Do you consider warranty?

[guitarpreston]

Upgrading my binos and probably getting a secondhand pair. Started checking into warranty’s and some seem to be transferrable, some seem limited, and others (vortex maven etc) seem to be ridiculous. I get it, spending quite a bit on glass, take care of them. But stuff happens sometimes, they could fall out of your harness, etc and get a scratch on the lens and that may not be covered. So do you take that into consideration when buying?

 

[180ls1]

No.

You only insure/warranty against what you cannot afford to lose. Unless you'll lose sleep at night knowing you'll have to come out of pocket, but that's what an emergency fund is for.

 

[PathFinder]

No. The job of the optic is not to be replaced, it's to help find game.
Additionally, the perception of warranty policies is more a matter of how much companies lean on them for advertising. All of the major companies have excellent warranty policies now. Making that a major selling point may be the best thing Vortex has ever contributed to the market
I have no worries about Swaro taking care of things if something were to happen. And even if they didn't, I'd rather pay for another pair than get a pair of something else for free.

 

[dirtytough]

Yes and no.

I’m going to buy what I think is the best. If there are two brands that are a toss up I’m buying the one with the better warranty.

And even if there is a good warranty what good is it if the company can’t honor it. SWFA is a perfect example of that.

 

[Maverick1]

Considered it, yes. Depends on intended purpose and use. Pair of binoculars I KNOW I am going to beat the pi$$ out of in the backcountry and optical quality isn’t at the top of my priority list vs treestand hunting binocular pouch queens that will be babied. One I look at warranty, other I do not.

 

[MuleyFever]

No. I get the best tool for the job that I can afford.

 

[TaperPin]

Upgrading my binos and probably getting a secondhand pair. Started checking into warranty’s and some seem to be transferrable, some seem limited, and others (vortex maven etc) seem to be ridiculous. I get it, spending quite a bit on glass, take care of them. But stuff happens sometimes, they could fall out of your harness, etc and get a scratch on the lens and that may not be covered. So do you take that into consideration when buying?

And used there’s no guarantee the item wasn’t looked at by the factory and black balled as not repairable prior to you buying it, for something the dude before you fixed in his garage or kitchen table.

I look carefully for the slightest hint that the smallest thing is out of place and walk away quickly if need be. There is a large group of retired guys and dudes looking to make extra money, that actively look for damaged optics to fix with duct tape/super glue and flip. I have a scope and spotting scope that someone was inside and left apprentice marks behind - they both work, but aren’t worth anything except to flippers looking to screw people - others were much better than expected. It’s just the chance you take with used.

I still buy questionable optics regularly, but the price has to reflect the risk. A lot of auction stuff sells at prices that assume there is no risk, which makes no sense to me. You’re money ahead to buy from a dealer or someone believable who purchased it new even if it’s a little more expensive. The problem is most believable sellers are also lying. Lol

 

[hunt1up]

No. These no questions asked warranties are a marketing scam. Great, you'll send me a new pair or a new scope after it fails on my very important hunting trip. My scope won't hold zero and I can't hunt elk now, but at least I get a new one when I get home empty handed! Are Vortex or Leupold going to drive me out a new scope while I'm elk hunting and dial it in for me?

 

[RockAndSage]

No - I prioritize performance, and gear of a quality where I never need to return it for failures. At that level, they take care of you if a problem ever does come up. But generally speaking, optics companies that push warranties actually need it. Ones that don't, don't.

 

[Honyock]

No. Warranty is worthless when the scope craps out on a once in a lifetime opportunity. Vortex comes to mind. I think every person that I know that has used Vortex has had warranty work done. If the selling point is the warranty, I'm out.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

No.

 

[bombhunter]

Yes and no.

The scope on my rifle is an aiming device. I shouldn’t have to warranty it. It should hold zero and hold up to normal rifle scope usage. If that s**** the bed, hunt is over. So buy durable scopes that function like they are supposed to: aiming device.

Binos and spotters on the other hand I feel more comfortable with a solid warranty when spending that amount of dough for glassing animals. If those s*** the bed, my hunt is not completely over and I can get a warranty replacement afterward.

 

[Macintosh]

I absolutely consider warranty, in most cases I just dont consider it first, or even second. I also consider real-life reports of how the company handles their warranty policy almost as strongly as the written warranty policy itself.