Rifle Scopes Vortex RG3 6-36x56, Element Theos 6-36x56 and Zeiss LRP S3 6-36x56 Review

Glassaholic

Glassaholic

Optical theorist and conjecturer
Full Member
Minuteman
    • Nov 30, 2012
    8,749
    10,762
    Panhandle, FL
    #1
    I will soon update the Hide with full review: Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36x56, Element Theos 6-36x56 and Zeiss LRP S3 6-36x56 Review

    20240828_LOW_Vortex_Zeiss_Element_6-36x56_008.jpg


    Full review here

    TLDR Version

    FINAL THOUGHTS​

    I have been impressed with Japanese OEM scopes for quite some time, but I must admit that these new 6-36 scopes have the secret sauce, they are some of the best scopes I have seen come out of Japan optically and possibly the best I have seen from Japan to date overall. Overall, I think each of these scopes offer excellent performance per price – meaning they punch above their class while each offer some different features that different shooters will find appealing. Each of these 6-36×56 get my “best in glass” thumbs up!

    So here are my personal thoughts on each of these scopes:
    • Zeiss LRP S3 6-36×56: Zeiss was smart to bring this scope to market, they are brand new to the FFP world but have one of the biggest names in the industry. They started with the LRP S5 which is their premium line of scopes; however, in some ways I think I like/prefer the S3 even more than the S5, yes the S5 does have an edge optically but honestly it is not much (and maybe differentiated more in harsh lighting conditions). The turrets are outstanding, the optical quality is excellent and the overall ergonomics are really well thought out. This scope is a real winner in my book and based on its price point I feel it punches well above its class (as do the rest of the scopes here). If I were to split hairs about anything it would be the performance at 36x, while not bad the Zeiss was not able to resolve as well as the Vortex and Element at the top of the magnification, but it wasn’t by any means lacking.
    • Vortex RG3 6-36×56: The RG3 comes with no surprise as to its performance as it has impressed me since day one of its release. Optically this scope holds its own with some of the best in the industry and has laid the groundwork for other manufacturers to take notice, hence the focus of this review – how well do the other OEM 6-36 designs compare. I still think the Vortex has the slight edge optically but the other scopes are very close. Coupled with the industry’s best warranty this scope is the premium choice, but it is also the most expensive out of the three.
    • Element Theos 6-36×56: The surprise of this scope is the nicely engineered toolless turrets that rank very close to Tangent Theta. The feel of the turrets is also excellent giving the scope a refined feel that, coupled with the excellent optical performance, really makes this scope stand out. Element has been around for a while and has impressed with price per performance, but they do not have the market awareness as the likes of Vortex and Zeiss; however, this scope has the potential to really help with name recognition throughout the community and I could see Element gaining more brand awareness as they continue to listen to the community and deliver top quality optics at excellent price points. Speaking of listening to the community, that is one advantage the smaller manufacturer has – they are able to get boots on the ground and not only listen to what the community is asking for but also execute on that quicker.
    Reiterating what I mention at the very beginning, I am biased (we all are) and I have my own preferences and this review has opinions that are influenced from that, hopefully I’ve done an adequate job throughout the review to share where my personal preference comes into play in order to help you better evaluate a particular feature. I utilize a strict testing regimen, but it is by no means perfect, always open to constructive criticism. I do not like giving numbers to any scope because there are so many factors that could affect outcomes at any given time, so any numbers I do provide are meant to be for that day and against those scopes I could test side by side. Give me the same scope on another day and it might fare a little better or a little worse due to any number of variables, not the least of which is atmospherics which are constantly changing.

    One final thought, I think many manufacturers need to do better at adapting to market needs quicker, too much time and you begin to lose market share in this ever changing world of FFP sport optics. “Adapt or go home” is becoming the name of the game as the market gets more and more saturated with excellent options, and I think Vortex, Zeiss and Element have done well, very well, with these new 6-36 scopes.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: TheOtherAndrew, AK74U, Rockworx and 7 others
    #4
    The market share thoughts are interesting, it has to be concerning for the big manufacturers on some level because of how easy/fast it is to bring quality products to market now compared to 10-20 years ago. However the fear would be that changing products too quickly and too often, and you become SIG, shitty quality control and using your customers as beta testers. In cheap scopes I don't mind but in more expensive stuff, I still hesitate to buy from a company that has no established history in the market.

    Just about every year now there's some new scope(s) that comes out, gets super hyped, "compares to scopes 3x it's price", sells a ton, and then a couple years later no one talks about them because it was never that special to begin with, even if it's not a bad scope, just not nearly as good as lots of folks claimed when it first hit the market. Vortex Strike Eagle, Burris XTR III/Pro, I'd say clearly fall into these areas. Not bad scopes, but no where near the level they were hyped at, and even though neither of them are very old, you don't see them that much anymore, and you don't see them recommended or praised much anymore. Reality and some time quickly expose how much hype is there.

    However, if you make a truly good scope that brings value at it's price point, it persists. Look at how long the Razor Gen 2 was a major player, even 10+ years later and there are worse choices you can make at similar price points. The Gen 3 is following that path. The ATACR 7-35 is another one, been out for 6-7 years, still a very solid choice we often see recommended/praised. Even if not the best choice anymore in a sea of options. It will be interesting to see if the big manufacturers think it's worth chasing being the flavor of the year, that no one wants 2-3 years later, or making a product that persists in it's market share for a few years.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Glassaholic and YotaEer
    #5
    Owning the G3 Razor and LRP S3, I'd say that I agree with the OP. Guess that means I will probably have to try the Element soon. While I also agree with the post above that there are some scope designs that have lasted many years, I also believe that you are either innovating or getting ready to get left in the dust (Leupold a decade ago and Trijicon for example).
     
    • Like
    Reactions: GrandeJake
    #7
    Sako man said:
    I owned a first run production of the Zeiss 6-36 but couldn't get past the red tinge I would see when looking through at higher mag, I wonder if they have fixed that in the past few years? Otherwise a nice optic for all the reasons mentioned.
    Click to expand...
    I never saw this red hue/flare issue during my testing. Others have noted that this specific scope has an issue with light sources from behind the shooter that apparently is the root cause of this phenomenon. During my testing I do light sources hitting the front objective but I have not done light sources hitting the eyepiece.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sako man
    #8
    I'm guessing the Bushnell XRS3 6-36 also comes from the same LOW base model.

    Don't seem to head much about that scope anymore, was quite popular for a while.
     
    #10
    Glassaholic said:
    I never saw this red hue/flare issue during my testing. Others have noted that this specific scope has an issue with light sources from behind the shooter that apparently is the root cause of this phenomenon. During my testing I do light sources hitting the front objective but I have not done light sources hitting the eyepiece.
    Click to expand...
    The other thing I remember was when focused at high to mid power, then either zooming up or down required a re-focus. So a focus at one power did not focus at all of the other powers, if you changed magnification you were forced to re-focus.

    As I got one of the first production 6-36's I wonder if perhaps it had issues and has said issues been cleared up?
     
    #12
    Seems like they are all so close, that it either becomes a feature or reticle you really want/like that one has the others don't, or you go strictly by price. So the "winner by a nose" becomes what feature is important or what thing do you value more, that's something really only the individual can evaluate. Unfortunately it's kind of where "buy to try" comes in, or you have to get to a match etc. where you can hopefully handle all 3. Don't get me wrong these reviews are amazing to get 90% of the way there to the right decision but if all 3 products are say 90% the same, the last 10% becomes individual preference. That's where I think the depth of these reviews is amazing because so many factors of the optics are compared head to head.

    For example some folks really like the big bold turret marks on the Zeiss, but I'm personally not a fan. Even though my eyes are the downslope, I like the larger lettering on whole mils, which I wish more scopes had, but the half mill marks and the marks for the second rotation (we all should be able to add 10 to the #) make it way too "busy". That said I'd love to see bigger numbers on the vortex/theos. By contrast I like the Zeiss windage knob markings much more. Some people are huge on warranty so Vortex might get the nod there. Other folks want daylight bright so maybe that's a factor. If you really want a tooless zero, the Theos has that, if it works well I wasn't impressed with the tooless zero on the XTR Pro. Even brand matters, for example if I have 6 vortex scopes now with the EBR-7C reticle and that's what I'm used to, do I want to throw a different reticle into the mix.....maybe not.

    Logically in my mind the biggest factors in a scope should be the things you interact with, turrets, optics, reticle (not necc. in that order). I admittedly hate mushy turrets, even if functionally they work great. Others care less about turret feel and have to have maximum optical quality at a price point.

    Now of course mechanical reliability, and accuracy of adjustments matters, but we all know those vary sample to sample so there's no easy way to test them that's meaningful across a large sample size. Aside the tracking testing SH does, that they no longer release the results of due to manufacturer pressure.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: YotaEer, steve123 and Glassaholic
    #13
    Redfisher60 said:
    So is it a coin flip or is there a winner by a nose? I’m actually trying to make a decision between the 3.
    Click to expand...

    I have the Razor G3 and LRP S3.

    If the price was equal, I'd buy the Razor G3 again before the LRP. But when you figure anywhere from $600 - 800 difference usually...the LRP starts to look a lot more appealing to me. Let's face it, these are options when someone wants close to an alpha optic without spending that kind of money. So budget needs to be considered.

    Can't speak to the Element, but neither the Vortex or Zeiss is going to prevent you from being competitive at a match. They are both very good.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: TahoeDust, HaydenLane, Glassaholic and 1 other person
    #15
    ToddM said:
    Seems like they are all so close, that it either becomes a feature or reticle you really want/like that one has the others don't, or you go strictly by price. So the "winner by a nose" becomes what feature is important or what thing do you value more, that's something really only the individual can evaluate. Unfortunately it's kind of where "buy to try" comes in, or you have to get to a match etc. where you can hopefully handle all 3. Don't get me wrong these reviews are amazing to get 90% of the way there to the right decision but if all 3 products are say 90% the same, the last 10% becomes individual preference. That's where I think the depth of these reviews is amazing because so many factors of the optics are compared head to head.

    For example some folks really like the big bold turret marks on the Zeiss, but I'm personally not a fan. Even though my eyes are the downslope, I like the larger lettering on whole mils, which I wish more scopes had, but the half mill marks and the marks for the second rotation (we all should be able to add 10 to the #) make it way too "busy". That said I'd love to see bigger numbers on the vortex/theos. By contrast I like the Zeiss windage knob markings much more. Some people are huge on warranty so Vortex might get the nod there. Other folks want daylight bright so maybe that's a factor. If you really want a tooless zero, the Theos has that, if it works well I wasn't impressed with the tooless zero on the XTR Pro. Even brand matters, for example if I have 6 vortex scopes now with the EBR-7C reticle and that's what I'm used to, do I want to throw a different reticle into the mix.....maybe not.

    Logically in my mind the biggest factors in a scope should be the things you interact with, turrets, optics, reticle (not necc. in that order). I admittedly hate mushy turrets, even if functionally they work great. Others care less about turret feel and have to have maximum optical quality at a price point.

    Now of course mechanical reliability, and accuracy of adjustments matters, but we all know those vary sample to sample so there's no easy way to test them that's meaningful across a large sample size. Aside the tracking testing SH does, that they no longer release the results of due to manufacturer pressure.
    Click to expand...
    It’s tough, I interface more with NF scopes more than anything right now though I have a RGII that I don’t spend much time on. I’m fine with the reticles on all 3. Hmmm, I think Mile High may have all 3, I was going to stop in there next week so maybe I can do a side, by side, by side.
     
    #16
    Redfisher60 said:
    It’s tough, I interface more with NF scopes more than anything right now though I have a RGII that I don’t spend much time on. I’m fine with the reticles on all 3. Hmmm, I think Mile High may have all 3, I was going to stop in there next week so maybe I can do a side, by side, by side.
    Click to expand...

    If you have an ATACR, the G3 is going to put you extremely close in just about every way except for the turrets.
     
    #17
    Hennig said:
    Yep as someone who has all 3, Id take the G3 or the Theos over the LRP all things being equal.

    I love the toolless zero on the Theos, Vortex has the warranty and CS, so Id just decide based on what color you like best :)
    Click to expand...
    I do like that Grey on the Theos.
    diggler1833 said:
    If you have an ATACR, the G3 is going to put you extremely close in just about every way except for the turrets.
    Click to expand...
    I have an ATACR (and 2 NX-8s), at first glance I do like the reticle on the THEOS. I had decided on the RG3 before I saw this thread🙄.
     
    #18
    ToddM said:
    Seems like they are all so close, that it either becomes a feature or reticle you really want/like that one has the others don't, or you go strictly by price. So the "winner by a nose" becomes what feature is important or what thing do you value more, that's something really only the individual can evaluate. Unfortunately it's kind of where "buy to try" comes in, or you have to get to a match etc. where you can hopefully handle all 3. Don't get me wrong these reviews are amazing to get 90% of the way there to the right decision but if all 3 products are say 90% the same, the last 10% becomes individual preference. That's where I think the depth of these reviews is amazing because so many factors of the optics are compared head to head.

    For example some folks really like the big bold turret marks on the Zeiss, but I'm personally not a fan. Even though my eyes are the downslope, I like the larger lettering on whole mils, which I wish more scopes had, but the half mill marks and the marks for the second rotation (we all should be able to add 10 to the #) make it way too "busy". That said I'd love to see bigger numbers on the vortex/theos. By contrast I like the Zeiss windage knob markings much more. Some people are huge on warranty so Vortex might get the nod there. Other folks want daylight bright so maybe that's a factor. If you really want a tooless zero, the Theos has that, if it works well I wasn't impressed with the tooless zero on the XTR Pro. Even brand matters, for example if I have 6 vortex scopes now with the EBR-7C reticle and that's what I'm used to, do I want to throw a different reticle into the mix.....maybe not.

    Logically in my mind the biggest factors in a scope should be the things you interact with, turrets, optics, reticle (not necc. in that order). I admittedly hate mushy turrets, even if functionally they work great. Others care less about turret feel and have to have maximum optical quality at a price point.

    Now of course mechanical reliability, and accuracy of adjustments matters, but we all know those vary sample to sample so there's no easy way to test them that's meaningful across a large sample size. Aside the tracking testing SH does, that they no longer release the results of due to manufacturer pressure.
    Click to expand...
    ^^^ couldn’t have said it better myself, some great advice here.
     
    #21
    ToddM said:
    Seems like they are all so close, that it either becomes a feature or reticle you really want/like that one has the others don't, or you go strictly by price. So the "winner by a nose" becomes what feature is important or what thing do you value more, that's something really only the individual can evaluate. Unfortunately it's kind of where "buy to try" comes in, or you have to get to a match etc. where you can hopefully handle all 3. Don't get me wrong these reviews are amazing to get 90% of the way there to the right decision but if all 3 products are say 90% the same, the last 10% becomes individual preference. That's where I think the depth of these reviews is amazing because so many factors of the optics are compared head to head.

    For example some folks really like the big bold turret marks on the Zeiss, but I'm personally not a fan. Even though my eyes are the downslope, I like the larger lettering on whole mils, which I wish more scopes had, but the half mill marks and the marks for the second rotation (we all should be able to add 10 to the #) make it way too "busy". That said I'd love to see bigger numbers on the vortex/theos. By contrast I like the Zeiss windage knob markings much more. Some people are huge on warranty so Vortex might get the nod there. Other folks want daylight bright so maybe that's a factor. If you really want a tooless zero, the Theos has that, if it works well I wasn't impressed with the tooless zero on the XTR Pro. Even brand matters, for example if I have 6 vortex scopes now with the EBR-7C reticle and that's what I'm used to, do I want to throw a different reticle into the mix.....maybe not.

    Logically in my mind the biggest factors in a scope should be the things you interact with, turrets, optics, reticle (not necc. in that order). I admittedly hate mushy turrets, even if functionally they work great. Others care less about turret feel and have to have maximum optical quality at a price point.

    Now of course mechanical reliability, and accuracy of adjustments matters, but we all know those vary sample to sample so there's no easy way to test them that's meaningful across a large sample size. Aside the tracking testing SH does, that they no longer release the results of due to manufacturer pressure.
    Click to expand...
    IMO, for what it's worth to you, that has been my mindset for the last few years on most all scopes in the $2,000+ MSRP price range. Somebody might look through a $2,000 scope and then a $5K TT, and say they think the $2K scope is better. Everyone's eyes are different. I've had folks that have never owned a $1,000 scope look through one of those DNT's and think it's a $1,500 scope. And I've bought scoops that cost $2,500+ that I was very underwhelmed at the performance that everyone else loved to tout online everywhere (NF ATACR F1 5-25x56), even though I do absolutely love the MIL-XT reticle and the robustness and positive clicks of the turrets and ZS... But that tunnel vision where I feel like I'm looking through a paper towel roll constricted internal FOV, and how tiny the FOV is on target, really leaves A LOT to be desired, IMO. NF really needs to do better if they're charging $3K+ for a scope. At least my Razor Gen3 has a MASSIVE internal FOV that almost seems like the image fills up the entire glass of the eyepiece edge-to-edge for a really bright and huge image...It's really nice. If LOW can do it for Vortex, there's no reason NF can't do the same when they order the LOW glass for their scopes. Just saying...
     
    #22
    Glassaholic said:
    Out of curiosity, how do you think the Theos compares to your NX8's?
    Click to expand...
    Hmmmm, I have 40 rounds behind it all load testing a new 6 dasher build (so all at a white target at 100 yards). My NX-8's (4-32) sit on a 223AI and a lightweight gen1 vudoo (Mil-XT and C reticles). The Theos was stupidly easy to set zero, the glass is great (I wear glasses), I really like the reticle though I do like my MIL-C with no x-mas tree. I like the NX-8 because it's compact. They are just different beasts, I think it more directly compares to my ATACR 7-35 and until I spend more time behind it (the Theos) I’m not really sure. First impression I'd take the Theos, but I need to spend more time behind it. I definitely like it better than my G2 razor.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: YotaEer and Glassaholic
    #23
    Received my Theos today. Cant believe I waited so long to upgrade. Not mounted yet but the feel of the turrets and diopter zoom is in a whole different class compared to my Steiner.
     
    #27
    As someone who owns a 4-25 s3 and likes it, this thread has me scratching my head on my next upgrade.

    I want to move my 4-25 to my 6 arc gasser, and upgrade to one of these 3.

    I have no idea which one though 😂
     
    #32
    Kino said:
    My biggest gripe on these 3 is the lack of a nice clean reticle other than a tree.

    Something like ZCOs IMPCT1 would really really shake up the industry for ELR guys and others that has zero want or need of a tree.
    Click to expand...
    I like a little bit of a tree but when they get excessive and turn into grids I find it can be more difficult than it should be sure which line is which. This is more for field shooting against different backdrops or in low light. This kind of sums up the issue for me:
    vt-rzr-42708@6.jpg

    Probably a trivial issue for most people but it bugs me. ZCOs MPCT3X at least switches up the hash marks and adds some centerline numbers.
     
    #33
    Rodney65 said:
    I like a little bit of a tree but when they get excessive and turn into grids I find it can be more difficult than it should be sure which line is which. This is more for field shooting against different backdrops or in low light. This kind of sums up the issue for me:
    View attachment 8774132
    Probably a trivial issue for most people but it bugs me. ZCOs MPCT3X at least switches up the hash marks and adds some centerline numbers.
    Click to expand...
    No when you get behind a Element Theos the reticle does not get in the way of the sight picture. It's much better than many, if it's really a thing then perhaps you should stick to a Mil-C, or MSR2.

    For the buck there it's impossible to beat the turrets and glass on these optics.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: blksno and 1791PrecisionArmory
    #35
    The theos is a good scope, however I do think the gen3 does noticeably better job controlling mirage. I only have 1 theos as a sample, but 3 gen3s to compare it to. I moved my S3 636 pretty quickly after finding the reticle too heavy for my tastes. I do still have the 4-25 atop my rimX for all that extra elevation for stupid long 22lr shots.
     
    #36
    What's your preference between the NF and the Zeiss S3?

    I'm looking to get a new one.
    4O6shootist said:
    The theos is a good scope, however I do think the gen3 does noticeably better job controlling mirage. I only have 1 theos as a sample, but 3 gen3s to compare it to. I moved my S3 636 pretty quickly after finding the reticle too heavy for my tastes. I do still have the 4-25 atop my rimX for all that extra elevation for stupid long 22lr shots.
    Click to expand...
     
    #37
    Huntinfreak80 said:
    What's your preference between the NF and the Zeiss S3?

    I'm looking to get a new one.
    Click to expand...
    I seriously don't know how the S3 has ever passed muster. Once the s3 parallax is adjusted for a given power, take it out of that power range and it has to be re focused, it's a serious deficiency or defect in the design. An optic should stay in focus given any particular power.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: TheOE800
    #39
    Sako man said:
    I seriously don't know how the S3 has ever passed muster. Once the s3 parallax is adjusted for a given power, take it out of that power range and it has to be re focused, it's a serious deficiency or defect in the design. An optic should stay in focus given any particular power.
    Click to expand...
    I think that’s an engineering trade off combined with sensitivity to diopter setting. Perhaps a topic @koshkin could cover?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sako man and 1791PrecisionArmory
    #41
    TheOE800 said:
    I think that’s an engineering trade off combined with sensitivity to diopter setting. Perhaps a topic @koshkin could cover?
    Click to expand...

    Parallax does not shift with magnification changes in FFP scopes. Diopter setting does. It is likely that with that specific scope there is excessive diopter shift. That can make the image defocused. A couple of S3 scopes I have seen did not have that issue, but it is entirely possible that there are some out there with excessive diopter shift.

    ILya
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sako man, 1791PrecisionArmory and Redfisher60
    #42
    TheOE800 said:
    I think that’s an engineering trade off combined with sensitivity to diopter setting. Perhaps a topic @koshkin could cover?
    Click to expand...
    I thought this was a question worth discussing, so I discussed it a little bit in yesterday's impromptu livestream, starting about 25 minutes in:
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Glassaholic, Ichi, TikkaVortexFan and 3 others
    #44
    Huntinfreak80 said:
    Yes sir. I ordered the S3 6-36 it should arrive in 2weeks time. Can't wait to take it to the range.
    Click to expand...

    I greatly prefer milC VS the zeiss reticle. Prefer the NF turrets and DOF. FOV at lower mag on S3 is better, at higher end they're very similar. I believe the NF glass has more contrast, but the Zeiss is brighter. NF has much better flare control looking in direction of sun when light is at a lower angle.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: carbonbased
    #45
    koshkin said:
    I thought this was a question worth discussing, so I discussed it a little bit in yesterday's impromptu livestream, starting about 25 minutes in:
    Click to expand...

    This was great! Thank you. I do like the image quality of the S3 but the diopter shift is a deal breaker. I have not heard anyone else say if they have seen this issue on the S3, as well I wonder if the S5 has the same issue.

    To your point, unboxing videos are very retarded, and or maybe fun for little kids...
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: 1791PrecisionArmory
    #46
    Sako man said:
    To your point, unboxing videos are very retarded, and or maybe fun for little kids...
    Click to expand...
    There are many "little kids" on this forum... :LOL: For me, the box goes into storage immediately after opening, companies that look like they spend $100 on some fancy box feels like a waste as I don't proudly display my boxes all over my house... Curse Apple for ever introducing fancy boxes! Unboxing videos might be of interest to understand all the accessories but outside of that they don't have much weight.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sako man
    #47
    Glassaholic said:
    There are many "little kids" on this forum... :LOL: For me, the box goes into storage immediately after opening, companies that look like they spend $100 on some fancy box feels like a waste as I don't proudly display my boxes all over my house... Curse Apple for ever introducing fancy boxes! Unboxing videos might be of interest to understand all the accessories but outside of that they don't have much weight.
    Click to expand...
    I loved Schmidts old boxes (not seen a new one recently), plain white box and a plastic bag.
    I swear some companies spend more on the box than they do the scope.

    Burris XTR rings are ridiculously bad.
    A hard, reusable plastic case, that looks like they are designed to be dropped from an aircraft into occupied France.
     
    • Haha
    Reactions: carbonbased and Glassaholic
    #48
    At least Burris used a known brand name like Plano ($20 on amazon), Area 419 does the same with their mounts, except that it feels way cheaper and 3x as big, I ended up throwing my garmin chrono in it. I have a couple of the Burris ones, I turned one into a camera memory card holder by just slotting some foam, the other one I think I finally tossed. The red rubber trays in them made nice small parts trays.

    Rings should be one of the most bullet proof things on your rig........and yet the manufacturer feels they should be shipped in something that normally only holds extremely fragile things.

    Accutac is another one, super fancy boxes, crazy thick custom high density foam packing (that develops white sludge coating over time)......it's supposed to be a bombproof bipod :). Now they are even selling custom $50-$80 pelican hard cases for them, saw one at the range the other day.....I don't keep my spotting scope in something that bombproof on range days :)

    I'd much rather they put that extra money into either actually adding to the product, or keeping the price lower. What's even more odd is half the time the actual padding to keep the product safe in those fancy boxes/containers is basically worthless. Some scopes are notorious for this, fancy box, fancy stuff inside the box, but the actually padding to protect the optic in shipping 1/16" foam if you are lucky. Give me a plain brown box with 1/2" of hard density foam around the entire optic, not 1/16" (or nothing at all) at the erector knobs......the most fragile part of the entire optic.

    Having the lenses exposed is another one that drives me crazy, get rid of the sticker and spend the $0.25 for a couple cheap lens caps and actually PUT THEM ON THE OPTIC. I've seen several optics come out of the box with scuffs/smears etc. on the eyepiece end because that lens is so close to the housing opening and the optic was not packed well or the plastic bag it was in was being rubbed into the lens during shipping.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: carbonbased and Glassaholic
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    Mordamer
    Optics Sold
    Replies
    5
    Views
    697
    delta6pk
    D
    D
    Optics Zeiss LRP S3 6-36 MRAD
    Replies
    0
    Views
    277
    DumpPouch
    D
    ZCOklahoma
    SOLD Zeiss LRP S3 6-36x56 MIL
    Replies
    2
    Views
    413
    ZCOklahoma
    ZCOklahoma
    P
    Anybody around Dallas have a Zeiss LRP S3 to look at?
    Replies
    1
    Views
    274
    Bigtyme74
    B
    C
    SOLD FS: Zeiss LRP S3 6-36 ZF-MRi
    Replies
    0
    Views
    291
    couch000
    C
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts