Would you buy this scope?

[omicron1792]

@Ryan Avery any thought of adding the flip covers to order? That’s one of my fave part. I hate janky flip covers and the fitted ones look good on ZT other scopes. Looks like they come with the others.

 

[eoperator]

@Ryan Avery any thought of adding the flip covers to order? That’s one of my fave part. I hate janky flip covers and the fitted ones look good on ZT other scopes. Looks like they come with the others.

Hopefully "bumper caps"

 

[omicron1792]

Hopefully "bumper caps"

Man. I’ll take fitted tenebraex every single time.

 

[HuntHarder]

Hopefully "bumper caps"

Vast majority of guys aren't wanting to add $120+ to a scope, for some covers.

 

[hardincobucks]

Yes- NF UL pic rings or whatever they call them now.

Form what’s your opinion on the Area 419 match scope rings

 

[ChrisAU]

It says Tenebraex ready so I’m hoping that means a rear cover will snap on.

 

[omicron1792]

It says Tenebraex ready so I’m hoping that means a rear cover will snap on.

Yeah. Most of their other top scopes come with the fitted tenebraex caps. They look like they may even screw in similar to Leupold, by far my favorite cap system.

 

[Mike D Texas]

Most important question @Ryan Avery - when sunshade?

If the glass and coatings are good, why would you need a sunshade?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Airdiggy]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Depends on how much $

 

[Jake Larsen]

If my reticle choice bothers you, then you’re the turkey.

Far from the best offered, though.

Have you spent time behind the THLR reticle? What about it don’t you like?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[waspocrew]

Depends on how much $

$999

Here are the updated specs though:

 

[HuntHarder]

Have you spent time behind the THLR reticle? What about it don’t you like?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Much like the "donut" reticles Nightforce offers, you don't necessarily need to spend time behind them, to tell yourself, it's not what you are looking for. Why try and talk yourself into something you know you aren't interested in?

Why do some of you get so hung up on a guy not liking the THLR reticle? BFD! More scopes available for you.

 

[The Guide]

Much like the "donut" reticles Nightforce offers, you don't necessarily need to spend time behind them, to tell yourself, it's not what you are looking for. Why try and talk yourself into something you know you aren't interested in?

Why do some of you get so hung up on a guy not liking the THLR reticle? BFD! More scopes available for you.

Sometimes it isn't that people are "hung up on someone not liking the thing" but rather trying to see why they don't like it to see if there is something they have overlooked in their observation of the thing. Other times, people just like to be confrontational. Short form written communication doesn't always give the best view of nuances in speech.

Jay

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Much like the "donut" reticles Nightforce offers, you don't necessarily need to spend time behind them, to tell yourself, it's not what you are looking for. Why try and talk yourself into something you know you aren't interested in?

Why do some of you get so hung up on a guy not liking the THLR reticle? BFD! More scopes available for you.

I agree to an extent. But I also look at it like my daughter refusing to try mashed potatoes. I won’t make her eat them, because they are just another delicious pile of carbs, but she absolutely won’t even try them, or explain to me why she won’t try them, and that frustrates me.

I am also a bit curious about what reticle that guy would like. I’m willing to try the THLR and trust that I will probably like it, but I would be interested in the scope even if it only had the mil-c style.

 

[wapitibob]

Just wanted to say Congrats, start to almost finished on the project has to feel good.

 

[Jake Larsen]

Sometimes it isn't that people are "hung up on someone not liking the thing" but rather trying to see why they don't like it to see if there is something they have overlooked in their observation of the thing. Other times, people just like to be confrontational. Short form written communication doesn't always give the best view of nuances in speech.

Jay

This right here

Not trying to be confrontational. The original comment about disliking the THLR reticle was rather absolute. I was genuinely wondering if that guy had a reason (based on experience) to feel that way, or was judging simply based on how it looks. I believe he said something like “it’s far from the best” reticle offering.

I understand trepidation with the THLR reticle. When I first saw it, I wasn’t convinced. Seemed busy with lots of gimmicks at first glance. Then I started seeing guys that I know have LOTS of experience speaking highly of it. More than one. Found the review of the Minox ZP-5 explaining some of its features. It started to make sense for real world use, at least on paper. I have been very leery of FFP reticles for hunting purposes, having had multiple real life, real world bad experiences with them in low light/low power situations.

Long story short, I found someone locally who has a ZP-5. Got behind it for a range day, and was very impressed with the THLR. Can echo what many others have said. You see what you need to see when using it. Everything in the design is there for a reason, and functions the way it should. Works beautifully on low power for fast/low light, and on high power for longer range work. The S2H stripped back version should be even better, as it retained every useful feature and deleted the extras IMO. I had to see it to believe it. It’s not a reticle that before this experience would have jumped off the page as being “good” for hunting to me. I’m not “hung up on it” I just think many other guys will be in the same boat as me, which is why I was trying to tease this out of the conversation. I don’t want guys to write this scope off as “not for them” based on how this reticle looks on paper alone.

That being said, I would genuinely like to hear if someone has spent time behind a THLR and found it to be sub-par in some way. And what other reticle would be their choice instead. (Excluding the Mrad/MOA discussion dumper fire).

@HuntHarder @N2TRKYS



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Huntforthesoul]

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


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I prefer at minimum an 18x on the higher end, but everything else looks great.

 

[omicron1792]

I prefer at minimum an 18x on the higher end, but everything else looks great.

The scope is a 3-18

 

[benconfused]

If the glass and coatings are good, why would you need a sunshade?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I wasn't being serious, other than it looking cool for some people.

 

[BjornF16]

I prefer at minimum an 18x on the higher end, but everything else looks great.

You quoted the original design goals…the prototypes are 3-18x44 and 25oz