I was just checking out the US Optics website. They are not showing the ERGO models. Did i miss something? Did they drop the ERGO paralax?
Rifle Scopes No more ERGO?
- Thread starter axeltow
- Start date
Re: No more ERGO?
It's USO's business decision to make, but I am disappointed.
I prefer the ERGO, and I am not interested in a Tpal.
It's USO's business decision to make, but I am disappointed.
I prefer the ERGO, and I am not interested in a Tpal.
Re: No more ERGO?
I was lucky, I have one of the last ergo batches.
I was lucky, I have one of the last ergo batches.
Re: No more ERGO?
I really like my SN-3 ERGO/EREK. Sad to see them discontinue it. If I was to order another USO for a precision rifle it would have likely had the ERGO as well.
I really like my SN-3 ERGO/EREK. Sad to see them discontinue it. If I was to order another USO for a precision rifle it would have likely had the ERGO as well.
Re: No more ERGO?
me also like simple ergo . got a rebuild coming-in this week . but No more ergo . no more 35mm on the Sn3's w/ only 34mm now . restrictions of Ret's & Illum choices . and I am sure other changes of production .
They Do the most personal custom glass orders out there .
BUT it is good because they are streamlining & cutting time consuming details that are not dictating the overall quality of there work & product . They do offer a lot of nice models . You can't have the customer in total complete control with dictating his/her every little freaky personal likes in the overall picture . It is just to costly in the end & these little changes help to get everyone in & out the door & shooting faster with bowing down to every little personal detail in a glass order .
Something has to give a little off both ends with customer & production with everyone happier in the end .
<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">imho ( Theoretically ) limiting 'some' choices is going to give you New custom order glass builds faster & with faster turn around on all Repair . overall - Everyone wanting & getting there glass as fast as possible & to get themselves out and driving some bullets .</span></span>
.
me also like simple ergo . got a rebuild coming-in this week . but No more ergo . no more 35mm on the Sn3's w/ only 34mm now . restrictions of Ret's & Illum choices . and I am sure other changes of production .
They Do the most personal custom glass orders out there .
BUT it is good because they are streamlining & cutting time consuming details that are not dictating the overall quality of there work & product . They do offer a lot of nice models . You can't have the customer in total complete control with dictating his/her every little freaky personal likes in the overall picture . It is just to costly in the end & these little changes help to get everyone in & out the door & shooting faster with bowing down to every little personal detail in a glass order .
Something has to give a little off both ends with customer & production with everyone happier in the end .
<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">imho ( Theoretically ) limiting 'some' choices is going to give you New custom order glass builds faster & with faster turn around on all Repair . overall - Everyone wanting & getting there glass as fast as possible & to get themselves out and driving some bullets .</span></span>
.
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Unreconstructed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's USO's business decision to make, but I am disappointed.
I prefer the ERGO, and I am not interested in a Tpal.</div></div>
May I ask why not the t-pal?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Unreconstructed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's USO's business decision to make, but I am disappointed.
I prefer the ERGO, and I am not interested in a Tpal.</div></div>
May I ask why not the t-pal?
Re: No more ERGO?
If I'm going to throw down $2500-$3000 on optics I know I am getting what I pay for from USO. USO does things no other scope mfg does: EREK, left windage, more reticle choices than any other mfg combined, color anodizing or cerakote, internal bubble level, push button illumination, etc. I own <span style="font-weight: bold">one</span> scope, a USO SN3 3.2-17x44 with ERGO, I have zero complaints with the scope and will honestly never sell it now that its irreplaceable.
I can understand the switch to all 34mm as that was an industry standard that was bound to happen, but I also feel kind of shut out in the cold now that there is no ERGO. I can understand the limiting factor of producing the all steel MST-100, but really dislike the lack of ingenuity of the T-PAL setup and wish the feature on USO scopes that works so well for me wasn't made redundant.
I would have planned on more USO scopes and still hold out hope for the DFP SN8, but can't justify spending so much on something I just don't love. For top dollar, I expect better executed design.
If I'm going to throw down $2500-$3000 on optics I know I am getting what I pay for from USO. USO does things no other scope mfg does: EREK, left windage, more reticle choices than any other mfg combined, color anodizing or cerakote, internal bubble level, push button illumination, etc. I own <span style="font-weight: bold">one</span> scope, a USO SN3 3.2-17x44 with ERGO, I have zero complaints with the scope and will honestly never sell it now that its irreplaceable.
I can understand the switch to all 34mm as that was an industry standard that was bound to happen, but I also feel kind of shut out in the cold now that there is no ERGO. I can understand the limiting factor of producing the all steel MST-100, but really dislike the lack of ingenuity of the T-PAL setup and wish the feature on USO scopes that works so well for me wasn't made redundant.
I would have planned on more USO scopes and still hold out hope for the DFP SN8, but can't justify spending so much on something I just don't love. For top dollar, I expect better executed design.
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: softcock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They Do the most personal custom glass orders out there .
BUT it is good because they are streamlining & cutting time consuming details that are not dictating the overall quality of there work & product . They do offer a lot of nice models . You can't have the customer in total complete control with dictating his/her every little freaky personal likes in the overall picture . It is just to costly in the end & these little changes help to get everyone in & out the door & shooting faster with bowing down to every little personal detail in a glass order .
Something has to give a little off both ends with customer & production with everyone happier in the end .
<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">imho ( Theoretically ) limiting 'some' choices is going to give you New custom order glass builds faster & with faster turn around on all Repair . overall - Everyone wanting & getting there glass as fast as possible & to get themselves out and driving some bullets .</span></span>
.</div></div>
In the midst of these changes that USO is making, seems there are a few guys that are upset about one thing or another. From a business standpoint I think they are doing the right thing and softcock's response here is the best response I've seen regarding USO's changes. You cant make everyone happy, but they are STILL the ONLY custom scope builder out there. Seems they just dropped the LEAST popular options which makes sense. Ford is not going to keep building a car that they sell less than 10 of per year. Fords cars also dont look the same now as they did 10 years ago. Keep up the good work USO. Looking forward to some cool new stuff hopefully too.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: softcock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They Do the most personal custom glass orders out there .
BUT it is good because they are streamlining & cutting time consuming details that are not dictating the overall quality of there work & product . They do offer a lot of nice models . You can't have the customer in total complete control with dictating his/her every little freaky personal likes in the overall picture . It is just to costly in the end & these little changes help to get everyone in & out the door & shooting faster with bowing down to every little personal detail in a glass order .
Something has to give a little off both ends with customer & production with everyone happier in the end .
<span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">imho ( Theoretically ) limiting 'some' choices is going to give you New custom order glass builds faster & with faster turn around on all Repair . overall - Everyone wanting & getting there glass as fast as possible & to get themselves out and driving some bullets .</span></span>
.</div></div>
In the midst of these changes that USO is making, seems there are a few guys that are upset about one thing or another. From a business standpoint I think they are doing the right thing and softcock's response here is the best response I've seen regarding USO's changes. You cant make everyone happy, but they are STILL the ONLY custom scope builder out there. Seems they just dropped the LEAST popular options which makes sense. Ford is not going to keep building a car that they sell less than 10 of per year. Fords cars also dont look the same now as they did 10 years ago. Keep up the good work USO. Looking forward to some cool new stuff hopefully too.
Re: No more ERGO?
Way back when, the ERGO was touted as being a simpler and more rugged design for parallax than the side-focus models and that was around the time when the TPAL was introduced. If USO feels that the TPAL is durable enough to phase out the ERGO, then I guess that is a good thing. I am sure the weight savings and simpler machining and fitting also plays a part, most people are demanding side-focus models over the adjustable objective scopes these days. How many high-end scope manufacturers still have/use adjustable objectives?
I have one USO scope, ST-17 custom build, this unit has ERGO and EREK and was comparable in price to the NXS offerings. This retirement of the ERGO would be a plus if the price is not increased but, judging from the website it seems that USO is not offering as many options as it used to. (Perhaps streamlining the product line to reduce backlogs or working on a contract?)
Way back when, the ERGO was touted as being a simpler and more rugged design for parallax than the side-focus models and that was around the time when the TPAL was introduced. If USO feels that the TPAL is durable enough to phase out the ERGO, then I guess that is a good thing. I am sure the weight savings and simpler machining and fitting also plays a part, most people are demanding side-focus models over the adjustable objective scopes these days. How many high-end scope manufacturers still have/use adjustable objectives?
I have one USO scope, ST-17 custom build, this unit has ERGO and EREK and was comparable in price to the NXS offerings. This retirement of the ERGO would be a plus if the price is not increased but, judging from the website it seems that USO is not offering as many options as it used to. (Perhaps streamlining the product line to reduce backlogs or working on a contract?)
Re: No more ERGO?
ergo is simpler & that's why I always like it . I also use it for the most part as just a 'point & shoot' It's fast & simple as I mainly just keep it on Infinity & don't touch it much at all . ...It's KISS All The Way .
But I am pretty sure more customers choose Side over the Obj. ergo . Side-Focal is the superior choice for that fine focus/definition . & also superior reading the Mirage @ range distances . So it is going to be on top if you have to make the choice to cut one off the list of choices .
.
ergo is simpler & that's why I always like it . I also use it for the most part as just a 'point & shoot' It's fast & simple as I mainly just keep it on Infinity & don't touch it much at all . ...It's KISS All The Way .
But I am pretty sure more customers choose Side over the Obj. ergo . Side-Focal is the superior choice for that fine focus/definition . & also superior reading the Mirage @ range distances . So it is going to be on top if you have to make the choice to cut one off the list of choices .
.
Re: No more ERGO?
So from what I have read in this topic ERGO is no longer available. So does this mean the ST-10 will no longer have a paralax adjustment since that was all that was offered. Also all scope tubes are now 34mm no more 30mm tubes? The tube size will make them all a big price jump since the 30mm sold a lot cheaper. Or am I wrong? If so please tell me.
So from what I have read in this topic ERGO is no longer available. So does this mean the ST-10 will no longer have a paralax adjustment since that was all that was offered. Also all scope tubes are now 34mm no more 30mm tubes? The tube size will make them all a big price jump since the 30mm sold a lot cheaper. Or am I wrong? If so please tell me.
Re: No more ERGO?
I always prefered the ergo as they were optically superior to T-pals and much less sensitive to paralax to begin with. T-pal requires an extra internal lens to focus. Ergo uses the over all tube length to focus (screw in to shorten, out to lengthen).
I always prefered the ergo as they were optically superior to T-pals and much less sensitive to paralax to begin with. T-pal requires an extra internal lens to focus. Ergo uses the over all tube length to focus (screw in to shorten, out to lengthen).
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: para1505</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So from what I have read in this topic ERGO is no longer available. So does this mean the ST-10 will no longer have a paralax adjustment since that was all that was offered. Also all scope tubes are now 34mm no more 30mm tubes? The tube size will make them all a big price jump since the 30mm sold a lot cheaper. Or am I wrong? If so please tell me.</div></div>
The USO website says the ST-10 is a TPAL, so it will have the parallax knob on the side.
All scope tubes are not 34mm. Looks like ALL but the 5-25x are 30mm.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: para1505</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So from what I have read in this topic ERGO is no longer available. So does this mean the ST-10 will no longer have a paralax adjustment since that was all that was offered. Also all scope tubes are now 34mm no more 30mm tubes? The tube size will make them all a big price jump since the 30mm sold a lot cheaper. Or am I wrong? If so please tell me.</div></div>
The USO website says the ST-10 is a TPAL, so it will have the parallax knob on the side.
All scope tubes are not 34mm. Looks like ALL but the 5-25x are 30mm.
Re: No more ERGO?
USO themselves used to (& maybe still does) say that the Ergo is optically superior to the Tpal. Ditto on it's durability.
And I can't help but wonder if the old, dial illumination rheostat, with a screw on cover, is a hell of a lot more durable, & accident proof than the push button variety.
Not real happy to be hearing about the Ergo no longer being offered. I'd always thought I'd get another USO down the road, & the Ergo was one of those boxes which I definitely wanted to check.
USO themselves used to (& maybe still does) say that the Ergo is optically superior to the Tpal. Ditto on it's durability.
And I can't help but wonder if the old, dial illumination rheostat, with a screw on cover, is a hell of a lot more durable, & accident proof than the push button variety.
Not real happy to be hearing about the Ergo no longer being offered. I'd always thought I'd get another USO down the road, & the Ergo was one of those boxes which I definitely wanted to check.
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BillPrudden</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Dave -
May I humbly submit that there might be a lot of USOs built and ordered, but rarely- or only lightly-used, and that, therefore, rate-of-order does not necc demonstrate functionality or durability?
Bill </div></div>
I see your point and it's a good one to ponder on. Pretty smart comment.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BillPrudden</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Dave -
May I humbly submit that there might be a lot of USOs built and ordered, but rarely- or only lightly-used, and that, therefore, rate-of-order does not necc demonstrate functionality or durability?
Bill </div></div>
I see your point and it's a good one to ponder on. Pretty smart comment.
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BillPrudden</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Dave -
May I humbly submit that there might be a lot of USOs built and ordered, but rarely- or only lightly-used, and that, therefore, rate-of-order does not necc demonstrate functionality or durability?
Bill</div></div>
Hello Bill, that may or may not be the case, but I dont know how anyone would gather those statistics other than pure speculation. I wasn't talking about durability, functionality, optical superiority, frequency of use, looks, style, or even cool factor. I was just pointing out that somebody at USO said they sell way more TPAL's than ERGO's and that was a large part in the decision to discontinue the ERGO. Why continue to carry a product if the sales numbers are not there? No matter if it is a better scope or not, it wasn't selling.
I personally have both ERGO's and TPAL's and I prefer the TPAL for ease of use and the funny thing is that the TPAL is more "Ergonomic" than the ERGO haha. With my T-rex arms I can adjust parallax with the side knob without breaking my shooting position or cheek-weld vs having to reach all the way to the objective to turn it. You can see the numbers on the TPAL knob with your left eye when looking through the scope with your right.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BillPrudden</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Dave -
May I humbly submit that there might be a lot of USOs built and ordered, but rarely- or only lightly-used, and that, therefore, rate-of-order does not necc demonstrate functionality or durability?
Bill</div></div>
Hello Bill, that may or may not be the case, but I dont know how anyone would gather those statistics other than pure speculation. I wasn't talking about durability, functionality, optical superiority, frequency of use, looks, style, or even cool factor. I was just pointing out that somebody at USO said they sell way more TPAL's than ERGO's and that was a large part in the decision to discontinue the ERGO. Why continue to carry a product if the sales numbers are not there? No matter if it is a better scope or not, it wasn't selling.
I personally have both ERGO's and TPAL's and I prefer the TPAL for ease of use and the funny thing is that the TPAL is more "Ergonomic" than the ERGO haha. With my T-rex arms I can adjust parallax with the side knob without breaking my shooting position or cheek-weld vs having to reach all the way to the objective to turn it. You can see the numbers on the TPAL knob with your left eye when looking through the scope with your right.
Re: No more ERGO?
I've wanted a ST-10 EREK/ERGO for several years. The decision by USO to consolidate their product line gave me impetus to buy one now, so I snatched up one of the last ones Midway had in stock. It'll sit on my SPR until I can buy another bolt gun to put under it. Dang good scope, good glass and built like the proverbial tank.
I'm sorry to see USO discontinue this feature, but like any company they have to do what makes the most business sense.
I've wanted a ST-10 EREK/ERGO for several years. The decision by USO to consolidate their product line gave me impetus to buy one now, so I snatched up one of the last ones Midway had in stock. It'll sit on my SPR until I can buy another bolt gun to put under it. Dang good scope, good glass and built like the proverbial tank.
I'm sorry to see USO discontinue this feature, but like any company they have to do what makes the most business sense.
Re: No more ERGO?
I would like to see them keep one ERGO scope in the line up as I think it was the best high mag "low profile scope" out there.
3.8-22x44 ERGO with 35mm tube (though 34mm would not bother me at all)
Glad I own one did plan in the future to get another for the "high Mag" low profile nature of that model.
USO please put that 1 model back in the line up !!
I would like to see them keep one ERGO scope in the line up as I think it was the best high mag "low profile scope" out there.
3.8-22x44 ERGO with 35mm tube (though 34mm would not bother me at all)
Glad I own one did plan in the future to get another for the "high Mag" low profile nature of that model.
USO please put that 1 model back in the line up !!
Re: No more ERGO?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gmbjr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I always prefered the ergo as they were optically superior to T-pals and much less sensitive to paralax to begin with. T-pal requires an extra internal lens to focus. Ergo uses the over all tube length to focus (screw in to shorten, out to lengthen). </div></div>
While USO had previously stated that the ERGO is optically-superior to the T-PAL that isn't necessarily true <span style="font-style: italic">in all cases.</span> It's about quality control and attention to detail. Case in point: I had a full-tilt SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] ERGO Lo Profile that was built at close to the same time that a friend had a full-tilt SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL built, but the clarity of my ERGO Lo Profile was well below that of my friend's SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL. At least part of the clarity issue was due to the reticle lens not being throughly cleaned after the reticle was filled with the phosphorescent substance used to illuminate the reticle when the illumination is "On'. The result was a sub par clarity across the entire FOV in daylight, and visible streaks when the illumination was switched-on in darkness. It's possible that if my scope had been built with the same care that my friend's T-PAL received my ERGO Lo Profile might have had equal or better quality than my friend's T-Pal. We'll never know, as both my friend and I traded our USOs' for Premier Heritage 5-25X[56]s'.
USO is in the best position to know the optical specifications and performance data of it's own scopes, so when USO said that the ERGO out-performed the T-PAL it probably did <span style="font-style: italic">at the time</span>. The 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL has always been more expensive than identically-optioned 3.2-17X[44mm] ERGO, so unless USO pushed the ERGO because it might sell better based on price why would they say that the ERGO was optically-superior to the T-PAL if it hadn't been true? Dropping the ERGOs' could have been based purely on supply & demand sales. Or maybe USO feels that they've improved the T-Pal to a point that it's performance matches that of the ERGO or even surpasses it.
Keep-in-mind that not all side focus scopes are equal and that (aside from tracking, turret feel, optical performance, and durability) there's a lot more to a scope. Schmidt & Bender, Premier, and USO all use Schott glass for their lenses, but the Premiers' and commercial S & Bs' that I've used and/or looked-though have all had a definite edge over all the USOs' I've used and/or looked-through - and that's been quite a few. Some of the optical differences may be due to mechanical design, but there are different levels of glass quality, nuances in procedure and techniques for shaping lenses, and, of course - coatings to be considered. And I'm sure that there are other things I've haven't mentioned too.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gmbjr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I always prefered the ergo as they were optically superior to T-pals and much less sensitive to paralax to begin with. T-pal requires an extra internal lens to focus. Ergo uses the over all tube length to focus (screw in to shorten, out to lengthen). </div></div>
While USO had previously stated that the ERGO is optically-superior to the T-PAL that isn't necessarily true <span style="font-style: italic">in all cases.</span> It's about quality control and attention to detail. Case in point: I had a full-tilt SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] ERGO Lo Profile that was built at close to the same time that a friend had a full-tilt SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL built, but the clarity of my ERGO Lo Profile was well below that of my friend's SN-3 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL. At least part of the clarity issue was due to the reticle lens not being throughly cleaned after the reticle was filled with the phosphorescent substance used to illuminate the reticle when the illumination is "On'. The result was a sub par clarity across the entire FOV in daylight, and visible streaks when the illumination was switched-on in darkness. It's possible that if my scope had been built with the same care that my friend's T-PAL received my ERGO Lo Profile might have had equal or better quality than my friend's T-Pal. We'll never know, as both my friend and I traded our USOs' for Premier Heritage 5-25X[56]s'.
USO is in the best position to know the optical specifications and performance data of it's own scopes, so when USO said that the ERGO out-performed the T-PAL it probably did <span style="font-style: italic">at the time</span>. The 3.2-17X[44mm] T-PAL has always been more expensive than identically-optioned 3.2-17X[44mm] ERGO, so unless USO pushed the ERGO because it might sell better based on price why would they say that the ERGO was optically-superior to the T-PAL if it hadn't been true? Dropping the ERGOs' could have been based purely on supply & demand sales. Or maybe USO feels that they've improved the T-Pal to a point that it's performance matches that of the ERGO or even surpasses it.
Keep-in-mind that not all side focus scopes are equal and that (aside from tracking, turret feel, optical performance, and durability) there's a lot more to a scope. Schmidt & Bender, Premier, and USO all use Schott glass for their lenses, but the Premiers' and commercial S & Bs' that I've used and/or looked-though have all had a definite edge over all the USOs' I've used and/or looked-through - and that's been quite a few. Some of the optical differences may be due to mechanical design, but there are different levels of glass quality, nuances in procedure and techniques for shaping lenses, and, of course - coatings to be considered. And I'm sure that there are other things I've haven't mentioned too.
Keith
Re: No more ERGO?
I'm a fan of both the ERGO and TPAL. I run a TPAL but have always appreciated the attributes of the ERGO. I too am sad to see them go but as always look forward to new options and offerings from US Optics!
I'm a fan of both the ERGO and TPAL. I run a TPAL but have always appreciated the attributes of the ERGO. I too am sad to see them go but as always look forward to new options and offerings from US Optics!
Re: No more ERGO?
I just bought a new ST10 with the EREK/ERGO last month. The only reason I did not get the the other type of scope is I shoot with a Swiss K31 and that Knob sticking out on the left side would continue to be hit with brass during rapid fire ejection. Jesee
I just bought a new ST10 with the EREK/ERGO last month. The only reason I did not get the the other type of scope is I shoot with a Swiss K31 and that Knob sticking out on the left side would continue to be hit with brass during rapid fire ejection. Jesee
