MK Machining Needs your Help! Good/Better/Best optics

[Tony R-MkMachining]

If you cant make even this level of differentiation, then you’re wasting your time.

Hah! Ohh I know. Now Imagine how hard my head was spinning when they wanted me to pick Top 3 scopes overall without context. I was putting my foot down pretty hard when I said we need to split that up at last once. The guys who came up with the idea don't have an extensive background in optics and are pretty casual white tail hunters who go every couple years.

 

[Macintosh]

Hah! Ohh I know. Now Imagine how hard my head was spinning when they wanted me to pick Top 3 scopes overall without context. I was putting my foot down pretty hard when I said we need to split that up at last once. The guys who came up with the idea don't have an extensive background in optics and are pretty casual white tail hunters who go every couple years.

Well, sometimes it comes off different when they hear it directly from a customer, so I’ll be clearer:

I like mk machining, i own several of your products. But when I see a “top-x list” like this that doesnt account for fundamental requirements of wildly different uses, its CLEARLY useless clickbait and I immediately unsubscribe and unfollow whatever entity is spewing this garbage. This sort of marketing is not only unhelpful, it’s HARMFUL by alienating informed customers because it’s blatantly in-authentic and uninformed. This is AI-generated chinese amazon seller level crap. Is that what you want to be?

 

[WRO]

Minox zp5 and Schmidt and Bender’s should be considered in the best category


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SDHNTR]

It’s gonna be a short list! And you’ll rule out most of your potential inventory!

Good: SWFA, lower end Trijicon, Nightforce SHV, Bushnell LRHS.

Better: Maven RS 1.2 (but none of the others!), Nightforce NXS, upper end Trijicon, Schmidt and Bender Klassic.

Best: Nightforce NX8 and ATACR. Upper end Schmidt and Bender.


That’s literally it.

 

[Tony R-MkMachining]

What’s the purpose of the list?

I should have included that in my initial blurb.

The marketing team is wanting to post some informational content to help buyers know what sort of criteria they should be looking for in a hunting optic and for us to have publicly listed recommendations for optics that we approve of. With this information, the marketing team will also be bunding accessories with the optics to have package deals for an upcoming promotion.

 

[z987k]

The Schmidt and Bender Klassic 3-12 P3L reticle with the 4.8 mils of elevation is on my go to hunting rifle right now. It could be improved upon for sure(more elevation), but given the compromises of every scope, it's my favorite.. #1 right now.
I also have a Maven RS1.2 on a rifle. It's for sure #2.

 

[alexnelon]

I should have included that in my initial blurb.

The marketing team is wanting to post some informational content to help buyers know what sort of criteria they should be looking for in a hunting optic and for us to have publicly listed recommendations for optics that we approve of. With this information, the marketing team will also be bunding accessories with the optics to have package deals for an upcoming promotion.

I love the heart to help customers and I feel for you, but you're gonna have a hard time getting anything you can use to accomplish that goal here. Y'all sell tactical/PRS stuff for soft use. It's a different use case over here.

Out of the 327 models y'all carry, there is 1 with a mil reticle that meets the absolute minimum standard we have for durability/reliability (ZCO 420) and it's over $4,000 and weighs over 2 pounds.

So essentially, we would never recommend that any hunter buy any of the scopes you sell, because none of them meet the needs that we have as hunters.

 

[SDHNTR]

The problem is, most marketing people don’t understand what matters most, especially in a hunting optic, durability! It’s not a feature you can quantify on paper, therefore it’s rarely highlighted or even understood by most manufacturers and their marketing teams. In fact, some of what are considered “the best” optical manufacturers in the world make absolutely terrible rifle scopes, Swarovski for example, because they don’t hold zero and resist impact worth a darn. Hands-down, rugged durability is what matters most in a rifle scope. Pretty glass doesn’t matter if it can’t send the bullet where it belongs after normal field use and the inevitable bumps and knocks that happen. Literally everything else, especially glass quality, which most uninformed think is so important, is a very distant secondary criteria.

So if you really wanna do this right, forget traditional marketing efforts. Just focus on selling the very few scopes that actually work and make that your marketing campaign! That would differentiate you you guys nicely as one of the only retailers that actually understands what hunters need in a scope.

 

[Kegstand]

As a person who really only likes FFP, for the fact of shooting range, but does own SFP on my smaller caliber guns. Weight isn’t always easy to compare to price points.
Good:
Honestly surprised by the Arken line up, have a few that really surprised me
Any early 2000’s Nikon, they float around

Better: Tract Toric (although heavy, extremely clear glass and the warranty is amazing) , Nightforce NX8, Maven, and Trijicon.

Best: Too rich for my blood and using a scope as a tool, I don’t think it truly can be any better than the ‘better’ category.

 

[Tony R-MkMachining]

That fact alone will make any list coming from Rokslide pretty problematic for your audience. Unless they come here and spend a few hours digging into the drop tests across a couple dozen scopes, and see the repeated results of all those "best" scopes just getting crap results, they just won't get it.

This is exactly why I specifically why I chose this forum. Asking the guys who have higher expectations and have a somewhat standardized testing procedure for evaluating optics. Rokslide has a reputation for this, but I'm preaching to the choir here.

Your safe route would be to focus on optical quality and lightweight - but that also wouldn't be the truth of what makes a good hunting scope. In reality.

Agreed, and I hope that sharing this thread (after it has matured) with a few guys in house will shed some light on how difficult this task is to approach well, and remain truthful. I'm trying to protect my personal reputation, as I have to ultimately put my signature on this being the "staff expert". This to me can very easily toe the line between what Can we sell, and what Should we sell.

 

[WRO]

It’s gonna be a short list! And you’ll rule out most of your potential inventory!

Good: SWFA, lower end Trijicon, Nightforce SHV, Bushnell LRHS.

Better: Maven RS 1.2 (but none of the others!), Nightforce NXS, upper end Trijicon, Schmidt and Bender Klassic.

Best: Nightforce NX8 and ATACR. Upper end Schmidt and Bender.


That’s literally it.

I wouldn’t put a NX8 in the best category, the eyebox is pretty touchy.

 

[77TMK]

I wouldn’t put a NX8 in the best category, the eyebox is pretty touchy.

Looking through my NX8 and others still wondering what y'all are talking about.

 

[SDHNTR]

I wouldn’t put a NX8 in the best category, the eyebox is pretty touchy.

That’s a mostly subjective matter. And yes I will agree with you on the 2.5-20, but the 4-32 is much better, imo.

Sidebar, but big erectors are just unnecessary for hunting. They only cause problems and solve none.

 

[WRO]

Looking through my NX8 and others still wondering what y'all are talking about.

They aren’t nearly as easy to get behind as say a z5 or an rs1.2 much more finicky with regards to eye relief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk