S2H Scope Interest

[Tommyhaak]

Just finished getting three days of use on these scopes. Love the reticle, the glass, the low pro turrets and big numbers on the adjustments (@mtnwrunner)in a much smaller and lighter package than an Nx8, RS 1.2, or SWFA. It’s superior in comparison with all things considered. So far so good on reliability. Count me in if it stays that way.

 

[Shortschaf]

Thank you.

I would be a little surprised if they don't EVENTUALLY offer in MOA though

 

[Bluumoon]

I would be a little surprised if they don't EVENTUALLY offer in MOA though

Don't be. The entire goal of RS (for some) is to leverage our collective presence and exuberance (when we finally understand what works) to get certain things made the way they should be and to shift the industry as a whole.

 

[Gstew1930]

Don't be. The entire goal of RS (for some) is to leverage our collective presence and exuberance (when we finally understand what works) to get certain things made the way they should be and to shift the industry as a whole.

Well said!!

 

[Okie_Poke]

Just finished getting three days of use on these scopes. Love the reticle, the glass, the low pro turrets and big numbers on the adjustments (@mtnwrunner)in a much smaller and lighter package than an Nx8, RS 1.2, or SWFA. It’s superior in comparison with all things considered. So far so good on reliability. Count me in if it stays that way.

I'm in on this scope as I've previously said, but would you mind elaborating a bit on what you mean as compared to each of these? Below is my understanding of the specs/differences and "much smaller and lighter" seems like unhelpful puffery, unless it refers to something other than the length and weight dimensions of the scopes. Thanks.

Scope​	Weight (oz.)​	Length (in.)​
S2H 3-18	25.0*	12.5*
NX8 2.5-20	28.3	12.0
NX8 4-32	28.6	13.4
RS1.2 2.5-15	26.4	14.05
SWFA 3-15	22.7	13.7
SWFA 3-9	19.8	13.08

* estimated based on forum posts. Other scope specs taken from mfg specifications page.

 

[Chris in TN]

Don't be. The entire goal of RS (for some) is to leverage our collective presence and exuberance (when we finally understand what works) to get certain things made the way they should be and to shift the industry as a whole.

Inductive reasoning (ex: an extremely tiny subset/sample of shooters are faster with mrads, ergo mrads must be superior, it couldn't possibly be a bias in the sample selection process) mixed with exuberance....

Well, it's not like that's ever went wrong in history. At least you have that going for you.

Everybody *really does* want to rule the world. Sigh.

 

[Schmo]

Inductive reasoning (ex: an extremely tiny subset/sample of shooters are faster with mrads, ergo mrads must be superior, it couldn't possibly be a bias in the sample selection process) mixed with exuberance....

Well, it's not like that's ever went wrong in history. At least you have that going for you.

Everybody *really does* want to rule the world. Sigh.

Maybe you should listen to people with multiples of your lifetime in actual experience afield that one is superior over the other? Basically like telling someone how to do their job in an industry you haven’t worked in.

 

[streamerfish]

Like only offering the scope with an mrad reticle. Or ZT offering a second reticle choice that is also in .mils with no explanation of what purpose it is to serve.

Page 22 and nobody has yet commented on the chance of getting a moa version of the THLR reticle, or any workable moa reticle at all. A guy on page one raises the question of getting a moa version and 20 pages later nobody has bothered to even address that.

When I was a kid - like maybe 20 or so - we were family friends with some people that owned a little small town destination type restaurant. I asked the owner a simple question one night - I don't remember what it even was but it may have been a request for a bottle of hot sauce, to put on fried catfish - and instead of just saying 'yes or no' she launched into an explanation on how the way she cooked and served it was better and I should just eat it that way. Guess who never ate there again? If you're going to be in a business that depends on sales, you can have opinions and even convictions, but learn to categorize those. If people ask you a sales question, give them a sales answer. Even if it is 'no'.

Looking at ZT's website (which I will admit I hadn't ever done until a couple weeks ago) they seem to be pretty heavily invested in moa reticle sales. It baffles me that they'd set that completely aside for this one scope and only offer it in mrads. But if that's the case, maybe the people who have time to browbeat us could take a moment to just say 'yes' or 'no'.

Well, it was addressed multiple times on the other thread, and the answer is no MOA. Soo no reason for any further discussion on it.

 

[fwafwow]

 

[tony]

It’s just not that hard to learn mils.

An app like shooter makes it super simple. You plug in your rifle and ammo. Then adjust the number of clicks. It doesn’t matter whether it is mils or moa.

This is my CZ 527 with a MOA scope.

This is my old Tikka with a mils scope:

All I have to do is validate those clicks and memorize or put them on the rifle in any number of ways.

Is this app just called “shooter “ ?
I put shooter in the App Store and get endless call of duty type games

I’d be in for one as well. I just spent 25 k on a driveway.
What’s $999.99 more!

 

[nm.otter]

try 'shooter ballistics'

 

[HuntHarder]

Are we still talking about MOA? FFS Chris, I am an moa guy too, but understand this is a mil scope. Get over it. Move on. Buy one or don't. Argue moa vs mils in another thread.

 

[jdvangeystel]

It’s just not that hard to learn mils.

An app like shooter makes it super simple. You plug in your rifle and ammo. Then adjust the number of clicks. It doesn’t matter whether it is mils or moa.

This is my CZ 527 with a MOA scope.

This is my old Tikka with a mils scope:

All I have to do is validate those clicks and memorize or put them on the rifle in any number of ways.

I wouldn’t call this “Learning mils” sure it’s simple to use an app to get your corrections but that’s not a real understanding of what MILS are- I am a mil user myself and couldn’t imagine going back to MOA- but this example isn’t “learning” anything- it’s using a calculator


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tommyhaak]

I'm in on this scope as I've previously said, but would you mind elaborating a bit on what you mean as compared to each of these? Below is my understanding of the specs/differences and "much smaller and lighter" seems like unhelpful puffery, unless it refers to something other than the length and weight dimensions of the scopes. Thanks

Scope​	Weight (oz.)​	Length (in.)​
S2H 3-18	25.0*	12.5*
NX8 2.5-20	28.3	12.0
NX8 4-32	28.6	13.4
RS1.2 2.5-15	26.4	14.05
SWFA 3-15	22.7	13.7
SWFA 3-9	19.8	13.08

* estimated based on forum posts. Other scope specs taken from mfg specifications page.

I was too busy shooting it to pull it off the rifle to weigh for you. Not sure it matters until testing is done. *Shorter and/or smaller in geometry and/or lighter*. If it works out, I’ll have an RS 1.2 and some used NX8s with a great hunting reticle for sale.

 

[Wrench]

I wouldn’t call this “Learning mils” sure it’s simple to use an app to get your corrections but that’s not a real understanding of what MILS are- I am a mil user myself and couldn’t imagine going back to MOA- but this example isn’t “learning” anything- it’s using a calculator


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. Using an example like the speed system would show quickly how it can ve superior. Copying data from the calculator to the scope is just that.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I wouldn’t call this “Learning mils” sure it’s simple to use an app to get your corrections but that’s not a real understanding of what MILS are- I am a mil user myself and couldn’t imagine going back to MOA- but this example isn’t “learning” anything- it’s using a calculator


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn’t say I “learned mils” from that app.

The app pictures illustrate that mils and MOA are simply two ways of measuring angles. One is simpler to use in many ways, but either system is better if you don’t try to think in inches and convert to MOA or mils.

 

[prm]

Inductive reasoning (ex: an extremely tiny subset/sample of shooters are faster with mrads, ergo mrads must be superior, it couldn't possibly be a bias in the sample selection process) mixed with exuberance....

Well, it's not like that's ever went wrong in history. At least you have that going for you.

Everybody *really does* want to rule the world. Sigh.

You’re confused on your role in this process. There are people who are using their ideas, time, and money to develop a scope. They get to decide the design. Period. Your role, and mine, is rather binary as a consumer. Like the design and buy it, or not. The developers can then choose whether or not to respond to differing consumer sentiment. They are not ruling anything, your choice remains yours. They are not obligated to appease you, you are not obligated to purchase. By the way, over a year ago they did ask if people would be interested in the design they chose. Apparently enough people said yes.

 

[jdvangeystel]

No you didn’t say you learned MILS from the app you gave advice as how to “learn” mils by just remembering the corrections you got from an app- I didn’t see anywhere where you gave me any sort of inclination that you understood mils @Q-sertorious


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[West2East]

Man, this thread started out as scope interest and now it's just shot's fired every time I peak in!

 

[Dobermann]

View attachment 1015109

You trying to say that MOA should be like the moa ... extinct?

I see you, @fwafwow, I see you ...