned where the Sportview ranks....we left it off.  The other brands you mention like Simmons, Millet and Meopta pretty much just have one level.  Sightron is a relatively new company that we did not feel was worthy of having all its brands listed at this time as to not dilute the scale.

 

Originally posted by gman1332 gman1332 wrote:

Such as the case with Meopta, being ranked 7.5 as a model in the t-bone scale and then a 4 as a manufacturer in the newest ranking.  Apparently, when customer support and others get involved in the process, Meopta is discounted 3 full levels.  This doesn't make sense.  I'm not trying to pick apart the ranking but it needs to be one or the other, models within a particular manufacturer or just the manufacturer rankings. Leupold is another great case in point.  Most of their models are listed and cluttering up the newest ranking and yet they are not cluttering up the t-bone ranking since models are being compared.  As a consumer, I would rather see the models listed and make my choice from that instead of just a manufacturer ranking.   I will stick with the t-bone scale since models are listed and this for me consitutes a true ranking scale.  More apples are compared with apples in the t-bone scale.  These are my observations backing up my statement.

 

I'm the one that put Meopta on the t-bone scale as well as just about every other scope on there.  I put it at a 5.  Koshkin put the Meostar at a 7.5 on his.  You are getting confused probably because there is no one single t-bone scale accept for the one he originally made after looking at six different scopes.  Perhaps we should not have kept calling our scale on his thread a T-bone scale........this is another reason as to why I move my scale off his thread and when I did I dropped the .5 numbers and added a 0 to give the scale one more position of seperation that it needed in the middle range and this caused Meopta to go to the 4 position.  Have you ever dealt with Meopta????



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 16:55
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

 

............... I've had 4 different sales jobs and I also deal with sales reps nearly every day in my current job.  My point is that you don't know that SWFA is intentionally skewing the rankings to their benefit, and since they are our hosts who provide this forum for us, that's perhaps not the most prudent thing to openly say.  I've bought several optics from them on site and have found their dealings to be nothing but honorable, and they've never tried to sway my decision of one optic vs. another.  They are also entitled to their opinions as well, and may place heavier emphasis on certain criteria that you or I wouldn't weigh as heavily.

 

I deal with mfg. reps (check cashers is what I call them) every day too and would never allow any of them to have anything to do with my business much less have any input on this scale.  For the most part they have only one interest in mind and it isn't mine.  We don't have sales reps working here, we are a small family owned and operated business....when you call you are speaking with family or life long friends (some have been here 20 years and one has been working for us longer than I've been alive).  So to mention us in the same breath as a sales rep is an insult to me.  Apologies to any sales reps this may offend as there are exceptions.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 17:01

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:


VX-7 I have only seen briefly, so time will tell, but from what I have seen, it is a very good scope that is priced too high.  It would be very competitive if it was priced about 30% lower.  As it is I do not expect to buy one until Leupold realizes that they messed up and we start getting various "one time 40% off deals" and such.  Also, 34mm tube in a hunting scope is a mistake, I think.  They should have come out with 30mm hunting sopes and 34mm tactical scopes.  Time will tell, of course.

ILya

 

Don't hold your breath ILya!

 

Only the VX-7L models are 34mm and they all have 50 or 56mm objectives which already makes them pretty heavy.  These are marketed more toward the long range bench / varmint crowd.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 17:19

Originally posted by SAKO75 SAKO75 wrote:

chris

i called swarovski in rhode island today and they told me thay even though they own kahles, they are the "2nd-tier" line. they also told me that getting kahles to service something in a timely manner was hard to do because they dont work on any kahles stuff in the USA. it all has to go back to austria. her quote was that it could take "months" for a repair. that really dissuaded me from kahles especially coming from their sister company. have you heard different regarding kahels????

 

This could be another thread all to its own.  Conact Kahles in Austria and tell them what S.O.N.A. said.  I've covered their history in detail many times on OT (hit the search).  The Reader's Digest version is:

 

Kahles is the world's oldest scope maker dating back to 1898, they even had the first CNC machine in Austria.  When the last family member was on his death bed with no heirs he approached Swarovski to see if they would purchase his company and keep it going (they had some employees that had been there over 50 years).  Swarovski agreed.  At that time Swarovski did not have a scope, so they re-branded the Kahles line and as Kahles would turn out new ideas and products Swarovski would put their name on them and Kahles' name on the previous years product.  Kahles has always been the blood, sweat and tears behind what people assumed was the Swarovski scope.  Swarovski is a marketing machine much like Leupold but they went too far one year and attempted to market the Kahles line (when it was new to the U.S. market) in their ads like this:

Kahles

A division of Swarovski

This was the ultimate slap in the face insult to Kahles.  Kahles demanded that it be stopped and suggested that Swarovski should market themselves as a division of Kahles.  The family feud carried on and on for years until finally Kahles reached their boiling point and stopped sharing technologies with Swarovski.  They worked secretly behind the scenes on all of the current Kahles products and waited to release them until they had a clear separation agreement in writing.  Once that day finally came, Kahles launched the CSX illumination which is the most advanced illumination technology in the world, they followed up with the Multi-Zero and the CL line and now the KX.  The current Kahles out performs the PH and American series but you they have a hard time convincing the public of this because of budget constraints.  Swarovski has the crystal side backing them.

 

To say there is a bitter rivalry between the two companies would be an understatement at this point.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: SAKO75
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 17:29
thanks,
 I guess my question now would be what have you heard or seen from kahles in regards to their service in support? If they have been around a long time, they must have some kind of record of service....

the nitwit answering the phone at Kahles for customer service is nice but doesnt know her product... she didnt comfort the potential buyer (me) and kind of inferred they were a low cost "almost" equal option to swarovski!

Do you think they are as good or better?


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 17:39
Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:


VX-7 I have only seen briefly, so time will tell, but from what I have seen, it is a very good scope that is priced too high.  It would be very competitive if it was priced about 30% lower.  As it is I do not expect to buy one until Leupold realizes that they messed up and we start getting various "one time 40% off deals" and such.  Also, 34mm tube in a hunting scope is a mistake, I think.  They should have come out with 30mm hunting sopes and 34mm tactical scopes.  Time will tell, of course.

ILya

 

Don't hold your breath ILya!

 

Only the VX-7L models are 34mm and they all have 50 or 56mm objectives which already makes them pretty heavy.  These are marketed more toward the long range bench / varmint crowd.



Thanks for the tip, Chris.

I am most certainly not going to hold my breath waiting for anything for Leupold to lower prices (I would need lung capacity of a whale for that).  I just do not think Leupold will do well with their current VX-7 pricing.

As for the VX-7L models, I find them absolutely baffling.  Long range bench/varmint crowd, in my experience, is perfectly comfortable mounting the scope a little higher, so the cutout at the bottom of the objective lens does not make much sense.  The stocks used for this type of shooting are, I think, set up differently and higher scope mounting is not a problem.  As for the need for a 34mm tube, as I have said in the past, I can see the need for extra rugged tubes and additional real estate for overbuilt mechanicals in tactical scopes, but not in these.  As an update to the Mark 4 line, 34mm tubes would work fine.

On Leupold's website, they claim that 34mm tube allows for more adjustment range (which is true), but I could not find any specs for the VX-7L scopes.

ILya


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 18:34
Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

 

............... I've had 4 different sales jobs and I also deal with sales reps nearly every day in my current job.  My point is that you don't know that SWFA is intentionally skewing the rankings to their benefit, and since they are our hosts who provide this forum for us, that's perhaps not the most prudent thing to openly say.  I've bought several optics from them on site and have found their dealings to be nothing but honorable, and they've never tried to sway my decision of one optic vs. another.  They are also entitled to their opinions as well, and may place heavier emphasis on certain criteria that you or I wouldn't weigh as heavily.

 

I deal with mfg. reps (check cashers is what I call them) every day too and would never allow any of them to have anything to do with my business much less have any input on this scale.  For the most part they have only one interest in mind and it isn't mine.  We don't have sales reps working here, we are a small family owned and operated business....when you call you are speaking with family or life long friends (some have been here 20 years and one has been working for us longer than I've been alive).  So to mention us in the same breath as a sales rep is an insult to me.  Apologies to any sales reps this may offend as there are exceptions.

 

Chris,

I was defending your company in my posts.  My reference to "sales reps" was in response to gman's post, where he talked about salespeople in general.  I'm very familiar with your business, since I've dropped off several thousand dollars in the past few months alone behind the little door with the scope reticle logo on it -- so much so that I've had you change my email contact to my work address so my wife isn't constantly reminded of my purchases!  I also purchased several optics from you when you were operating behind the house in De Soto.  I've also referred several people to you, all of which ended up buying optics from you.  Please don't confuse my comments with gman's.



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 18:42
Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

...the 1" are assembled here which is less expensive and there is no duty (18-20%) because only parts are imported.....this is why they are such a value FYI.  Same for the Kahles.

 

Has something recently changed in this regard?  My Swaro AV scopes say "Made in Austria" on them and their magazine ads and owners manuals say all their scopes and binos are manufactured entirely in Absam, Austria.  The same goes for Kahles.  I have 2 AH series scopes, both of which also have "Made in Austria" labels on them and one of their people in Vienna told me in an email inquiry that their 1" scopes are made in Austria as well.  Zeiss Conquest scopes have parts made in Germany, with assembly in the US, and they are labeled Made in USA.

 

Also, I keep hearing that Swarovski and Kahles parted ways, yet when I recently sent a Kahles binocular in to get the rubber armoring replaced, I was instructed to send it to, and the repairs were done by, S.O.N.A.  Kahles US customer service center still has the same address as S.O.N.A., 1 Slater Rd, Cranston, RI.  I realize they have separate manufacturing locations, but their US service center is still in the same location.  What's up with that?

 



-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Blackbird
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 19:31
Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

Originally posted by Blackbird Blackbird wrote:

I'm no optic expert, but I have to disagree with 2 scopes in particular vs. the Leupold Mark 4, and VX III. The Bushnell Elite 4200 has a BRIGHTER sight picture than the 2 mentioned Lupy's. But, 1. it has less adjustment of moa in elevation and windage. 2. It has less reticle choices than either Lupy. 3. I believe the warranty is for 1 year replacement on the 4200, vs. lifetime for the Lupy's. Everything above pertains to the Nikon Monarch, except I don't see the sight picture any brighter with the Monarch. (The resolution might be better) And now Nikon has the forever warranty. As far as durability, someone has to explain to me why an Elite 4200 & Monarch are more durable than a Mark 4, or VX III.

 

I don't really know how to reply to your inquires because I don't completely follow what you are saying.  Are you disputing that the 4200 is brighter or agreeing?  The 4200 is easily brighter and shaper than the Leupold.  It is the fact that Leupold has so many options that got the Mark 4 and VX-III to the level they are on the list as well as their industry setting customer service. The Monarch listed on the scale is the new Monarch.

 

I am agreeing that the 4200 is brighter, but to my eyes it isn't any sharper than a Mark 4 8.5-25X 50mm. LR/T,  or a VX III 8.5-25X 50mm. LRT.  And the older Monarch that I had, (5.5-16X ?) didn't seem any brighter or clearer (to me) than my VX III 8.5-25X 50mm. LRT. Maybe what I'm trying to say is, I feel the Leupold Mark 4 and VX III LRT models have more "positives" going for them than the 4200 or the "older" Monarch on the scale rating chart. But then again, I am looking at this from a 1000 yard target shooters point of view, where Leupold LRT and Nightforce scopes dominate. I, by no means, have any optical credentials, and I didn't write this to piss anyone off, its just 1 mans opinion. 



Posted By: bigant
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 19:51

Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

   

1. I agree NF should move up, but not to the Kahles / Swarovski level.  I moved them up one level.

2. This is the new 4x erector Monarch, totally different scope than the one it replaced.  They may end up above Conquest in a year or so.

3. Have you seen the VX-7 and compared it with a NF?

 

As you noted yourself, you are a huge NF fan and rooting for the home team....so to speak.  They have a fine scope, their line is not very deep, the illumination is not as good as their competition and their custom service is notorious for not be easy to work with.

 

We are not just rating scopes that we sell and definately not downgrading any that we don't sell.  This healthy discussion is precisely why I started this thread.  Thanks for the input Koshkin and R.C.

 

I added USO too.

 

Why would it take a year or so for the New Monarch to overtake the Conquest?  Is that due to it being new and needs to be in everyones hands for a period of time?  However, I'm reading between the lines and the New Monarch is above the Conquest, but needs to be on the market for one to be able to make that statement.

 

Also I have heard horror stories about Nikons CS, so is that going to change?

 

Ps. Been reading for awhile, and decided to take part in this great forum.

 

Ant



Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/08/2007 at 20:21
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

 

Chris,

I was defending your company in my posts.  ..................  Please don't confuse my comments with gman's.

 

 

I know RifleDude, my post was referring to gman's comments.  Sorry if that was not clear .



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 05:35

  

Quote

 

Why would it take a year or so for the New Monarch to overtake the Conquest?  Is that due to it being new and needs to be in everyones hands for a period of time?  However, I'm reading between the lines and the New Monarch is above the Conquest, but needs to be on the market for one to be able to make that statement.

 

Also I have heard horror stories about Nikons CS, so is that going to change?



Are the new monarchs out and being evaluated yet? Are you just expecting them to hang with the conquest optically or will the higher rating be the improved eye relief, constant eye relief, and 4fold power increase? I'm real curious about just where the monarch will place optically compared to the conquest. Perhaps I'm rushing the process if they aren't even available for comparing yet in asking these questions. Has anybody actually seen and looked thru one?

     focus

 



-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: bigant
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 09:00

The new Monarchs are available....From what I have read about the new Monarchs and what SWFA has listed on  there website discribing the new Monarchs, plus I know of one dist that has some of the Morach X's, the 1" Monarchs instock.

 

Ant



Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 15:47

I was doing some shooting last enening and I had both my Millett TRS-1 and the Burris FF2 with me so I did a little comparing and the Millett was brighter and had better resolution at distance. I recieved the FF2 as a gift last year and it is one of the newer ones. This was just my observation and I was a little suprised what I saw. Has anyone else had similiar findings? I was disappointed the FF2 did not do better since most of the post indicate it above the Millett TRS

 

Thanks  for posting the scale Chris

 

Duce



-------------
Duce


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 16:19

Originally posted by SAKO75 SAKO75 wrote:

thanks,
 I guess my question now would be what have you heard or seen from kahles in regards to their service in support? If they have been around a long time, they must have some kind of record of service....

the nitwit answering the phone at Kahles for customer service is nice but doesnt know her product... she didnt comfort the potential buyer (me) and kind of inferred they were a low cost "almost" equal option to swarovski!

Do you think they are as good or better?

 

To be honest I don't recall ever having to send in a Kahles for service.

 

Kahles is still owned by Swarovski, so they use the same facility in Rhode Island to land, distribute and service both product lines.  You are not the only one that has not had a positive experience when contacting Swarovski of North America (SONA).  They seem to have an elitist attitude and can be short with you at times (I think it's just because they're Yankees ).

 

I think when you compare apples to apples that Kahles offers a better product.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 16:38
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Originally posted by Chris Farris Chris Farris wrote:

...the 1" are assembled here which is less expensive and there is no duty (18-20%) because only parts are imported.....this is why they are such a value FYI.  Same for the Kahles.

 

Has something recently changed in this regard?  My Swaro AV scopes say "Made in Austria" on them and their magazine ads and owners manuals say all their scopes and binos are manufactured entirely in Absam, Austria.  The same goes for Kahles.  I have 2 AH series scopes, both of which also have "Made in Austria" labels on them and one of their people in Vienna told me in an email inquiry that their 1" scopes are made in Austria as well.  Zeiss Conquest scopes have parts made in Germany, with assembly in the US, and they are labeled Made in USA.

 

Also, I keep hearing that Swarovski and Kahles parted ways, yet when I recently sent a Kahles binocular in to get the rubber armoring replaced, I was instructed to send it to, and the repairs were done by, S.O.N.A.  Kahles US customer service center still has the same address as S.O.N.A., 1 Slater Rd, Cranston, RI.  I realize they have separate manufacturing locations, but their US service center is still in the same location.  What's up with that?

 

 

I don't know exactly how the law reads in regards to marking products Made in USA, vs. Made in Where-ever but it is my understanding that if a certain percentage of the work is done here you can legally claim, Made in the USA but I don't know if you have to claim that.  In other words it would be beneficial for a company that has it's products made i n Mexico to do some of the work here so they can claim Made in the USA.  It is much more prestigious to say Made in Austria or Made in Germany than it is to say Made in the USA.  The fact that the scopes are put together may not be something that Swarovski and or Kahles really want you to know.

 

Swarovski and Kahles parted ways as far as sharing technologies, Kahles is still owned by Swarovski Optik and they will continue to use the same physical address for landing, distributing, assembling and repairing products most likely because it would not be financially beneficial to build and operate two locations in the U.S.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 17:18

Originally posted by bigant bigant wrote:

Why would it take a year or so for the New Monarch to overtake the Conquest?  Is that due to it being new and needs to be in everyones hands for a period of time?  However, I'm reading between the lines and the New Monarch is above the Conquest, but needs to be on the market for one to be able to make that statement.

 

Also I have heard horror stories about Nikons CS, so is that going to change?

 

Ps. Been reading for awhile, and decided to take part in this great forum.

 

Ant

 

It needs to be on the market for a while to see how well they hold up.  We already know how they compare optically and spec wise.

 

Nikon does have very bad customer service and has for a long time.  Once the new Monarchs starting landing in late September we'll start testing their customer service at the same time we are testing the product so that we can position them correctly.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 17:22
Originally posted by Focus Focus wrote:

Are the new monarchs out and being evaluated yet? Are you just expecting them to hang with the conquest optically or will the higher rating be the improved eye relief, constant eye relief, and 4fold power increase? I'm real curious about just where the monarch will place optically compared to the conquest. Perhaps I'm rushing the process if they aren't even available for comparing yet in asking these questions. Has anybody actually seen and looked thru one?

     focus

 

 

They will not be available to the public until late September.  We've played with pre-production models for a while and the specs are in print, I bumped them up primarily for the reasons you noted.



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 17:24
Originally posted by bigant bigant wrote:

The new Monarchs are available....From what I have read about the new Monarchs and what SWFA has listed on  there website discribing the new Monarchs, plus I know of one dist that has some of the Morach X's, the 1" Monarchs instock.

 

Ant

 

The new Monarch X scopes are available but they are really a different animal, the new 4x erector Monarchs are not available yet.

 

You can see some of the info about them at http://www.TheNewMonarch.com - www.TheNewMonarch.com



-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 19:20
Thank you for the info Chris.

   focus


-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: SAKO75
Date Posted: August/09/2007 at 19:32
Yes thanks and by the way, I agree with you on the "yankees" comment......

Stars and Bars forever


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: August/10/2007 at 08:58

6 - Bushnell Elite 4200, Nikon Monarch, Zeiss Conquest

5 - Leupold Mark 4 VX III & VX-L

 

HMMM

I think I would have to rate these all on the same line or at least carry the Zeiss conquest on line 6 and drop the 4200 and Monarch to line 5. My reasons are several among which is a sore spot on the top of my nose from a new Bushnell 4200 4-16x40 that I couldnt get to shoot a decent group at 100 yds  on a 30-06 pro hunter Encore yesterday. Great glass but I could have used a tad more eye relief ouch. I think that the amount of internal adjustment on the Leupold models is surperior to many other scopes and they come in a staggering array of styles including reticle patterns that make a significant difference. The last two Nikons I bought both went back but I have had very VERY little trouble with my Leupolds. Yes they are over priced so is most anything that says made in the U.S. but a hit with a Leupold because the reticle gave you a known hold over point beats a miss with a Kahles $$ that gives you a great view of bambi running away. There really is more than just glass to consider. I am deciding on a tactical scope right now and I really would like to go with a U.S. Optics, Hensold, S&B, but three grand is out of my range  Nightforce would be a possibility but cant trade into one here, IOR would be a posibility but Badger doesnt make 35mm rings so that leaves LEUPOLD  doesnt it.



-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Trinidad
Date Posted: August/10/2007 at 11:33

The IOR 35MM is a much better scope and overall in a different class than the Mark 4 and better than the NF IMO,

forget the fact that it is available in a FFP even in the SFP it is better than the NF but in the same price bracket it also comes with free TPS 35MM rings. Here is the great Longbow308 who recently won his first match ever with his on a factory rifle.

 

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=7008 - http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=7008



Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: August/10/2007 at 13:52

I like the IOR glass but the rings I am not familiar with.  So far I am interested in two new models naturally neither of which is available.

LEUPOLD® MARK 4®
6.5-20x50mm LR/T® M1
FRONT FOCAL  http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/L248-008014_Mk4_LRT_FF_SS.pdf - http://www.leupold.com/_pdfs/L248-008014_Mk4_LRT_FF_SS.pdf

 

OR

 

http://www.swfa.com/pc-10162-292-new-ior-3-18x42-tactical-35mm-rifle-scope.aspx - 301848 http://www.swfa.com/pc-10162-292-new-ior-3-18x42-tactical-35mm-rifle-scope.aspx">New IOR 3-18x42 Tactical 35mm Rifle Scope                                                                               New IOR 3-18x42 Tactical 35mm Rifle Scope
  • Matte
  • MP-8
  • 30mm
  • Side Focus
  • First Focal Plain Reticle
  • Free IOR 35mm Medium Rings w/ Purchase
SWFA: $1,314.95



-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Trinidad
Date Posted: August/10/2007 at 13:58
Best of luck with your choice and set up. TPS rings are world class, there should be no worries there if you go with the IOR.


Posted By: Tip69
Date Posted: August/30/2007 at 13:15
Were we ever able to determine where the Grand Slam is being made now?

-------------
take em!


Posted By: VSLaika
Date Posted: February/08/2008 at 10:38
I feel it is wrong to put Kahles and Schmidt & Bender before Swarovski PH (or PV as they are named in Europe)PH is at better scope than S&B and Kahles in my opinion. Zeiss Classic is at least as good as Kahles and S&B perhaps even better.Many european tests indicates the same thing.  I'am not sure how good Swarovski Z6 is ,but I agree that Zeiss V should be at top. Except for one thing; the V model have a lot of problems "many" of them had to be sent back for repair. In  european hunting forums some people says they won't buy more Zeiss V just because of this even if the optics are better than any other scopes..
 
In some tests I have seen both Zeiss V , Zeiss Classic and Swarovski PH scored 10/10 points for use in twilight and darkness,even if Zeiss V and Classic had a little higher total score.  Kahles , S&B Klassik and Zenith all came behind the two top brands Zeiss and Swarovski


Posted By: catt_tracker
Date Posted: February/08/2008 at 12:08
Where would you place the Bushnell 6500 on your scale Chris?


Posted By: Handler
Date Posted: February/12/2008 at 16:25

I have a new Kahles ZF-84 6x42 that I mounted on a HK-91 with the HK Claw clamp and I am having trouble adjusting the elevation using my bore-siter, which is a lazer slip in the end of the barrel type.  When I pick up the dot it shows I am low and when I turn the top turret it will bring the the dot up but not all the way to the X.  What gives,\

 
Thanks,
K-9


-------------
Handler


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: February/12/2008 at 16:34
Originally posted by Handler Handler wrote:

I have a new Kahles ZF-84 6x42 that I mounted on a HK-91 with the HK Claw clamp and I am having trouble adjusting the elevation using my bore-siter, which is a lazer slip in the end of the barrel type.  When I pick up the dot it shows I am low and when I turn the top turret it will bring the the dot up but not all the way to the X.  What gives,\

 
Thanks,
K-9
not sure what that has to do with this thread maybe you should post this some where else, like start a new subject


-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: Dolphin
Date Posted: February/12/2008 at 18:53
Getting in late on this one.  Basically, it is a bunch of bullsh*t.  BSA with Leapers.  Trijicon below any Leupold scope made.  Burris FFII in the same group as the Leupold Rifleman scope, not to mention the Mueller and Swift scopes.  Sightron is easily the equal of the Bushnell 4200s.  A Swift in the same group as a Barska.  Let get real.  The ratings scale in pure bullsh*t and should be trashed.  I am not sure there should be a scale, unless it is based on some objective testing of, at least some type.  Obviously the Euro scopes are going to land on top.  Who is going to spend 100,000 dollars on a Mercedes Benz and complain about it.  Same goes with Euro scopes.  It is easy to find faults with a cheap scope and complain about them.  Same with a Kia, although, I would not buy one of those.  So, I would say, trash that scale and never post it again and lets replace it with one at least based on some objective data.

-------------
D. Overton


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: February/12/2008 at 19:04
Come on Dolphin.....how do you really feel :>) I agree there are some real out of place positions on some but I guess its just to give a general idea. I agree the big skys are the equal of 4200's but not the plain Sll's. I think the Fullfield ll is between the VX l and VX ll's. About like the 3200 elite. Nobodys gonna agree with all the ratings for sure. I've never used a Kia scope but believe they are poor on edge to edge clarity......

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: February/12/2008 at 19:40
one set up by koshkin would be great!

-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: Ed Connelly
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 05:20
I think Chris and SWFA should give one control group of, say...a thousand of us "testers" ...a Swarovski Z6, and then give the second control group a thousand Zeiss Victorys-- so we can wring them out in the field, and come to some Hard Data Conclusions.
 
You bet.  Smile


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 06:32
Oh......he didn't give you one to test Ed? Maybe next time around you'll get one too......:>) I hear they will sending some BSA's out soon.......

Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 08:18
you guys got z6's all i got was this crummy s&b 3x12.

-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: medic52
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 09:06
I consider the scale as information ONLY, I mean its like going to the Doctor and you tell him your in pain and he says on a scale of 1-10 with ten being the WORST PAIN in the world what is your number. We all have our own numbers for pain and scopes, so I appreciate the scale as a tool for information ONLY, NOT GOSPEL. I have learned so much from the people on this site that when I make a purchase its because of you, all of you that I buy in confidence that I am getting the BEST scope that I can afford for my hard earned dollars. I have 12 scoped rifles. All of them are scoped for a particular purpose and IMHO all of them are 10's. To me whats important is the product I BUY does its JOB and the company I deal with stands behind their product. 

-------------
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." G.K. Chesterton


Posted By: tahqua
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 09:22
Originally posted by medic52 medic52 wrote:

I consider the scale as information ONLY 
 
Excellent Nothing to get worked up about because it is for reference only. I still like the concept and agreed with the original, most. Like already pointed out, some of the updates seem to be off. Both on the upper and lower ends.
That's why we're all here.Yippee


Posted By: Dolphin
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 17:29
My Sightron SII is the easy equal to my 4200 in about the same power range.  Go Sightron.

-------------
D. Overton


Posted By: tahqua
Date Posted: February/13/2008 at 17:40
Yep, D, Sightron being one of those.


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 14:00
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

Getting in late on this one.  Basically, it is a bunch of bullsh*t.  BSA with Leapers.  Trijicon below any Leupold scope made.  Burris FFII in the same group as the Leupold Rifleman scope, not to mention the Mueller and Swift scopes.  Sightron is easily the equal of the Bushnell 4200s.  A Swift in the same group as a Barska.  Let get real.  The ratings scale in pure bullsh*t and should be trashed.  I am not sure there should be a scale, unless it is based on some objective testing of, at least some type.  Obviously the Euro scopes are going to land on top.  Who is going to spend 100,000 dollars on a Mercedes Benz and complain about it.  Same goes with Euro scopes.  It is easy to find faults with a cheap scope and complain about them.  Same with a Kia, although, I would not buy one of those.  So, I would say, trash that scale and never post it again and lets replace it with one at least based on some objective data.
 
I think you can find a better way to disagree with our scale.  Your blantent disrespect and profanities are not appreciated.
 
To make it easier for you I will republish some information from the first page because it appears you either chose to not read it or chose to ignore it.
 

------------------------------------------

The scale below was formed by SWFA sales staff, customer service, pro-staff and owners using personal experience, customer input and facts supplied by the manufacturers.  The ranking system is based on the following criteria (in order of importance and weight).

1.  Optical Quality - How bright and clear the scope is.

2.  Specifications - Field of view, eye relief, weight, adjustment travel, etc.

3.  Durability - How do they with stand the test of time.

4.  Special Features & Options - Proprietary items (reticles, design, turrets), Zoom ratio.

5.  Warranty & Customer Service - How good are they.

6.  Value - Bang for your buck.

In order to maintain the scale's simplicity we are not listing every single manufacture and only major manufactures will have several of their brands listed. 

-----------------------------------------------------

 

Although I don’t feel your post deserves a respectful reply, I will attempt to respond to your comments.

 

Yes  BSA with Leapers.  Leapers has made advancements over the last three years and not only expanded their optical offerings they have improved them (at least to BSA quality)….in the next few years they may be up to tasco quality.

 

The scale is heavily waited toward the field that rifle scopes are most widely used in, which is hunting not target shooting or tactical shooting.  Trijicon’s primary offering is a very simplistic prismatic fixed power tactical scope (ACOG).  These scopes are very purpose built and do not offer much more than a combat optics for AR based platforms.  If you look at the scale’s criteria you will see why Trijicon has been placed where they are, the scale is not based on one particular product offering or simply the optical performance, the ranking system is based on the following criteria (in order of importance and weight).

1.  Optical Quality - How bright and clear the scope is.

2.  Specifications - Field of view, eye relief, weight, adjustment travel, etc.

3.  Durability - How do they with stand the test of time.

4.  Special Features & Options - Proprietary items (reticles, design, turrets), Zoom ratio.

5.  Warranty & Customer Service - How good are they.

6.  Value - Bang for your buck.

Here is a key part that you may not have read about our scale.



Posted By: Sled2live
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 14:14
Sooooo.... after all of the adjustments to the 2007 scale.....Where do I find the latest 2008 version ?
Thanks
Scott


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 14:19
We are still compiling information for the updated scale.  Many of the new lines and new products have just started shipping and we have not had enough time to accumulate sufficient information, so instead of waiting I will update what I can now and edit the first page of this thread.  The main thread for this is here
http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8185 - http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8185
The thread above can not be posted on, so this thread will continue to be the thread used for discussions pertaining to adjustments to the scale.


-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com


Posted By: 357mag
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 15:19
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

Getting in late on this one.  Basically, it is a bunch of bullsh*t.  BSA with Leapers.  Trijicon below any Leupold scope made.  Burris FFII in the same group as the Leupold Rifleman scope, not to mention the Mueller and Swift scopes.  Sightron is easily the equal of the Bushnell 4200s.  A Swift in the same group as a Barska.  Let get real.  The ratings scale in pure bullsh*t and should be trashed.  I am not sure there should be a scale, unless it is based on some objective testing of, at least some type.  Obviously the Euro scopes are going to land on top.  Who is going to spend 100,000 dollars on a Mercedes Benz and complain about it.  Same goes with Euro scopes.  It is easy to find faults with a cheap scope and complain about them.  Same with a Kia, although, I would not buy one of those.  So, I would say, trash that scale and never post it again and lets replace it with one at least based on some objective data.
 
What a total and complete jerk. 

I don’t know what you do for a living or how many scopes you see daily or how much inside information you have about various optics and companies but I would greatly appreciate you posting your credentials Mr. Dolphin!



-------------
I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 16:18
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

Getting in late on this one.  Basically, it is a bunch of bullsh*t.  BSA with Leapers.  Trijicon below any Leupold scope made.  Burris FFII in the same group as the Leupold Rifleman scope, not to mention the Mueller and Swift scopes.  Sightron is easily the equal of the Bushnell 4200s.  A Swift in the same group as a Barska.  Let get real.  The ratings scale in pure bullsh*t and should be trashed.  I am not sure there should be a scale, unless it is based on some objective testing of, at least some type.  Obviously the Euro scopes are going to land on top.  Who is going to spend 100,000 dollars on a Mercedes Benz and complain about it.  Same goes with Euro scopes.  It is easy to find faults with a cheap scope and complain about them.  Same with a Kia, although, I would not buy one of those.  So, I would say, trash that scale and never post it again and lets replace it with one at least based on some objective data.


Now that has go to be one of the rudest posts I have seen here lately.  You could not find a more civilized way to disagree?

While I do not entirely agree with this scale, I think it is generally more accurate that your take on scopes. 

Before you go off on another bout of trash-talking, consider how many scopes SWFA folks look at each year.  Before you discard their opinion it may worth your while to double check your own.

As for justifying your purchases, are you sure that your recent love affair with Trijicon Accupoint 2.5-10x56 is not a perfect example of your justifying a purchase of a fairly expensive scope?

ILya


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 16:33
You need to post an apology Dolphin using the same "zeal" you used to piss on this thread.
 
Not sure what or WHO Shocked has gotten inside your head lately, but your out of line.
 
 


Posted By: pyro6999
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 16:37
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

You need to post an apology Dolphin using the same "zeal" you used to piss on this thread.
 
Not sure what or WHO Shocked has gotten inside your head lately, but your out of line.
 
 
 
im not sure whats up, but i dont think i would have handled that in that manner either, if you protest something i think you could have said it in a better tone than you did, your better than that d!


-------------
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead"

343 we will never forget

God Bless Chris Ledoux
"good ride cowboy"


Posted By: cyborg
Date Posted: February/16/2008 at 21:19
WHAT THE ?..................HEY, Dolphin Brother calm down, There are as wass posted some adjustments that were in order and it was up to us to make those recommendations for the updates. Everyone is going to be somewhat partial to their favorite, I, and I am sure everyone else here will agree with that. Take it as information only, The scale isn't there, as a tool for insults.  

-------------
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other

An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects.

OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause.

Cyborg


Posted By: Dogger
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 08:25
He could have stated his objections in a more positive manner for sure, but was he banned because he did not print an apology or did he make further inflamatory statements?

-------------
God save the Empire!


Posted By: cyborg
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 08:34
I'm guessing that there was more to it than just what we read here.

-------------
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other

An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects.

OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause.

Cyborg


Posted By: tahqua
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 08:49
I think your right, Cyborg and I was too generous in my response.
 
 


Posted By: cyborg
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 09:31
No Doug I think you were right in what you have said. Just right, not too much and not too little...........Excellent

-------------
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other

An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects.

OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause.

Cyborg


Posted By: Brock_Brett
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 10:46
Getting in late on this one.  Basically, it is a bunch of bullsh*t.  BSA with Leapers.  Trijicon below any Leupold scope made.  Burris FFII in the same group as the Leupold Rifleman scope, not to mention the Mueller and Swift scopes.  Sightron is easily the equal of the Bushnell 4200s.  A Swift in the same group as a Barska.  Let get real.  The ratings scale in pure bullsh*t and should be trashed.  I am not sure there should be a scale, unless it is based on some objective testing of, at least some type.  Obviously the Euro scopes are going to land on top.  Who is going to spend 100,000 dollars on a Mercedes Benz and complain about it.  Same goes with Euro scopes.  It is easy to find faults with a cheap scope and complain about them.  Same with a Kia, although, I would not buy one of those.  So, I would say, trash that scale and never post it again and lets replace it with one at least based on some objective data.




Wow, that looks like a post that I would see at the 24 HCF, not here

Rob


Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: February/19/2008 at 11:01
We updated the scale....added some, expanded some brands, move many up and many down.  I am going to lock this thread and start a new one http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=9913&PID=83632#83632 - here to discuss the latest scale and what ya'll think needs to be added or moved around.
 
 


-------------
SWFA, Inc.
http://SWFA.com - SWFA.com
http://www.swfa-ss.com - SWFA-SS.com
http://www.mil-dot.com - Mil-Dot.com
http://www.samplelist.com - SampleList.com



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net