Would you buy this scope?

[RockAndSage]

Now that you say that, I remember the quote from the office about the funeral for a bird.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

Specs are 3-14, right around $1500 IIRC, Form shared some renderings of low-profile turrets, and the simplified THLR reticle. Can't tell you where it's all posted at in this thread, but it's in here somewhere.

 

[grfox92]

Thank you.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Specs are 3-14, right around $1500 IIRC, Form shared some renderings of low-profile turrets, and the simplified TLHR reticle. Can't tell you where it's all posted at in this thread, but it's in here somewhere.

I could have sworn it was supposed to be right around the “magic number” - aka $999. In a world where reliable scopes can be had for $350-$650-$1000, a $1500 scope is a nonstarter for me.

 

[gtriple]

I could have sworn it was supposed to be right around the “magic number” - aka $999. In a world where reliable scopes can be had for $350-$650-$1000, a $1500 scope is a nonstarter for me.

I’ve bought multiple Maven Rs1.2s for sub $1000 and several Nightforce NXSs for about $1000. I’m still failing to see how this is any different than the RS1.2 other than maybe a slightly better reticle.

 

[Okie_Poke]

I’ve bought multiple Maven Rs1.2s for sub $1000 and several Nightforce NXSs for about $1000. I’m still failing to see how this is any different than the RS1.2 other than maybe a slightly better reticle.

It may not be. We’ll need to see it to know if it’s worth buying. Maybe the reticle is more than a little better. Maybe it’s a tish lighter. Maybe there are a couple other creature comforts Form and Ryan want that other folks may or may not value. Maybe it’s a total flop. I’m just glad there wasn’t a presale.

It’s really too bad the 3D suppressor printing wizard at Unknown can’t print glass. They’d have a full line of scopes out by now if he could.

 

[RockAndSage]

I could have sworn it was supposed to be right around the “magic number” - aka $999. In a world where reliable scopes can be had for $350-$650-$1000, a $1500 scope is a nonstarter for me.

This is where the $1500 number is coming from, which I'm absolutely willing to pay, for the specs as outlined.

All:

It’s a serious question from Ryan. This is not just a feeler post. No presale or other nonsense.


If a 3-12x40’ish mil/mil scope was offered that was consistently reliable and durable, was tested heavily, had multiple reticles that were truly usable/visible from 3-12x, a good/great eyebox and DOF, low profile zero stop elevation and capped windage; and was under $1,500- would you buy it?

The specs were updated to 3-14 later on. Reliability is only one of the things I'm looking for though, personally, and price-point is a secondary function of that.

The only thing that would keep me from paying more as currently outlined, is if it had crap glass - everything else absolutely makes it worth it. If it had legit alpha glass, coatings, and optical performance, I'd happily pay $2k or more, depending on performance. But I think the intent is to make the Toyota Land Cruiser of North American hunting scopes here, not the Lexus.

So, for me personally, bottom-line economy of price point is not what matters. I'm looking for a sweet-spot set of capabilities, at a price point that makes it fair value. Okay glass with all these other features and overall bomb-proof capability/durability? At $1200-1500? Hell yes.

 

[grfox92]

This is where the $1500 number is coming from, which I'm absolutely willing to pay, for the specs as outlined.




The specs were updated to 3-14 later on. Reliability is only one of the things I'm looking for though, personally, and price-point is a secondary function of that.

The only thing that would keep me from paying more as currently outlined, is if it had crap glass - everything else absolutely makes it worth it. If it had legit alpha glass, coatings, and optical performance, I'd happily pay $2k or more, depending on performance. But I think the intent is to make the Toyota Land Cruiser of North American hunting scopes here, not the Lexus.

So, for me personally, bottom-line economy of price point is not what matters. I'm looking for a sweet-spot set of capabilities, at a price point that makes it fair value. Okay glass with all these other features and overall bomb-proof capability/durability? At $1200-1500? Hell yes.

Just to play devil's advocate, besides low profile turrets, what are you getting that you aren't getting from an SWFA 3-15x?

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[nobody]

They released them in February. Unfortunately, they were priced at $2,900 and couldn’t pass the drop test. The whole project had to be canned. LOW almost filed bankruptcy. Whole big thing. We had a funeral for a bird.

Now that you say that, I remember the quote from the office about the funeral for a bird.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

I promise it’s my only meme on this thread, can’t resist an office tangent.

Still excited for this optic, I need 2 when they’re ready

 

[Q_Sertorius]

This is where the $1500 number is coming from, which I'm absolutely willing to pay, for the specs as outlined.




The specs were updated to 3-14 later on. Reliability is only one of the things I'm looking for though, personally, and price-point is a secondary function of that.

The only thing that would keep me from paying more as currently outlined, is if it had crap glass - everything else absolutely makes it worth it. If it had legit alpha glass, coatings, and optical performance, I'd happily pay $2k or more, depending on performance. But I think the intent is to make the Toyota Land Cruiser of North American hunting scopes here, not the Lexus.

So, for me personally, bottom-line economy of price point is not what matters. I'm looking for a sweet-spot set of capabilities, at a price point that makes it fair value. Okay glass with all these other features and overall bomb-proof capability/durability? At $1200-1500? Hell yes.

Thanks. I could have sworn there was some later discussion elsewhere of “the magic number” in regard to the UM scope offering (just as there was for the suppressors). I don’t think I just imagined it. I will take a look and listen around to see if I can find that source. It might have been on the S2H podcast or in another thread.

Consider the below not directed at you, but as a statement “general to the topic.”

As others have asked, I will reiterate, in a world where SWFA (also made by LOW), Trijicon, and Maven make reliable scopes in the $350-1000 range, what need or niche does this LOW-made scope fill? Lower turret profile doesn’t seem worth all that extra money to me.

And I am not willing to pay more for glass better than those three manufacturers offer. I hesitate to say “never,” but I am unlikely to ever shoot at game more than 0.5 second time-of-flight away. And I can see my 12” steel at 900 with my SWFA scopes.

But, it’s not up to you to defend or justify the price. I simply wouldn’t touch it at $1500. And even at $1000, I would have to have a real need for it. I haven’t purchased a SWFA 3-9x ($600) or 3-15x ($750) because I can’t justify it over the 6x or 10x at $350.

Remember that the RokScope and SWFA are going to be made in the same factory. The RokScope would have to be objectively better (get it?) than the SWFA 3-15x to justify costing an extra $250 more, much less $750 more.

 

[dreamingWest]

It sounds great to me. You're getting a seriously well thought out hunting scope. A purpose built hunting reticle, appropriate zoom ratio that likely has a superior eye box, possibly lighter weight, low profile turrets (be honest, SWFA looks terrible), all from a company that cares about these qualities and didn't just luck into it.

I still care about aesthetics on my rifles. As long as these don't look terrible, with like an obnoxious logo or weird color, I plan to buy at $1500 or less.

 

[RockAndSage]

Just to play devil's advocate, besides low profile turrets, what are you getting that you aren't getting from an SWFA 3-15x?

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

Nah, fair question. A similar one could have been asked about one or two of the Nightforce or Trijicon offerings.

The THLR reticle is a very big factor for me. Enough so that I almost pulled the trigger on the Minox ZP5 that has the original one - and that thing is a hog of a scope, far bigger, heavier, and long-range capable than I want, need, or am capable of using at my own present skill level. But that reticle offers capability for speed, usability at low and high mag, and low-light usability I'm just not aware of in other offerings, that are very useful for me at my current skill-level and my hunting priorities inside of 400yds. If Nightforce or Trijicon offered it in one of their scopes, I probably would have 3 now and wouldn't be commenting in this thread.

The low-profile turrets and a good zero-stop elevation are another major pairing of factors, along with what, IIRC, sounds like might be the low-end/starting point of HD glass.

Those are all functional issues that put the proposed scope well ahead of an SWFA for me, personally.