• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

If the manufacturer was listening, what realistic thing would you change about your favorite optic?

I always get a kick out of min parralax. After shooting a shot load of nrl22 and prs22, rarely are shots under 50 and when they are parralax doesn't matter. You can clean the course with a TT or any other 50m parralax. It's not an issue at all.
Agree that NRL22 is fine backed off to 8x when .25 targets at 25m

IIRC the .mil and LEO guys req'd ~10M parallax (S&B and NF). Others copied that at a later date. Not worth explaining more here.
 
Depends on what you mean by "American". The major glass companies are multi-national. They don't make every product in every country. Schott has US facilities, but is a German company. They even have facilities in China. Same with Corning. You might as well get over hoping for 100% "Made in America" (or any particular country), that ship has sailed. Best you can hope for is designed and assembled in the USA.
The Vortex AMG 6-24x50 was 100% made and sourced in the USA (including glass), that was part of their big marketing campaign about the whole AMG project. They had to change their terminology a bit when their USA reticle etcher had some issues and so they outsourced the reticle lens to Germany IIRC. I would hope that the next iteration of AMG long range scopes is similar with most products being sourced in the USA, but not sure if that is too cost prohibitive these days and made even harder by many millennials demanding starting wages higher than what I made after 20 years on the job.
 
The Vortex AMG 6-24x50 was 100% made and sourced in the USA (including glass), that was part of their big marketing campaign about the whole AMG project. They had to change their terminology a bit when their USA reticle etcher had some issues and so they outsourced the reticle lens to Germany IIRC. I would hope that the next iteration of AMG long range scopes is similar with most products being sourced in the USA, but not sure if that is too cost prohibitive these days and made even harder by many millennials demanding starting wages higher than what I made after 20 years on the job.
i honestly don't care much about where/who makes the AMG. but if they can do a 4-16/4-20 and/or 5-25 with that lighter 26-32ish oz weight and equally good glass and mechanics to the gen 3 i'm all for it
 
Damn it, man! I suppose a more FML-LDK oriented solution might work? Keep the crosshairs compact and thicken them? The scope itself is compact, (relatively) light... easy to see the desire to put it on something that might get carried and used on low mag and in low(ish) light. The optical system being what it is, having a cross hair that works for the shooter at low mag, particularly in low light, seems like a good idea.
Take a look at the FML-TR1H offered in the 3-24x52, it is basically the FML-TR1 with a circle of death similar to what Bushnell used to offer with their G2H reticle in the LRHS series of scopes. If enough people ask for this reticle in the 4.5-28 March may consider it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJL2
Lighter weight ...scopes with glass are ancient technology...like blackpowder...need something new, multi dimensional alien technology...to peer into the future as well as the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Gahler
Part of the issue is it’s got to be the “right” MPVO. Too many thought taking an existing design and throwing in a new reticle would suffice, or offering a decent reticle in a poor design. I realize this is personal opinion but a proper FFP MPVO needs to go below 3x on the bottom (preferably be closer to 2x) and offer 12x or higher on the top end and have a reticle that works as well at the bottom as it does the top, I think several LPVO reticles would suffice and all this needs to be wrapped up in a package that is preferably under 25oz or darn close to it. Athlons Helos G2 2-12x42 is a very nice design with one gaping flaw - it’s Chinese. Trijicons 2-12x36 had so much promise but they handicapped it with a useless reticle (useless for low mag work). Manufacture a quality 2-12 from Europe, Japan or even the Philippines and put in the proper reticle and we’re in business. March’s 1.5-15x42 is the closest I’ve seen at trying to accomplish this but I think they reached too far with a 10x erector and short design and IQ suffers at higher mags as a result, but man I love the idea of this scope even if the execution isn’t quite what I’d hoped it would be so it may stay a while. Leupold’s 2-10 just doesn’t have the top end needed for an effective MPVO (IMO) but it will sell just because of the name. Nightforce, Vortex and Steiner/Burris have the wherewithal to attempt this - who wouldn’t jump at an ATACR 2-12x42 with FC-DMX or a Vortex Gen3 2-12x42 with EBR-9 mrad reticle. There are a bunch of guys dropping $3k, $4k and higher for KAC’s and LMT’s, even more building really nice DMR/SPR style rigs wanting to put some good glass on it. I believe there is a market, but only for the right scope and that is the risk that any mfr has to take when considering this market. So far only a few have dared to enter, but hopefully it will encourage others to follow suit.
I heard ZCO something coming out ?
 
Dear Zco,
Please integrate some super badass dual focal plane reticles into your 420 and 527 line so its not just useable but super badass at low mag.
Please and thank you.

PS Please make a LPVO thats worth a shit. Everyone elses suck.
Couldn’t they just asd Vortex bright as the sun illumination ?
 
Lighter weight ...scopes with glass are ancient technology...like blackpowder...need something new, multi dimensional alien technology...to peer into the future as well as the past.
They are coming out with stuff like that. Integrated rangefinder , TracIR, AB etc. In a scope mount. Not just with a Raptar and clip on

Here:
 
Last edited:
I heard ZCO something coming out ?
Only available to Europe. If they did bring it to the states the 36mm tube would greatly hinder sales here, neither the hunter crowd nor the tactical community need 36mm scopes. 30oz a bit too much for an MPVO. The tiny little capped elevation turret not doing it for me either. I have little doubt this scope will knock it out of the park optically, but just like what I mentioned - it has to be the "right" MPVO scope and I just think there are too many compromises in this zero compromise scope ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cutout
I’m not sure why a 36mm tube is a hold back for anyone willing to pay for a ZCO. It seems they can afford new rings or they couldn’t afford the scope to start with and are already making bad decisions.
 
I’m not sure why a 36mm tube is a hold back for anyone willing to pay for a ZCO. It seems they can afford new rings or they couldn’t afford the scope to start with and are already making bad decisions.
Some won't care, many more will. It's just another area of non-conformity that we have to deal with. 36mm is going to add weight and cost to the design, this is unnecessary for the intended market. The major benefit of 36mm is increased travel which is a non-issue for an MPVO, the other benefits are negligible and would be gladly traded in for the benefits that come with smaller tubes. But maybe I'm wrong and a US version of the 36mm tube 1.7-12x50 ZCO will be the best selling MPVO of all time 🤷‍♂️ but it is not the scope I am looking for.

obi-wan-kenobi-these-are-not-the-droids.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: HaydenLane
The .mil is using mk5 with 35mm, and nobody is complaining
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCP
Only two things, get rid of the stupid ring mounting system and let me see the elevation turret
position in the scope image.
 
Take a look at the FML-TR1H offered in the 3-24x52, it is basically the FML-TR1 with a circle of death similar to what Bushnell used to offer with their G2H reticle in the LRHS series of scopes. If enough people ask for this reticle in the 4.5-28 March may consider it.
I co-designed the FML-PDK and FML-LDK reticles...

Now that you have the story, I would like to know why the MTR-PDKI would not work for you. It has illumination and longer (almost to the edge) thick stadia extensions.
Back on topic in the sense we're discussing this in the context of the FX 4.5-28x52 as a personal favorite. To a certain extent, this is just me wanting MORE.

It might make me the very odd man out, but perhaps my favorite thing about the FML-TR1 is the amount of space in the center. That little "starburst" center is my jam - I get .2/.4/.6 mrad holds without a reticle that looks like I'm monitoring seismic activity for a clean view of the target. The FML-TR1 "tree" does a wonderful job of being entirely ignored. When it's as easy to see through/past the tree as it is in the FML-TR1, there's no reason not to have it.

The FML-TR1H looks good to me in general. I'm not sure how I feel about the donut, given that the crosshairs themselves seem pretty substantial and may obviate the need for it. My only gripe there is that it's not an option in the 4.5-28x52. I could also argue that the FML-1 updated for .2 mrad hashes would be pretty damn useable in a crossover capacity... but may not provide enough capability to be a marketable "crossover" design.

I have to beg off answering on the PDK/LDK because I don't have experience to speak to. When I compared them to the FML-TR1 and FML-3 it didn't seem like the crosshair design was substantially different in appearance at low magnification. Or rather, not substantially different enough to warrant selection on that basis. I think there is a lot to like in both designs. The first paragraph does a good job of explaining my bias towards the FML-TR1.
 
The Vortex AMG 6-24x50 was 100% made and sourced in the USA (including glass), that was part of their big marketing campaign about the whole AMG project. They had to change their terminology a bit when their USA reticle etcher had some issues and so they outsourced the reticle lens to Germany IIRC. I would hope that the next iteration of AMG long range scopes is similar with most products being sourced in the USA, but not sure if that is too cost prohibitive these days and made even harder by many millennials demanding starting wages higher than what I made after 20 years on the job.
Would be interesting to know what facility they got the glass from. Ive been involved with the optical glass industry for over 30 years, and our company has a close working relationship with most of the major glass manufactures, except for the Japanese companies. If the reticle issue pushed it to Germany, I'm guessing maybe Schott glass (they have a large facility in Duryea PA, but had a massive fire that destroyed most of the facility, so a lot of what they produced was sent to other facilities and after rebuilding have a mostly different product line).

As I said, it really comes down to where the particular product is being made. If it was Schott glass, there's a good probability that material is no longer made in the US. Oh, and the big push the last few years was reformulating all the glass in Europe to eliminate lead, so many products are not what they were 10 years ago
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
Another vote for ZCO with a MSR2 reticle, and 10 mil turrets.

Leopold - offer the VX3 1.5-5 with the heavy duplex again.
 
... and made even harder by many millennials demanding starting wages higher than what I made after 20 years on the job.
Please update your younger generation terminology. The youngest millennial are 27 this year and were born in 1996. According to Pew millennials were born from 1981 to 1996. Or in other words ask where someone was on 9/11. If the answer ranges from kindergarten to not quite legal to buy alcohol, they are a millennial. I was a freshman.

I believe you are mostly talking about zoomers these days. Now some of the younger millennials are retards. They were the tide podders. Different from us older millennials. We used floppies, VHS tapes, cassettes, paper maps, and the like. I was 2 years out of high-school when the first iPhone was released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FuhQ
Please update your younger generation terminology.
The fact that you even had to bring this up tells me I'm getting old :ROFLMAO: I lump all whiney young people who think they are owed something or a victim of something into the "millennial" bandwagon, I suppose it's my catchall phrase for young and entitled regardless of what actual era they grew up in.
 
Please update your younger generation terminology. The youngest millennial are 27 this year and were born in 1996. According to Pew millennials were born from 1981 to 1996. Or in other words ask where someone was on 9/11. If the answer ranges from kindergarten to not quite legal to buy alcohol, they are a millennial. I was a freshman.

I believe you are mostly talking about zoomers these days. Now some of the younger millennials are retards. They were the tide podders. Different from us older millennials. We used floppies, VHS tapes, cassettes, paper maps, and the like. I was 2 years out of high-school when the first iPhone was released.
You're the same age as me... I was out of school 2 years as well. I remember when the internet didn't exist, and nobody had a cell phone until they were old enough to drive. Some of us older millennials grew up around Gen-X so we think, act, and function like they do. The younger millennials and Zoomers can be a whole different breed of people. I don't even claim or like to be associated with them because everyone thinks of the younger millennials when you hear the word.
 
Last edited:
You mistyped “completely removing MOA from use in scopes, especially otherwise good hunting scopes ruined by this utterly Inferior system of measure.”
Agree 100%. I think Zeiss, Swaro, etc... is doing themselves and their customers (and potential customers) a complete disservice by not offering their amazing lightweight hunting scopes in a MIL/MIL configuration, as well as their MOA/MOA that they've always made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJL2
You're the same age as me... I was out of school 2 years as well. I remember when the internet didn't exist, and nobody had a cell phone until they were old enough to drive. Some of us older millennials grew up around Gen-X so we think, act, and function like they do. The younger millennials and Zoomers can be a whole different breed of people. I don't even claim or like to be associated with them because everyone thinks of the younger millennials when you hear the word.
My brother in law was born in 1995 I believe so barely a millennial.

His work mate ls refer to him as an 80 year old man as he never goes out drinking, doesn't chase girls, never leaves the house and drives in old peoples cars.

There are people in their 40s and 50s who are every bit a useless as some of the new generation who don't have the excuse if youth.

Ultimately labels like millennial and boomer are totally meaningless as the individual differences vary so greatly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
Would be interesting to know what facility they got the glass from. Ive been involved with the optical glass industry for over 30 years, and our company has a close working relationship with most of the major glass manufactures, except for the Japanese companies. If the reticle issue pushed it to Germany, I'm guessing maybe Schott glass (they have a large facility in Duryea PA, but had a massive fire that destroyed most of the facility, so a lot of what they produced was sent to other facilities and after rebuilding have a mostly different product line).

As I said, it really comes down to where the particular product is being made. If it was Schott glass, there's a good probability that material is no longer made in the US. Oh, and the big push the last few years was reformulating all the glass in Europe to eliminate lead, so many products are not what they were 10 years ago
It was mostly not Schott. There is plenty of glass made in the US. The reticles were not made by Schott either. There are specialized companies who do that. There are a few around.

ILya
 
The Vortex AMG 6-24x50 was 100% made and sourced in the USA (including glass), that was part of their big marketing campaign about the whole AMG project. They had to change their terminology a bit when their USA reticle etcher had some issues and so they outsourced the reticle lens to Germany IIRC. I would hope that the next iteration of AMG long range scopes is similar with most products being sourced in the USA, but not sure if that is too cost prohibitive these days and made even harder by many millennials demanding starting wages higher than what I made after 20 years on the job.
Bitch, I went to college for underwater basket weaving I deserve $150K starting with 20 days PTO plus holidays - I know what I got!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Glassaholic
USO FDN:
  • Make a JVCR gen 2 with .2 marks on the vertical axis.
  • Do an FDN that makes it down to 25yds parallax. I want to use mine on a .22.
  • Maybe offer a 7-35x56?
  • Stop making crap in China. Make that a shell company or something. Seriously, US Optics selling Chinese optics is a bad look. Just stop.
ATACR 7-35:
  • Offer 10 MRAD/rev turrets
Taking China out of the equation would prove salubrious in the particular and broader pictures. Agreed.
 
Someone get this man in touch with the manufacturers. Imagine what March could accomplish if they'd just do something with a normal erector.

And seriously, s&b reticles are the main reason I could never buy one. Heck, just pay Vibbert royalties on the JVCR, or a pr2, mil-xt, mil-c, or scr2 variant. Ditch Horus and the grid reticle already.
I like the March and ZCO suggestions.
 
for me, my one feature I love is not as common as it should be: Push/Pull locking turrets. There's a few different ways to do it, but I would like it if every single one was like that.

Pie in the sky: Detents for magnification at a sensible interval. This mostly applies to LPVOs and 'MPVOs' and not the higher power glass, but it would be quite nice to be able to lock into a known magnification, especially on lighter SFP optics where you could make better use of the reticle by calculating dope tables for a given magnification.
 
for me, my one feature I love is not as common as it should be: Push/Pull locking turrets. There's a few different ways to do it, but I would like it if every single one was like that.

Pie in the sky: Detents for magnification at a sensible interval. This mostly applies to LPVOs and 'MPVOs' and not the higher power glass, but it would be quite nice to be able to lock into a known magnification, especially on lighter SFP optics where you could make better use of the reticle by calculating dope tables for a given magnification.
Yeah, I'm not keen on push-pull locking turrets. You can't tell by looking at them and it's quite a big movement and can occur by happenstance. I'm a big fan of the shuriken locks on the March. You can tell by looking at them and it's really a conscious decision to lock/unlock, simple to actuate, yet almost impossible to do it by mistake. But I'm an even bigger fan of choices and let people choose what they want or prefer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Balor
Yeah, I'm not keen on push-pull locking turrets. You can't tell by looking at them and it's quite a big movement and can occur by happenstance. I'm a big fan of the shuriken locks on the March. You can tell by looking at them and it's really a conscious decision to lock/unlock, simple to actuate, yet almost impossible to do it by mistake. But I'm an even bigger fan of choices and let people choose what they want or prefer.
Honestly any form of locking turret that isn’t a horrible fine-threaded cap and can be operated simply is a win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Denys
@ Schmidt & Bender

- Your new 3-18x42mm looks awesome, but now let's try it again in a focal plane and reticle people actually give a fuck about and will use. Call the FinnAccuracy folks for help on this.

- Until you can give me Aimpoint-level battery life, would you please stop with the ultra-thin, skeletonized reticles on FFP LPVO's. Ignoring some duplex posts is easier than finding your thin shit when my battery dies.

- While your "CC" mode on the LPVO's is a neat idea, I'd happily give that up for the sake of simplicity and cost savings on the already insultingly high prices. We can do just fine with a damn-near true 1x and an offset red dot. Having had this feature break and leaving me stuck on 7y parallax and essentialy leaving me stuck with a heavy, $5k Aimpoint, I now hold my breath on the rare occasions I go into CC mode. As much as I want to be doing all the shit "CQB-1000y", y'all have some stuff you could easily cut back on.

@S&B and other high-end mfgs

- Finally, can we knock it off with the idiotic erector ratios and pushing ridiculous top ends. How about we take just a second to push tech on some really kick-ass, light and efficient optics in reasonable erector ratio/tube sizes...ya know...for people to actually shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rothgyr
- Finally, can we knock it off with the idiotic erector ratios and pushing ridiculous top ends. How about we take just a second to push tech on some really kick-ass, light and efficient optics in reasonable erector ratio/tube sizes...ya know...for people to actually shoot.
Oh, I hope not. I would hate to give up my March Majesta (8-80X56). I've been having too much fun at 80X on the 1000 yard F-class target.