Tanget Theta 3-15x50mm Scope Evaluation

[Formidilosus]

Form, what is the issue with dialing on the Klassiks?

Also, what is the logic behind FFP duplex reticle I saw offered on the Klassiks?

The only have 3.2 mils of elevation available of the BDC turret fir the Klassiks. On the FFP duplex- in Europe, a lot of places night hunting without artificial light is common. Without illumination- FFP is better than SFP even for close range.

 

[p3t3rsn]

Heard back from S&B after asking for a PMII in 3-12x42 with THLR reticle, FFP and Mil adjust. Here is what they said..

"Thank you for reaching out and thank for your suggestion. Reticle design is a science for itself and there is a lot of discussion here internally about this I can tell you. Bad thing is that we cannot do a lot of different reticles since this would blow up our SKUs."

 

[Dobermann]

Heard back from S&B after asking for a PMII in 3-12x42 with THLR reticle, FFP and Mil adjust. Here is what they said..

"Thank you for reaching out and thank for your suggestion. Reticle design is a science for itself and there is a lot of discussion here internally about this I can tell you. Bad thing is that we cannot do a lot of different reticles since this would blow up our SKUs."

What a non-answer. Meh.

 

[Dos XX]

Nothing worse than blowing up your SKU's.

 

[p3t3rsn]

What a non-answer. Meh.

Yep.

 

[Dobermann]

Nothing worse than blowing up your SKU's.

Yeah, then we'd have products we actually want.

But what do we know?

 

[Tac Beard]

Nothing worse than blowing up your SKU's.

 

[Tac Beard]

Now 256 SKUs, that would be ridiculous.

 

[260madman]

And having Eurooptic as the only retailer of S&B in the US is such a great business move LOL.

Half those SKUs are never available. Just create a SKU for us and then list it as OOS that way they can say they tried.

 

[Hondo64d]

That right there has been a killer of many! I've had them go south when all they did was ride in a well padded case in the bed of the truck down a washboard road.

Yep. I’ve seen that myself on a Conquest HD5.

John

 

[mi650]

The TT is mounted in a .22 now, and it’ll get shot some more, but its pretty much over.



What was found and my thoughts.

I want to be clear, again, that this is one scope. That doesn’t tell us much, though a single scope doing poorly has a higher chance of it being a common thing.


Function:

Quite plainly a failure. This is the single most important trait a scope must posses, and this scope failed at every aspect of function- zero retention, zero retention with impacts, consistent and repeatable adjustments, and return to zero. “Tracking”, that is correct adjustments seemed fine before the first drop. Well actually nothing stood out as poor before the drops. While I know that there are some differences, this is about the same results that the original Premier versions exhibited. Almost zero doubt that the first set of 18” drops killed it. Because from then on it started doing weird things. A foot and half drop onto very soft muddy ground, with a padded mat on top, should not cause issues.



Reticle:

The Gen 2 XR sucks. Not harping in this. The Gen 2 XR wasn’t my choice. From what I remember of the other reticles they weren’t terrible. This one is maybe the worst reticle for field shooting from any legit scope I’ve used.


Turret feel and design:

The tool less rezero of the turrets is neat, and seems to work fine. The clicks are distinct and audible, I think most would really like how they feel. But like the over emphasis on “glass”, over emphasis on turret feel beyond acceptable is silly nonsense.


Usability, eyebox, parallax, etc:

Overall I’m left with a shoulder shrug towards these things. The eyebox is nothing special, and the overall view and ease of use isn’t anything special. The parallax is very forgiving, though image quality goes down slightly when changing distances without adjusting the parallax.


Glass:

The least important feature for field use. Once Leupold VX3 level of glass is achieved, you’re not missing because the glass isn’t good enough in the field. I don’t give a flip about sitting at a bench and staring through a scope as if it’s a telescope or spotter. It’s an aiming device, it’s supposed to help steer bullets. For what it’s worth I have no vision issue- 20/13 right, 20/10 left. Color vision is excellent, and no astigmatism or any other issues.

Having said all that- I found it overall underwhelming. I know that’s going to make people call BS, but multiple people agree that
used it. There’s nothing that stands out. Resolution seems good, contrast seems good, clarity is good all the way to the edge, but it’s a bit muted in colors compared to the one Minox ZP5, but nothing stand out. And that wouldn’t necessarily be bad if mechanically it was solid.




Overall thoughts:

As I stated- the whole experience is one of “meh”. This isn’t me taking a crack at TT or trying to claim anything nefarious. It’s just what it is. I don’t care at all what others say, or the reputation, or perception something gets. It is a fact that peoples perception is affected by what they are told beforehand. That has been demonstrated in psych study continuously.
You take two identical items, cover them so they can’t see labels, and tell people that item “A” is amazing, and item “B” is mediocre, they will universally “see” that item “A” is better. This works with scopes. I have watched repeatedly people have to juggle with scopes to get zeroed, and then claim it works perfectly. Because “everyone knows that this is the best”. I’m not saying that TT’s aren’t good optically- Ilya Koshkin says they are, and enough others do, that I believe them- most TT’s are probably great. This one shows nothing wowing at all. And on a mechanical side…. It is a total failure.


I guess it comes down to two options really-

1). This is the worst TT ever made in mechanics. And the worst one ever made in glass. And the worst one ever made in “ease of use”.

Or

2). People that buy TT’s (or any other scope) do not use them hard and therefore issues largely go unnoticed?


I say this, because somehow I either get every single garbage scope that almost every manufacture makes, or people really don’t use their stuff hard.

Ouch, got me right in the feels!!

I don't own a TT 3-15, but I do have 3 5-25s, and this eval is both surprising and disappointing.

I won't likely ever subject them to this level of abuse, at least intentionally, nor would they be my 1st choice for hunting. But still, disappointing.

Thanks Form!

 

[ResearchinStuff]

I contacted two nightforce sales reps asking if the THLR reticle was going to be available in the next year, will report back if they respond.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

the response wasn't great: "We have no intention of offering a competitors reticle in our riflescopes"

 

[Dobermann]

the response wasn't great: "We have no intention of offering a competitors reticle in our riflescopes"

But other people can use your reticles - and pay dearly for them?

C'mon Nightforce!

 

[BjornF16]

the response wasn't great: "We have no intention of offering a competitors reticle in our riflescopes"

Don't they use Horus reticles?

Wouldn't that be the same thing as using THLR?

 

[ResearchinStuff]

Yes, they do, and Horus makes scopes. It seems like a lame excuse.

 

[BjornF16]

Yes, they do, and Horus makes scopes. It seems like a lame excuse.

I'd respond back to them with that set of facts...and nicely communicate hunters are looking for better hunting reticles

 

[BjornF16]

Likening the use of Horus reticles in Nightforce is a terrible example. The Ownership of Nightforce and Horus are.......similar.

Didn't realize that...

"The Ray Dennis Group of Companies acquired the business of Horus Vision on 07/19/2016. Dr. Dennis is delighted to add the legendary product offerings of the Horus Vision portfolio under a new business known as Horus Vision Reticle Technologies. This company joins his Group of Companies also encompassing Nightforce Optics, Lightforce Performance Lighting, Ace Precision Rifle Systems, ForceOutdoors and Paroo Pastoral Company."

 

[Kimber7man]

Two requests:
A) would love to see TT’s response after receiving the tested scope to be fixed under warranty for failure to hold zero and track correctly, and if it hasn’t been returned to them, why?
B) would love to know where new milspec Nightforces can be purchased under $3,000?

 

[Formidilosus]

Two requests:
A) would love to see TT’s response after receiving the tested scope to be fixed under warranty for failure to hold zero and track correctly, and if it hasn’t been returned to them, why?
B) would love to know where new milspec Nightforces can be purchased under $3,000?

A). I’m not sure why people think the companies are going to have a real response? The only thing they would really do, with a couple notable exceptions, is to ignore it, attempt to discredit it, or try to make deals with the individual. What is a company going to do? Say “yeah we’ve replicated it, and the scope design will not hold zero from impacts”? I mean there isn’t a righteous avenue other then “we tested it repeatedly and they hold zero- here’s the video/results”, or “we tested it, and it does what was reported”.
These are bing done to the level that these scope are doing what is being reported- consistently. And, the few people that have attempted to replicate are getting very similar results. The reality is that unless a company wanted to change the design, it would be in their interest to ignore it.

B). Nowhere. Milspec Nightforces should be the grail scopes for long range work.