Would you buy this scope?

[Dave0317]

$1500 for 12x on the top end, no illumination? It better have damn good glass, turrets, reticle and be bomb proof reliable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Sounds like that’s exactly what they intend. Do away with all the frills, bells, whistles, and make it a simple system that is exceptional for precisely shooting animals.

If you want a higher top end mag, illumination, etc., all that is already out there. What doesn’t exist is a scope exactly as the OP described.

I think that is also why some expect it to cost closer to the $1000 mark. A 3 or 4 multiple erector should be cheaper to include, that’s an old proven element, compared to the 6 or 8 multiple erectors that are becoming the trend now (which negatively affects other usability characteristics, like eye box). The reticle will also be simpler than many on the market now. If they can measure a half mil, they can make us a good reticle. No need to pay Horus to grow another Christmas tree.

Even if it is a hair over the cost of the Maven, I think plenty would like this feature set better.

If the cost is higher than expected, I think they would do well to make a good fixed power to accompany it. Then they could have maybe a $500 6x, that outperforms the SWFA, and the 3-12x that would compete with the Mavens & Nightforces.

 

[5811]

Sounds like that’s exactly what they intend. Do away with all the frills, bells, whistles, and make it a simple system that is exceptional for precisely shooting animals.

If you want a higher top end mag, illumination, etc., all that is already out there. What doesn’t exist is a scope exactly as the OP described.

I think that is also why some expect it to cost closer to the $1000 mark. A 3 or 4 multiple erector should be cheaper to include, that’s an old proven element, compared to the 6 or 8 multiple erectors that are becoming the trend now (which negatively affects other usability characteristics, like eye box). The reticle will also be simpler than many on the market now. If they can measure a half mil, they can make us a good reticle. No need to pay Horus to grow another Christmas tree.

Even if it is a hair over the cost of the Maven, I think plenty would like this feature set better.

If the cost is higher than expected, I think they would do well to make a good fixed power to accompany it. Then they could have maybe a $500 6x, that outperforms the SWFA, and the 3-12x that would compete with the Mavens & Nightforces.

This is how I envision it, as well. Like the swfa 3-9, but

-update the turrets with zero stop and capped windage,
-improve the reticle for a more hunting focused use,
-3-12 power for a little more zoom,
-not so stiff zoom, or zoom ring with something to grip,
-keep weight under 20 ounces

If I'm on the right track with what they are thinking, I'd definitely be interested. And I think many more would be, as well. I could be way off.

My swfa 3-9 might be my favorite scope, but if I could change it, I'd change it exactly as they propose, pending reticle design, so I might just be reading into it what I want to read.

 

[TxLite]

Checking back in to say again 3-12x44 would be the move. I don’t see any reason to go with a 40.

 

[fwafwow]

@Ryan Avery - any further thoughts based on the input so far?

 

[Gstew1930]

I don’t understand the obsession with how turrets feel? I’ve had a tangent theta, ZCO & all of the below. I couldn’t care less how they feel. They could have no feeling at all, I don’t count clicks. I could be wrong here, I just seems like a weird thing to obsess over

 

[KHNC]

If it wasnt ryan that posted this , everyone would be wondering what happened to the op. lol

 

[slowelk]

The SB Klassic 3-12 is what turrets should be like.

Knowing nothing about optic and erector design, I would have to imagine that that turret can be so small because there is such limited available adjustment. I'd like to know though.

 

[atmat]

Knowing nothing about optic and erector design, I would have to imagine that that turret can be so small because there is such limited available adjustment. I'd like to know though.

I dunno enough on the mechanicals to speculate. It didn’t increase in size when it went from 3.2 to 4.8 mils, though.

Also, their windage is tiny and capped, too.

 

[BjornF16]

Scope specs:

FFP 3-12x40 to 3-12x44mm

Consistently holds zero through 3-foot drops and 3,000 rounds of constant use.

The reticle is specially designed for 25 to 600 yards, with bold outer posts and correct center aiming references.

Zero Stop
Low profile top turret.
Capped windage.
Large eye box
Good glass
20oz

Yes

 

[Felix40]

For $800 yes, for $1600, no. But then again I don't have the money of most Roksliders it seems.

Didn't read all 18 pages to see what the cost is going to be.

That’s about where I’m at too. $1000 for a scope is my absolute max. I can get an swfa and cut off the windage turret and make a diy zero stop for $600.

 

[Spoonbill]

That’s about where I’m at too. $1000 for a scope is my absolute max. I can get an swfa and cut off the windage turret and make a diy zero stop for $600.

Take it you haven’t tried to buy an swfa in a few years. Its been 2 years since I pre ordered a 3-9 and I am still waiting on it along with a lot of people.

 

[left hunter]

I’m in for one assuming it actually meets the criteria listed. I didn’t read everything, is this something a specific manufacturer is considering? If so was the manufacturer specified?

 

[Rolltide]

My hunting scopes are either 3-18, 4-14, or 4-16, but I suppose I can see the appeal of the 3-12. I like the slightly higher top end because I spend a lot of time shooting with rimfire PRS rifles wearing 7-35 ATACRs, 6-36, and 5-25s from various manufacturers, so it takes a minute to adjust when shooting such a low top-end scope, especially if you want to zoom in for a closer look.

I have a Bushnell 3-12 LRTS on my little Christensen MPP 223, which seems fine in that role.

I've read through the entire thread and at one point, someone mentioned that Maven isn't well known outside of this forum and a few others.

I may be the exception, but I've never seen their scopes mentioned on any forum or even Facebook groups outside of here...and I've never seen one in person.

That doesn't necessarily mean anything, and clearly, they seem popular with members here, but I believe that who the manufacturer is, could be a huge part of the overall success.

I love seeing progress and innovation, so I'm looking forward to seeing where this goes.

 

[atmat]

but I believe that who the manufacturer is, could be a huge part of the overall success.

Just to clarify, the manufacturer for most brands is LOW in Japan. But I get your point that brand recognition does matter for many people — particularly if it comes to resale value.

 

[RockAndSage]

Just to clarify, the manufacturer for most brands is LOW in Japan. But I get your point that brand recognition does matter for many people — particularly if it comes to resale value.

To add to this, LOW and other OEM suppliers generally build to the specifications provided by the brand. They'll build you cheap crap, or stuff that rivals the best. It's up to the brand to specify the quality they want to stand for and offer to the market.

 

[FB Trout]

I’d be in for 2-3, at least. If they prove to be available and durable, it would be my go to on all of our guns.

 

[Overwire]

I would buy at least 2 if they actually meet the weight target. Not buying if they are heavier than the SWFA 3-9 (21oz). I might consider a 3rd for my longer range rifle but the top end mag is less than desirable for that gun, would prefer 15x or 16x for that one.

 

[AZ_Hunter]

I do want a clearly illuminated dot though, without any bleed.

 

[Rolltide]

Just to clarify, the manufacturer for most brands is LOW in Japan. But I get your point that brand recognition does matter for many people — particularly if it comes to resale value.

You are correct, thanks for catching that!

 

[swavescatter]

To add to this, LOW and other OEM suppliers generally build to the specifications provided by the brand. They'll build you cheap crap, or stuff that rivals the best. It's up to the brand to specify the quality they want to stand for and offer to the market.

I'm not an optics manufacturer, but my assumption is that the secret sauce for Trijicon/Nightforce is in the specifications. A production agency won't design your scope for you; the design agency delivers a set of specifications with tolerances.

I think the ruggedness of a scope is driven by a mixture of certain design features and the right specifications. NF and Trijicon have figured this out, but I think the Maven RS1.2 accidentally hit the right balance.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you can just call up LOW and say "Give me a rugged scope." Especially if it's significantly different than what's already on the market. Who knows how many iterations it would take to prototype and tweak specs, with each unit taking 6+ months to produce.