Would you buy this scope?

[Shortschaf]

I guess I thought it was confirmed to be Zerotech. Their 1.5-15 they teased at SHOT is a spitting image of the 3-18 prototype.

Skip to 1:45

 

[Kyguy]

For everyone that is so concerned about who the partner is in the scope...

If the scope delivers everything you asked for and more, and meets your expectations based on Forms testing, at the price point that you're willing to invest...

Why does it matter who the partner company is?

If they never reveal who it is, are you NOT going to buy the scope?

If it's a company you don't care for... Are you Not going to buy the scope? Even after it's proven?

 

[Okie_Poke]

What a difference a day makes. Now that Form has bounced all three scopes more than any other scope and they passed the drop test, what's next? Excessive shooting, other abuse, small changes? Or, is it rock and roll time? I wish they were out now because I would have bought two for some new projects. I really like the low profile turrets.

Next test is to make sure the scope can double as a framing hammer in a pinch without losing zero.

 

[atmat]

If they never reveal who it is, are you NOT going to buy the scope?

Lol this is obviously not a thing. The manufacturer will put their name on the label. It’s already there.

For everyone that is so concerned about who the partner is in the scope...


Why does it matter who the partner company is?

If it's a company you don't care for... Are you Not going to buy the scope? Even after it's proven?

No one is “concerned” about it. We’re all just having fun playing detective.

 

[5MilesBack]

Do you have any pics of the reticle at 18x? I don't want to dig through every page if I don't have to.

 

[PaPete90]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nevwild]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Imagine this being the reticle at 8x.
Makes me want the 2-8 version yesterday.

 

[HuntHarder]

For everyone that is so concerned about who the partner is in the scope...

If the scope delivers everything you asked for and more, and meets your expectations based on Forms testing, at the price point that you're willing to invest...

Why does it matter who the partner company is?

If they never reveal who it is, are you NOT going to buy the scope?

If it's a company you don't care for... Are you Not going to buy the scope? Even after it's proven?

Warranty and customer service would be my concern.

 

[waspocrew]

Warranty and customer service would be my concern.

Definitely valid. Hopefully it'll be one of those "won't have to need it" sort of things, regardless of who makes it.

 

[BAKPAKR]

I guess I thought it was confirmed to be Zerotech. Their 1.5-15 they teased at SHOT is a spitting image of the 3-18 prototype.

Skip to 1:45

10X erector? No thanks.

 

[Formidilosus]

Thanks for the weight. Was length of the scope ever said?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

12.5”

 

[BAKPAKR]

Imagine this being the reticle at 8x.
Makes me want the 2-8 version yesterday.

This is a photo that was posted showing the 3-18 at 8X.

 

[JD Jones]

12.5”

Niceeeee

 

[alexnelon]

Warranty and customer service would be my concern.

The best warranty is always going to be a product that doesn't break, which is one of, if not the, primary benchmark for this scope.

But on top of that, the company we're pretty sure is supporting it has a reassuring warranty policy. I've never had to interact with their CS, but the policy makes it seem pretty unlikely to have a hard time with them.

 

[Nevwild]

This is a photo that was posted showing the 3-18 at 8X.

View attachment 1010190

Still great!
I usually shoot at 6x-8x.
The more zoomed version of the reticle lets me see the more fine grained windage hashmarks.
Therefore, I’m excited to see the 18x version at 8x.

 

[TxLite]

Can we separate this out into a locked scope eval thread for the demo models so we can see all the scope info in 1 location without scrolling through several pages of comments to see how it has performed? Maybe some low light testing, reticle at low zoom vs high zoom, drop testing etc?

 

[HuntHarder]

The best warranty is always going to be a product that doesn't break, which is one of, if not the, primary benchmark for this scope.

But on top of that, the company we're pretty sure is supporting it has a reassuring warranty policy. I've never had to interact with their CS, but the policy makes it seem pretty unlikely to have a hard time with them.

No doubt. All that concern seems erased with company chosen and parameters of this scope.
Given the choice tho, if things are equal on build quality I will learn toward the company with good customer service and company integrity or reputation as the decider.
Look at Maven for example, they build 1 scope that works and deny the fact that it's internals are different from their others. Dismissing the results of testing all together. They can pound sand in my book.

 

[Kaleb]

Can we separate this out into a locked scope eval thread for the demo models so we can see all the scope info in 1 location without scrolling through several pages of comments to see how it has performed? Maybe some low light testing, reticle at low zoom vs high zoom, drop testing etc?

I'm sure all that is coming. They've only had this scope a few days and its January outside.

 

[Kyguy]

Warranty and customer service would be my concern.

What specific optics companies have issues with warranty and customer service, in your experience? What company would deter you?

Some companies don't warranty accidental damage or things they consider abuse, as is their right. Some companies also don't offer a lifetime warranty, as is their right.

I know from personal experience that Bushnell can be a pain the ass. Still, if they had a product that I wanted, I wouldn't let that necessarily deter me.

Some companies also have a poor supply chain model and it takes a very long time for replacement or credit for a different product. (Looking at you SWFA).

 

[TxLite]

I'm sure all that is coming. They've only had this scope a few days and it’s January outside.

They’re already doing testing. Why not just put it in its own thread to reduce clutter?

I’m not asking for anything they aren’t already doing or planning to do.. just asking to have the info they are already gathering put in a locked thread to reduce clutter