Would you buy this scope?

[Dave0317]

Language on the turret most closely matches Nightforce with the 3 arrows, “impact, .1 mrad, up”.

But I doubt that is proprietary or patented or anything so I’m sure others have it. Just lots of others have language like “bullet impact, up, 1click =.1 mrad” or other variations.

But I also am pretty sure it’s been said somewhere on here that it’s not NF.

 

[nm.otter]

Smaller logo(s), and below centerline on the bell so you have to be close in order to read them.

 

[Gstew1930]

Tool-less caps are a big plus too

 

[RockAndSage]

Smaller logo(s), and below centerline on the bell so you have to be close in order to read them.

Vote again for something like S2H on the parallax knob. But if it absolutely, 100% has to be on the bell, then, yes, smaller and below centerline - but also, a more subdued font color. Maybe a dark-ish gray of some kind.

 

[RockAndSage]

@Ryan Avery


First prototype from Japan.

View attachment 1000023


View attachment 1000024

These are illuminated, right?

 

[streamerfish]

When I see one in person.


A very poor picture from the catalog-
View attachment 1000063

If that ends up looking like something between a german #1 and #4 at low power....Then count me in.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

A wrap of black vet tape around the barrel adds protection and takes care of the logos. It’s what I do with my RS 1.2’s. Also the Scope Bumpers cover quite a bit too.

Or orange vet wrap if you’re cool

 

[mtnwrunner]

Man, that form factor and those turrets look fantastic. Very excited to see these put through their paces.

Definitely don't want to sound negative, but I'd pay an extra $100 not to have that giant logo on either side of the bell. Please, reconsider to a more subtle branding, and do an S2H or something on the parallax nob.

Turrets will be great for "the elderly" crowd.
Just sayin......

Randy

 

[rafiki]

Vote again for something like S2H on the parallax knob. But if it absolutely, 100% has to be on the bell, then, yes, smaller and below centerline - but also, a more subdued font color. Maybe a dark-ish gray of some kind.

you got my vote.

 

[TxLite]

Why are we redacting the zoom range? I thought it was laid out in the first post of the thread?

 

[TxLite]

Also, I agree with the billboard style branding making it look cheap.

 

[WCT3]

Why are we redacting the zoom range? I thought it was laid out in the first post of the thread?

I think its a manufacturer name or logo on the zoom ring that they're hiding

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Why are we redacting the zoom range? I thought it was laid out in the first post of the thread?

Because everyone thinks they need more than 12 power to be able to kill big game animals apparently.

The reality is, when partnering with OEMs and other entities/business partners, your original product requirements often have to change a bit/compromise some to meet agreements/targets. At least in my experience anyway.

 

[intunegp]

The fix for the ugly billboard logo:

 

[Formidilosus]

These are illuminated, right?

Yes.

you got my vote. View attachment 1000112

That looks much better and matches almost exactly what my suggestion was if the branding has to stay.

 

[TxLite]

Because everyone thinks they need more than 12 power to be able to kill big game animals apparently.

The reality is, when partnering with OEMs and other entities/business partners, your original product requirements often have to change a bit/compromise some to meet agreements/targets. At least in my experience anyway.

I hope it wasn’t adjusted. 3-12 or 4-12 is what I was banking on. I don’t want or need 3-18, etc.

 

[lak2004]

I hope it wasn’t adjusted. 3-12 or 4-12 is what I was banking on. I don’t want or need 3-18, etc.

It's already been discussed but it did change and the rationale seems reasonable

 

[Formidilosus]

I hope it wasn’t adjusted. 3-12 or 4-12 is what I was banking on. I don’t want or need 3-18, etc.

It was changed a long time ago. The reason was because I modified/improved erector and optical system was offered, and it was a 3-18x system- if we wanted to keep it a 3-14x as it originally was going to be, it would just have a mechanical stop to the magnification; so no advantage at all. All optical performance aspects are supposedly improved with this design than the original.

 

[TxLite]

It was changed a long time ago. The reason was because I modified/improved erector and optical system was offered, and it was a 3-18x system- if we wanted to keep it a 3-14x as it originally was going to be, it would just have a mechanical stop to the magnification; so no advantage at all. All optical performance aspects are supposedly improved with this design than the original.

I must have missed that. I’ll search back through the thread.

Interested to see how it works out

 

[RockAndSage]

The reason was because I modified/improved erector and optical system was offered, and it was a 3-18x system- if we wanted to keep it a 3-14x as it originally was going to be, it would just have a mechanical stop to the magnification; so no advantage at all. All optical performance aspects are supposedly improved with this design than the original.

If the old guideline that higher zoom ratios lead to poorer usability/optical performance is starting to shift a bit from technological advancements, that's a pretty damn cool thing to be an early beneficiary of with this scope design.