Informed Opinions - EOTECH Vudu vs NX8 and Others... (help a guy out)

[Solid7]

What I have:

Zermatt Origin action
6.5 Creedmoor - one, and only one load - 140gr Berger VLD, H4350, fire formed
Pre-fit barrel not yet acquired, but it's gonna be a Rock Creek (possible a Krieger)
16.5" barrel length, used with ThunderBeast Arms Ultra 7 suppressor
Long range hunting, including elk, and night time hog hunting/culling - as well as general dickery from the bench
Distance probably capped at 800 yards, but I might get bored, and try some 1K (steel, maybe? - not hunting)
Mostly flatland (just above sea level, 80 degrees, 50-75% humidity, but occasional mountain hunting trips)
Prefer MRAD, something like an H59 reticle, and obviously a FFP. MUST have option for green illumination
I don't love > 50mm objective
Price isn't really an issue, but given the cost of the rest of the setup, I've looked at what my biased mind thinks are "logically compatible" options.


Currently, I am looking at a Nightforce NX8, 4-32, as well as an Eotech Vudu 5-25. I have an NX8 in 2.5-20x. Not a phenomenal scope, but no dud, either. I've heard the 4-32x are better. I like the illium reticle system. Checks the box for green. I have absolutely ZERO experience with Eotech scopes. In theory, it looks good. But it's a $2K theory, so I don't really feel like being too wrong.

Maybe there are other choices that are not on my radar. That's why I'm here.

Honestly, I'd go for the Leupold Mark 5HD in 5-25x, if it had a green illuminated option. I've always liked their legacy products. But for my night hunts, the illumination is just non-negotiable.

 

[Quarter Horse]

If the green illum. is a deal-breaker than the VUDU is out. In the H-59 illum. is red on mine and to the best of my knowledge there is no green option. If red is acceptable than I think the Vudu is a good option but not in the $2K range. It's a good option in the $1.5K range.

I am not an optics geek and could never provide the insight and multi factored review that the really good reviewers here can. The closest to Alpha I have is a 5-25 PMII and that is the comparison I use. If the red illum. will work for you I would be happy to elaborate on the VUDU.

 

[Solid7]

If the green illum. is a deal-breaker than the VUDU is out. It's a good option in the $1.5K range.

If the red illum. will work for you I would be happy to elaborate on the VUDU.

Maybe I shouldn't have listed green illumination as a must in my original criteria. That's uber-limiting (and also makes the NF the winner, by default). But when I said deal-breaker, I was referring to the fact that the Leupold has no illumination. Of course, one of my other cardinal rules was that I also don't want a hubble telescope, and the Leupold, again, fails to check a box, by having a 56mm objective.

And you're right, the VUDU can be had for $1.5K. That's a tougher ask on the NF, though. I don't buy used, so that is part of the reason.

 

[Jlknights61]

I haven’t used it but am personally very intrigued by the trijicon ten mile 3-18x44.

I’m building a similar rifle to yours (16” 308) and am contemplating it for my build.

30mm
Relative light weight (~24oz)
Street price ~1300-1500
FFP
Mrad Christmas tree style reticle

Seems to tick all the boxes you mentioned

 

[Solid7]

I haven’t used it but am personally very intrigued by the trijicon ten mile 3-18x44.

The biggest thing that I have against that particular scope, is the magnification. 20x would be my minimum max magnification. I mean, I know it's not much of a difference. But I don't slog a spotting scope around, so I like a scope with some top end, to do my sightseeing.

Also, I might be a bit of a heretic for saying it... But I don't love Trijicon products. I'm not exactly sure what it is, and I don't have a solid mastery of all the technical concepts - but there's something about their gear that I just don't like. I have one of their VCOGs, and there's something about that glass that really just bugs the crap out of me. I have one of the MROs for a piggie pistol, and it's a piece of garbage. (I actually replaced with an Aimpoint Comp M4)

 

[deersniper]

Nx8 is better than the Vudu.

Don’t leave out something like the minox 3-15

 

[Solid7]

Nx8 is better than the Vudu.

Don’t leave out something like the minox 3-15

You're undoubtedly right, but I can also get the VUDU for $500 less, and it's 3/4" shorter. If I were going for a PRS build I'd eschew both of these scopes, and slap a Kahles or S&B on it. I like something about BOTH the VUDU and the NX8. Neither of them will be anything close to a favorite. Compact dimensions with high magnification are a huge plus. And it's not a dream rifle build, so even better.

I do not know about the Minox, but at 15X on the high end, it falls a bit short. I'll check out this product, though.

If I were going to spend money, and go less than 20x, it would be a Kahles 318i for me, all day, every day.

 

[deersniper]

Just saying I have the Vudu 5-25, and all 3 nx8s. The nx8 looks a lot better to my eyes versus the Vudu.

 

[Solid7]

Just saying I have the Vudu 5-25, and all 3 nx8s. The nx8 looks a lot better to my eyes versus the Vudu.

Sorry if I misunderstood, but thanks for that.

Tell me about the VUDU vs the NX8 functionally. Is there $500 worth of better built in? And, since we're on the subject - although I really do love the compactness of the VUDU - the NX8 4x-32 can be had for approximately the same price as the 2.5x-20. It's been in the back of my mind that, if I couldn't get a good feeling on the VUDU, I may just suck it up, and get the bigger piece of glass...

 

[deersniper]

VUDU vs the NX8 functionally. Is there $500 worth of better built in?

Yes. And yes on the 4-32

 

[Jerry D]

Atacr 4-16x42? Id say its perfect for you.

Check out the eyeboxes and image quality at all magnifications on those high erector range scopes. Something has to give getting all those features.

Good glass at lower magnifications provides a sharper, more clear and detailed image compared to high magnification poor glass.

 

[Solid7]

I only use the higher magnifications for spotting, as mentioned previously. I am a gear minimalist.

Ironically, immediately after saying that ( ^^^ ) I remember that I do occasionally clip on a thermal, and the 50mm objective is what I'm adapted for...

 

[Jerry D]

Step up into the larger or largest atacr?

I dont see the purpose of this though. A 16.5" creedmoor for long range hunting elk with largest scopes that these companies are making? I think the 4-16 fits this better.

Id suggest a 24"+ 6.5prc at a minimun for 800 yrd elk and then top it with a 5-25 or the 7-35 atacr if it needs to double down as a spotting scope.

 

[db2000]

Step up into the larger or largest atacr?

I dont see the purpose of this though. A 16.5" creedmoor for long range hunting elk with largest scopes that these companies are making? I think the 4-16 fits this better.

Id suggest a 24"+ 6.5prc at a minimun for 800 yrd elk and then top it with a 5-25 or the 7-35 atacr if it needs to double down as a spotting scope.

^^^exactly

 

[Solid7]

Step up into the larger or largest atacr?

I dont see the purpose of this though. A 16.5" creedmoor for long range hunting elk with largest scopes that these companies are making? I think the 4-16 fits this better.

Id suggest a 24"+ 6.5prc at a minimun for 800 yrd elk and then top it with a 5-25 or the 7-35 atacr if it needs to double down as a spotting scope.

No, one of my criteria was no Hubble telescopes. Won't go 56mm on the objective, until I do a PRS rifle, sometime down the road. And then, yes, 6.5 PRC. I've actually got a little chub thinking about that one.

I wouldn't probably take an hunting shot at 800 yards, because I'm a flatlander, and that terrain/distance/conditions are not my comfort zone. The 800 yards that I mentioned above under my hunting line, was really my total working distance, because realistically, I don't have access to a range longer than that, and well... shrort barrel. When I do, I'll need to heat some steel first. 600 yards on flat land, I'd definitely do all day long with a Creedmoor, though. I've got homes on both coasts, but I don't get range time in the PNW. Maybe one day... I'm more likely to take an elk in the more mild terrain of NE Oregon or Southern Idaho. 50-500 yards, average. Idle acreage/pasture land.

 

[Memberberries]

I love my VUDU 5-25x50 but I have the md3 reticle. It's a solid scope that I find easy to use. I only have 2 gripes, one is the fast focus eyepiece makes a rear cap a pain and the other is that none of my friends can seem to get behind it. The eyebox is tight but I can get behind it pretty fast. Rifle is a Remington in a KRG bravo fwiw.

I use it as a range/match scope and I wouldn't call it amazing in low light, it's an ultra short scope so you can't expect it to be. It works but I have a leupold vx3i lrp 4.5-14x50 ffp TMR that I prefer in low light. Also my athlon cronus 4.5-29x56 is better in low light at the same mag levels but it's bigger than you want. I don't like a Christmas tree reticle for hunting but that's personal preference.

I'd go lower mag range for the distances you mentioned. I rarely run my scope at max magnification and that's usually only when shooting paper.

 

[Memberberries]

Just noticed you're going with a 16.5" creedmore. That's gonna be good for whitetail to 600 but not elk. Those would need to be half the distance.

I double down on something with less power like a 3-18x50 VUDU for a more forgiving optic or the leupold vx3i lrp 4.5-14x50 for light and more compact setup. I've really been surprised with the leupold, 5 mil turret is nice when hunting or target shooting when not on a timer where a locking 10 mil like on the VUDU is great in a match with a stopwatch running. If you want to save some money the leupold is 1k new, match scopes get bought and sold every season but those vx3i's are rare on the used market.

 

[Solid7]

I'd go lower mag range for the distances you mentioned. I rarely run my scope at max magnification and that's usually only when shooting paper.

Yes. As I mentioned a couple of times, I don't shoot at top end. I just don't like having a spotting scope. I would normally shoot at 12x-15x for something out to 500 yards. Maybe even less, depending on what the target is. There is a rare exception that I may take a carefully placed shot at higher than typical magnifications, and then, it's just nice to have it. Even if it's indulgent.

Thanks for the other info. Certain Christmas trees for hunting don't suck when it's windy. On the one NX8 2.5x-20 that I have, I have the Mil-XT reticle. It's a lot less cluttered than a Horus or a Tremor. I do like the broken cross hairs with the tiny dot in the center.

 

[Solid7]

Just noticed you're going with a 16.5" creedmore. That's gonna be good for whitetail to 600 but not elk. Those would need to be half the distance.

Negative. This seems to be an eternal debate. There is more than enough energy at 600 yards to drop an elk - even a big bull - with a 140 grain Berger Hunting VLD. And I wouldn't be breaking any new ground in doing so.

I like those Leupolds (and formerly the Vari-X III line), but illumination and a hog light are a beautiful thing. And again... higher magnification saves the the trouble of packing a spotting scope. I hate those damn things.

I hate that you planted that idea in my head, though. I always did love my Leupolds. And I'm half tempted to get a 6.5x-20, and stick it away for a rainy day. I have one of the old 6.5x-20 40mm objective, with a target dot, BNIB, for a silhouette rifle that never happened. So... thanks, man. Thanks a lot.

 

[deersniper]

Leupold. Just say no

 

[Jerry D]

You have got a lot of criteria, I think a picatinny rail and a couple scopes are in order that you can dismount depending on your usage. Scopes won’t change your dope so get a load figured out and confirm zero after swapping.

 

[ma smith]

Screw your budget and get ZCO 4-20

 

[Solid7]

You have got a lot of criteria, I think a picatinny rail and a couple scopes are in order that you can dismount depending on your usage. Scopes won’t change your dope so get a load figured out and confirm zero after swapping.

I shoot 130 grain Berger Hunting VLDs in my 6.5 Grendel guns, exclusively. I'll be shooting the 140 grain variant in the Creedmoor. The only thing to work out, will be how many flecks of powder.

For now, I have been planning on using the NX8 that I have - which sits in a Spuhr QDP - until I make a final decision. That won't be a full time solution, though (besides, that cantilever mount looks silly). There will definitely be a dedicated piece of glass for this gun. I can't see there being multiples, but who knows...

Absolute worst case, I get another NX8 in the 2.5x-20. I know where to get them cheap.

 

[Solid7]

Screw your budget and get ZCO 4-20

I would definitely do that, if the gun deserved it. Maybe on the PRS...

But don't think for a minute I haven't looked at those.

I am still a fanboy of German glass. Love me a Kahles or Schmidt and Bender. I'd have to play with the ZCO before committing, because I haven't actually seen one in person, yet.

 

[Solid7]

Leupold. Just say no

I get what you're saying... but are there actual problems with Leupolds? Cause I started buying them in the mid to late 90's - when they were one of the only brands that I'd actually use. I've still got one or two of those. Can't imagine what you'd have to be doing in the field to destroy a scope. Anybody's scope.

I'll be honest... I've never actually bought an optic based on either the warranty claims, or its claims of indestructibility. For me, that's a remote (as in a distant galaxy) consideration, as opposed to how well it does its one and only job.

 

[ma smith]

IMHO if you are asking for anything contradictory you can't be on a "budget".

You want to kill Elk at 600yd with sub 1000ft/lb energy payload?
and a mid range optic that doubles as a spotting scope?

and you want "cheap"?
(and light, and short, etc)





[I jest, but think about this for a minute!]

 

[Solid7]

IMHO if you are asking for anything contradictory you can't be on a "budget".

You want to kill Elk at 600yd with sub 1000ft/lb energy payload?
and a mid range optic that doubles as a spotting scope?

and you want "cheap"?
(and light, and short, etc)

[I jest, but think about this for a minute!]

so I know that there always has to be (at least) that one guy that pops in with no contribution, other than to exhibit contrarianism, blatant know-it-all-ism, or smartassery. Let me address your points, and then please move along.

1) sub 1000 ft lbs energy payload? Huh? I think you didn't actually look at any numbers before hitting the 'reply' button - I will revisit this often, and I reserve the right to change my numbers, based on empirical data. But this isn't what my initial range card says. For the sake of intellectual honesty, if you're right, you're right. However, this is already a done thing. Many elk have died at distance to 6.5 Creedmoor. I have witnessed it. Choose to believe that, or not. I'll re-adjust my shooting distances to whatever the range data tells me. That's my starting point.

2) I selected a "mid-range" optic, because I didn't use a top end action, or build premium all the way through. It's what fits, in my mind. Besides, it's not like I haven't given examples of what I'm looking at. I concretely specified my baseline. And the ones I listed, double as a "good enough" spotting scope for my purposes. Sorry, not sorry, if you don't agree. "Light"? Your word, not mine.

3) I don't know what you are talking about with that "cheap" talk. Sure, I spoke of value propositions. But can you specifically show me where I said I wanted something cheap? I don't recall telling yourself, or anyone else, that it had to be "cheap". I came in with something already in mind. I did go on to say that I know where to get the "mid-range" products that I've already considered, "cheap". (my pseudo-apologies if you're triggered by words, regardless of their actual context)

4) The short and compact nature of the optic has nothing to do with it being cheap. There are very expensive optics made in a short tube. The length has more to do with being able to use a clip-on thermal, or night vision forward of the optic.

 

[Memberberries]

A 6.5 creedmore shooting a 140gr out of a 16.5" barrel should be running about 2500 fps. That puts you under 1k ftlbs at about 500 yds.

16″ 6.5 Creedmoor Precision Rifle: Compact accuracy

Over the past two decades in the sport I’ve learned short barrel precision rifles shoot well and look cool. Most of the short rifles I’ve built were 16″ barrel 308 Winchesters. …

rifleshooter.com

You might be able to get 50 to 100 fps more but that's not a game changing ammount of additional speed

To be honest none of my scopes work as great spotting scopes when you get out past 300 to 400 yards. Yes they can see hits on steel that was painted or the shoot-N-c style targets but really for the range just I've spent time behind some nightforce nxs's also and they weren't better spotters. Sure they work at 100 but when the paper is at 600 you just need a real spotting scope.

At the match that I shot today, I only used more than 12x once. It went farther than the ranges you intend to shoot with this rifle. It rained, sleeted, snowed, and wind was really variable. The VUDU didn't skip a beat, my sunshade kept my lense clean and dry where lots of guys had to clean and dry theirs.

I can say that I wouldn't have missed the VUDU if I had my 4.5-14x50 on my rifle today instead, except I don't have a sunshade on the leupy. I think I'll remedy that.

 

[Solid7]

A 6.5 creedmore shooting a 140gr out of a 16.5" barrel should be running about 2500 fps. That puts you under 1k ftlbs at about 500 yds.

I'm not seeing that. My range card says I should be right around 1200 ft/lbs at 500 yards, out of a 16.5" barrel, 1:8 twist, loading for 2600 fps.

To be honest none of my scopes work as great spotting scopes when you get out past 300 to 400 yards. Yes they can see hits on steel that was painted or the shoot-N-c style targets but really for the range just I've spent time behind some nightforce nxs's also and they weren't better spotters. Sure they work at 100 but when the paper is at 600 you just need a real spotting scope.

OK, this point may need some further clarification... Sure. I get your point. My primary concern with not carrying a spotting scope, binoculars, etc, is in the field. I am a minimalist. I pack only what I need. For sight-ins, you're right. There's no way to print 600 yard groups, without having a way to see them.

For field work, I may spend a half an evening doing field sweeps, before snapping on a thermal or illuminator. That's where a higher power scope really shines. Doesn't have to be the best piece of glass in the world. Just needs to blow up the image. It gets dialed back before shots are taken. Also, most thermals don't work for shit past about 8X, anyway. They're optimized for lower magnification.

I probably could have been a bit more articulate on that point.

The VUDU didn't skip a beat, my sunshade kept my lense clean and dry where lots of guys had to clean and dry theirs.

I can say that I wouldn't have missed the VUDU if I had my 4.5-14x50 on my rifle today instead, except I don't have a sunshade on the leupy. I think I'll remedy that.

I am not interested in anyone's product loyalties, so shoot straight here for me - which piece of glass do you really like better overall? Some people really seem to want to trash on the VUDU - maybe even the concept, more than the product. But step out of the convention for just a moment... Is this VUDU 5-25 a capable piece of equipment, despite the fact that it's not competition grade, or an optic ho's holy grail? If there's one or two things that you absolutely hate about it, or things that might bust a deal, what would they be? Also, it seems that these days, Leupold have really fallen out of favor. What exactly do people think is wrong with their product?

If it's just the optic quality, well that's not a deal breaker for me. For me, listening to people talk about all the different facets of optics, is like listening to a sommelier describe wine; that's all great, but if I don't know the terms well enough to agree or disagree, and I still like the wine, it's all wasted on me. For sure, if optics quality is the standard to judge all by, I'd get a german scope, and be done with it. A PMII Ultra short, to be precise. But this is catered towards something a bit more unorthodox. I intend to use this build as a learning lesson for future builds, as much as anything.

 

[scharfschutze762]

The NX8 and VUDU 5-25 are good scopes but IMO both scopes have compromises for the compact optical packages.
The NX8 has pretty good glass but a tight eyebox especially the 2.5-20 and I found it pretty underwhelming for use on a gas gun.
The VUDU 5-25 has decent glass..not quite as good as NX8 but the eyebox is not bad. The cons are it has some pretty heavy purple fringing and the eye relief changes quite a bit with the magnification changes. But to get a 5-25 scope at 11 inches theres gonna be comprimises.
I like all of the above for different purposes and I dont buy into the one fits all for scope or rifle.

 

[Solid7]

The NX8 and VUDU 5-25 are good scopes but IMO both scopes have compromises for the compact optical packages.
The NX8 has pretty good glass but a tight eyebox especially the 2.5-20 and I found it pretty underwhelming for use on a gas gun.
The VUDU 5-25 has decent glass..not quite as good as NX8 but the eyebox is not bad. The cons are it has some pretty heavy purple fringing and the eye relief changes quite a bit with the magnification changes. But to get a 5-25 scope at 11 inches theres gonna be comprimises.
I like all of the above for different purposes and I dont buy into the one fits all for scope or rifle.

Thanks for that.

For sure, compromises. You'd be hard pressed to find any scope that wasn't a compromise. Ideally, a scope would most likely sit on a gun like a 10 gallon bucket, if it were designed for absolute optical perfection.

I think I can agree with you about the NX8. Except that I do like it on a gas gun, but probably not as much as I'd like something else, that cost twice as much - which for me would be a waste of a scope. (cause for me, $$$ optics belong on bolt guns) So complete circular logic. In fact, the NX8 that I'll be borrowing for this project, is coming off of a gas gun, temporarily. I shoot mine on a 6.5 Grendel, out to 600 on the range. That NX8 on that particular gas gun, owns every living thing inside of a 300 yard radius, all day, every day. Sub .5MOA, fully gas tuned, to recoil like a pea shooter, and stay on target with the follow-up. I had a Trijicon LPVO on it before that, and I really think that the NX8 2.5x-20 is an upgrade.

I really don't want anyone to take away from this thread that I'm after a "one size fits all" solution for my optics selection. This is a VERY specific gun. I'm literally building the entire firearm around the short barrel and the compact optic.

Thanks for weighing in.

 

[scharfschutze762]

Just my opinion only on the gas guns more specifically 7.62mm ones from personal experience I like 4-16 NF, 5-20 S&B, 3-12 S&B in no particular order. I dont need 1/2 moa accuracy and require fast follow ups including positional and weak side. YMMV.

 

[Solid7]

So, Manners has a pic on their website, that's very close to what I'd like to set up. I had never considered one of those folding stocks before, but honestly, I'm shopping backpacks, at this very moment...

 

[Quarter Horse]

I've enjoyed following this thread particularly the views of @deersniper who has a VUDU and apparently three of the NX8s. The problem is that every decent scope has compromises. If you want a super short there will be compromises. Weight, depth of field, eye relief, image clarity, reliability, color rendition, CA, coatings, field of view, and obviously price all enter into the equation of which optic and why.

@Solid7, my view of a scope revolves around two things. Will it do the things I need it to do? How easy it to use? It is interesting to note that the price of used VUDU 5-25s has been steadily increasing in the PX. I doubt that any of it's shortfalls will cost you a miss for your stated purposes. If anyone has any further questions about the VUDU I will be happy to address specifics I will be happy to answer them but the previous sentence says most of it. Besides that, it's stormin' and I have a strong chance of losing power so I'm going to get this posted.

 

[Solid7]

@Solid7, my view of a scope revolves around two things. Will it do the things I need it to do? How easy it to use?

I absolutely could not agree more. (and for that reason, one of my previous comments mirrors this)

Thank you for the feedback. I believe I may just PM you for a follow up. Much appreciated, sir.

 

[Memberberries]

I don't understand why leupold has such hate as of late but I can't argue with keyboard warriors, not saying it's perfect but my personal experience hasn't left me feeling the same way I sense the majority of forum folks do. Lrp sits on a heavy 24" 223 that gets run to 600 regularly at the range and 300 on pond critters.

I get the whole brand loyalty thing and I'm just comparing my two short optics, I wish I had an nx8 to compare to but sadly I do not. The leupold is literally half the cost of the VUDU but honestly I feel like I get 80% the use out of it. It doesn't act as a spotting scope when sighting in at 200 yds nearly as well, it has less power and doesn't light up.

As far as preference to use, if I'm just casually knocking down steel I'd probably grab my 223 with the LRP, if I want to get serious I grab my 308 with the VUDU because the 223 won't actually knock down some silhouettes unless you hit it a bunch of times in a row. Same story with critters, Bambi at 400 gets the 308, beavers at 150 get the 223. The 223 got about 300 rounds in the last month and the 308 got about 150, ammo cost plays a role there.

One last thing, both used, my LRP cost me $600 a month ago and my VUDU cost me $1000 about 2 years ago, I don't feel like I would buy the LRP for $1000 and I wouldn't buy the VUDU for $2000 but the used prices of both haven't gone down since I bought them, the VUDU has actually gone up quite a bit. They're great optics in their respective weight classes and the NX8 is a class above the VUDU but you have to pay to move up.

 

[Solid7]

That last comment is kinda the crux of the matter for me. In a lot of places, there isn't a whole heck of a lot of difference pricewise between a NX8 in the 2.5-20, and the VUDU in 5-25. I keep hearing that that the 4-32 is a far better optic, but it boxes me out of using the clip on... I'd be shooting above the brake, or pulling heat off of the suppressor (depending on how I was running the rig)

I respect this feedback, because honestly, unless someone could prove that a Leupold was falling apart in their hands, I wouldn't believe the hate. I've had way too many of their products. Now, they may not be the ideal choice for what I'm looking at right now, but certainly nothing to shake a stick at, either. I've been behind one of the Mark 5HD 3.5x-18 X 44, and I thought it was a damn fine piece of kit - albeit, not for my application. Back in the day, a Leupold VariX III, picked up on the cheap, and upgraded by Premier Reticle, was the stuff of everyday legendry. Reliable, clean, affordable. I've probably put more rounds downrange peeping through a Leupold tube, than any other single brand. Not a fanboy, by any means. But definitely not a hater.

 

[Memberberries]

I plan on running a clip-on someday in front of the VUDU but for now I play with a hog laser.

The 4-32 is widely regarded as a better scope because it's not as compact, you just can't beat physics. You should look into March scopes while you're at it. They're great for light compact rigs.

 

[Solid7]

Thanks for the lead. I'll check them out.