I purchased the IOR Recon at the Tulsa Gun Show from Val who is the importer of IOR scopes. Put it on a 308 a couple of weeks ago and sight it in at 100 and200 yards. Sunday we had a shoot that we fire 5 rounds each from 2, 3, 4, 5 and 600 yards. A couple of the other guys looked through it and could not believe how big the sight picture was through that 40mm tube. I was shooting with it set about 24 power all the way back to 600 and could see the holes in the white center all the way back to 600.I had a shot at 500 that split the white and black ring and I could see it. At any of the yardage the sight picture was just as clear at the edges as it was in the center. As for the turrets the clicks were crisp and solid. The light transmission is better than the 30mm tube 56mm objective scopes that I have. I do not know what else to say, I'm not the person that should be doing a review on a scope. Anyone thinking of getting the IOR Recon will not be disappointed when they get it. It is more scope than I should be allowed to own. BIll
Rifle Scopes IOR Recon 4-28x50 40mm tube
- Thread starter wrongside
- Start date
I want one of those in the worst kind of way. But that is an ass load of money (for me). I'm coming to the conclusion that any scope in the +3K range is a tad out of reach. But keep us posted, I may win the lotto.
The rings and sunshade come with it.
The size of the tube does not effect the quality of the image...
The size of the "tube" greatly affects the amount of light transmission and that aides in improving the clarity of what your eye can see. This is true of all scopes, not just IOR's.
This is incorrect. Here is a quote pulled from a highly respected and highly educated source on the subject.
"A larger tube does not by itself have any direct effect on image quality. It does give the the optical designer a little more space to work with which makes high zoom ratios and other complicated features easier to execute.
I put together a series of short articles on Riflescope Fundamentals some time ago. It is long since I was trying to make it suitable for different people, but if you scroll down to image quality sections, it will give some basics:
Riflescope Fundamentals
ILya"
I am also really interested in the Recon. It may be one of those purchases that is a ways off for me, but my 3.5-18x50 has me so impressed that I am looking really hard at IOR.
There are a number of manufacturers that make 40mm rings, I think IOR has TPS make most of their rings. My 3.5-18 came with ARC M10 35mm rings (really nice - pretty impressed with those as well).
IOR 40mm sure look like TPS rings
American Defense also has 40mm rings for their Recon mounts for AR platforms.
There are a number of manufacturers that make 40mm rings, I think IOR has TPS make most of their rings. My 3.5-18 came with ARC M10 35mm rings (really nice - pretty impressed with those as well).
IOR 40mm sure look like TPS rings
American Defense also has 40mm rings for their Recon mounts for AR platforms.
That's two of us, that thing looks sweet.
That is a question MSG would be better at answering. I have only had the scope out 2 times.
Holy shit the FOV is unreal. I didn't know anyone could do that.
I bought the "Terminator" (the brother to yours with a SFP and 52 power) and I couldn't say enough good things about it. I think it really is cheating. I can read a novel at 200 yards! (When mirage isn't bad) Throw it on a 1/8MOA gun and it pretty much hits the target on its own. I've been wanting to see or here about the Recon too. Thanks for the review. I will be getting another IOR.
I personally loved the glass (schott) in my IOR's and was always impressed by the image, but they all broke. Some more than once. All of them had never been on anything bigger than a .308 shooting M118LR. Out of about 13 I have had total, most were sold once they were replaced. The last I had was a new 6-24, 3.5-18 and newer 9-36. If I was just shooting paper and it didn't matter if I was out of a scope for a few weeks to a few months then I wouldn't mind spending up to $1,500 on one (never payed more than that for any of them). Anyways, knowing their history and seeing how they are put together and needing to rely on them, it is nearly insane to think about spending $3000 on an IOR unless it came with hunks of gold.
Do they work? sometimes yes. Do they have a higher percentage of failure? Hell yes. Do they track correctly and is the reticle aligned vertically to less than 0.5 degrees? Go find out for yourselves, but it may be a painful and expensive venture. Would I rather buy a S&B, Nightforce, Kahles, or Hensodlt? Fuck yea! I dare you IOR owners to go out and measure with a tape measure 100 yards to the INCH from the turret to a wall and put a laser in the bore and run the turrets 10-15 mils up and down a few times and see if everything lines up and the click value is true. Also see if the reticle travels perfectly vertical without running of center as the elevation increases. This is how you determine whether your scope is working properly.
There is a market for everything, look at counter sniper scopes, someone buys those pieces of crap. Phillip61 you are an IOR fanboy, there is nothing wrong with it but I also think you get offended when someone talks down about an IOR. I mean no disrespect, just saying watch out and check your gear to make sure it is functioning properly.
And their FOV numbers are TOTAL SHIT! Measured every one I had, they never were even friggin close, lying is a hell of a marketing strategy.
Do they work? sometimes yes. Do they have a higher percentage of failure? Hell yes. Do they track correctly and is the reticle aligned vertically to less than 0.5 degrees? Go find out for yourselves, but it may be a painful and expensive venture. Would I rather buy a S&B, Nightforce, Kahles, or Hensodlt? Fuck yea! I dare you IOR owners to go out and measure with a tape measure 100 yards to the INCH from the turret to a wall and put a laser in the bore and run the turrets 10-15 mils up and down a few times and see if everything lines up and the click value is true. Also see if the reticle travels perfectly vertical without running of center as the elevation increases. This is how you determine whether your scope is working properly.
There is a market for everything, look at counter sniper scopes, someone buys those pieces of crap. Phillip61 you are an IOR fanboy, there is nothing wrong with it but I also think you get offended when someone talks down about an IOR. I mean no disrespect, just saying watch out and check your gear to make sure it is functioning properly.
And their FOV numbers are TOTAL SHIT! Measured every one I had, they never were even friggin close, lying is a hell of a marketing strategy.
Last edited:
Every IOR made is a piece of shit, but you bought 13 of them anyway.
I have never had any problem with my Gen 4, my sample size is small.
Scott at liberty optics told me that the Gen 4 fixed the bugs and I believe him, of course he sells IOR scopes, but has an excellent rep as a stand up guy.
I had 5 before I started using them and breaking them. My 2.5-10x42 worked awesome until the parallax slipped out and I could no longer focus at less than 200 yards. The two 3-18x42 SFP scopes worked pretty well until the illumination circuit died on one and the other's parallax knob started binding to where it froze up. I picked up the gen 1 3-18x42 FFP MP8 scope and heard they had troubles but didn't have a problem until the groups started moving about due to a lens breaking loose inside. The 9-36 I had would jump parallax every time it was fired and the replacement did too! Moving on to the gen 3 3-18x42 FFP it worked well but by that time I was switching over, I still took a 6-24 and 9-36 in on a trade and the 9-36 had the same parallax trouble and the 6-24 seemed ok but was never used. I had a 2-12 that had horrible fish eye but was never mounted and was sold new, I also had a 2-12 Spartan with BDC turret that worked great for 500 rounds and then out of no where a lens inside fell out of alignment and everything went 100% blurry. The 3.5-18x50 was nice but the reticle was defective and I got the runaround trying to get another in a reasonable amount of time, sold it for a S&B 4-16x50 P4F. This is when I truly began to appreciate quality optics. My father still owns a SFP 3-18x42 MP8 MOA turret scope and has never even mounted it. From what I gather from Val is that the SFP scopes are supposedly tanks mechanically wise but the FFP scopes were problems...... I was given a lot of different info every time I had to send A scope or TWO back for repairs/replacement.
Val and Scott at Valdada optics always took care of me, they were stand up guys and all the new scopes were purchased from Scott at Liberty Optics who is also a great guy with 100% customer service.
Also Scott at Liberty honestly came close to dropping IOR before, it was a huge fight. Things seem to have changed some and bridges were built, I would have to believe they have improved but not to the point of a 3k dollar scope.
Val and Scott at Valdada optics always took care of me, they were stand up guys and all the new scopes were purchased from Scott at Liberty Optics who is also a great guy with 100% customer service.
Also Scott at Liberty honestly came close to dropping IOR before, it was a huge fight. Things seem to have changed some and bridges were built, I would have to believe they have improved but not to the point of a 3k dollar scope.
Actually it's just the opposite. When someone post on this site I'm thinking about getting A Such and Such IOR what do ya'll think? And I post "IOR, best damn scope on the planet. period, bar none". Then it's OTHERS that get their feelings hurt and jump in and start saying how terrible they are , how they break all the time.....but it was the older models. There is a current SF member on here that has used the IOR scopes in multiple counties under most environmental conditions and to use his words They have been "Astonished by the results". But no one here wants to hear that, again others get offended when he dares to post such a thing.?
I for the life of me can't understand when some one post "I'm thinking of getting XYZ scope, what do ya'll think"? why we all just can't say "awesome, you'll be happy with it".
I personally always post "Best damn scope on the planet. Period, bar none" because I know there is about four or five others that will start in with the name calling and negative comments. It's sad, but funny to me, that is why I do it. I'm not a fan boy. I could care less what people buy, but once they make up their minds I try not to tear them down and make them feel like their stupid.
Frank says we're doing a disservice to others when we say "It worked for me" or "Mine works". What are we suppose to say? If they work......they work. Why would I say otherwise? Should I advise others on what other people have experienced or what I have experienced? I believe everyone here that says they have had trouble with their IORs. I just don't understand why the same people I believe don't believe me when I say "Mine works" or "I haven't had any of those issues with mine". If Frank thanks that is such a disservice then he needs to list in each category on his forum those people that are allowed to reply to such a post. That way the OP can hear from only those that Frank "blesses".
Anyhow, I love all you guys.
PS. IOR, the best damn scope on the planet. Period, bar none!
Been there and done that with the 3.5-18X50, and it does what it is supposed to do with very nice glass and excellent performance overall. That is one of the reasons why I am so interested in the Recon. I think they have hit their stride with these newer models in the last couple of years. Unfortunately, for us, the prices seem reflect that.
I'm assuming you like the new Xtreme X-1 reticle? I'm not sure if I do or not. Maybe after I used it for awhile it would grow on me, but I sure like the the MP-8.
I am not that picky about reticles. I do like half mil marks and more than five mils hold over, and as long as it doesn't give you the feeling of using two 2 X 4s for center cross hairs, I can use it.
I am really happy with the MP-8 SH A5.
I second everything Matt said about IOR's as I have had the same experience with them. Vendors don't drop a brand and no longer carry them because its a great product.
If I was spending $3K on glass IOR wouldn't even get a consideration.
If I was spending $3K on glass IOR wouldn't even get a consideration.
Looking all over the internet for 40mm rings, TPS might make the heavy rings for IOR but that is not what came with the scope. The rings supplied with the scope are a lighter claw style. The only similar rings that style were Leupold PWR and Al Talbot. I'm not a big fan of the claw style so I will be looking for some others.
