Re: IT'S HERE!! Premier 3-15 Double Turn
Well, I made it to the range today. Unfortunately, I didn't really come away with any major revelations either way. The Heritage performed exactly like it should, and that was expected.
First of all, I of course was not going to subject this (or any other) optic to some hardcore durability test. I'll leave that to the others here. No freezing, dragging behind trucks, lighting on fire, hammering nails into boards, etc... I'm just going to take it for granted that any of these optics are more than durable enough for my uses.
For me, the 2 scopes I pay much attention to are the S&B PMII and the Heritage. You might not see too much about the USO Canadian here because honestly, I'm just not that big of a fan of USO and will probably not own another one. Just my personal opinion here. The customer service is fantastic, but unfortunately I've had to use it more than I think is acceptable.
A few issues I wanted to address:
1) Tactile feel of the turrets, and how audible the clicks are.
2) How accurate the clicks are relative to the target, i.e. does 3.0mil on the scope translate to 3.0mil POI shift on target.
3) Return to zero after clicking up into at least the second turn (15mil +).
4) Quality / Resolution of the glass and reticle subtension of the GenII.
I'm far from an expert, not even close, but I have owned several samples of some of the best glass out there. Here's what I came away with.
1) We set up the rifles and I took a few pictures for comparison. The S&B is a 5-25x56 PMII, CCW Mrad, P4Fine. I just sold and traded 2ea 4-16x50 S&B's last week. So the 5-25x's are all I have left to compare. Just checking out the turrets prior to shooting, the clicks of the Heritage are spaced fairly close. Not TOO close, but any closer would be too close IMO. I definitely would not want a single turn version of this scope. I did like the heavier click at each 1.0mil. It would be much easier adjusting these turrets in darker conditions having that feature. The sound of the clicks is much different than the S&B, but I guess either is fine. The S&B has a bit more defined tactile feel on each click though IMO, and "overshooting" the come-up is less of a problem on the S&B, i.e. stopping on the correct number is a bit easier on the S&B. I had mixed emotions about the "zipper" tool-less turret adjustment at first, having heard some people say they worry about it "coming loose" at an inopportune time. I can confirm these will NEVER come loose on their own. There is plenty of cam pressure when closed, and they take quite a bit of force to even open them. This is really a great idea and innovation. For someone like me who switches optics around quite a bit, or even switches to new reloads and requires much optic re-zeroing, I think this is a great feature. Thumbs up on the tool-less adjustments IMO!!! Both the turrets on the S&B and Heritage are much more tactile and audible than my USO Canadian. No question about it. One small detail I like better about the S&B turrets, is that the numbers are brighter and a bit easier to visually locate. May be a small advantage in lower light. All in all, I really like the turrets on the Heritage. The size is perfect, and they seem very solid and precise.
2) I zero'd the Heritage at 100yds and that was rather quick and uneventful. Then I performed a small box test going 3.0mil up and fire a shot, then 3.0mil right, 3.0mil down, 3.0mil left. We measured the distance between all shots and they moved just under 11" which is just about perfect for 3.0mil. Return to zero was perfect. I've done this a few times before with this particular S&B and it has always been perfect. I did it again anyway, and again the adjustments were perfect, and return to zero was right on.
3) We shot briefly at 1000yds, and the come up for my 300gr SMK is 6.1mil. I didn't shoot the S&B at anything further than 100yds because I already know how it performs, which is to say fantastic. The Heritage of course tracked to 6.1mil and was dead perfect elevation wise at 1000yds. We came back down to 800y, 600y and 500y and it tracked back down perfectly. At that time, I remembered I wanted to get it into the second turn then track back down. So I clicked up to 20.0mil and back down 3 times. Shot 2 shots at 100yds, and to nobody's surprise they were dead zero. That's a big deal to me, probably one of the most important aspects of a good optic, is perfect return to zero.
4) When we first set up at the bench, I carefully focused each optic, and made sure they were absolutely parallax free, at least as close as I could possibly tell. The S&B was set to 15x. My buddy and I both looked through each scope at the 100y target many times. This was something I was very curious about since I've heard/read here the glass of the Heritage rivals or even surpasses that of the S&B, which I thought would be quite a feat. I have to say -- it's very close. In my very honest opinion, I'd give a slight edge to the S&B in clarity and resolution, with possibly giving it to the Heritage at the edges. Of course, both have FANTASTIC glass, but I could read more of the smaller text of the target through the S&B. Same with my friend. Maybe 2 other samples would produce different results, but the 2 samples I'm looking at provided these results. I give the glass edge to the PMII, but it's really splitting hairs as they both have awesome glass.
The GenII reticle is actually quite thick for precision work. At first sight, I thought it appeared much finer. That only lasted until I compared it to the P4Fine, both on 15x of course. The GenII appears to be almost twice as thick as the P4F. Not a problem at all though, since I assume the GenII XR in the Heritage would be thinner for more precise applications. The GenII is a great reticle if one plans to spend much time dialed down from 15x, shooting close range, or movers, etc... Having both options of GenII and GenII XR should suit everyone's needs just fine. I liked the slightly wider FOV at 15x with the Heritage, while still maintaining what seemed like a bit more eye relief.
The S&B and the Heritage I have to say, in my very limited experience, are quite similar. If both were in front of me and I had to choose only one, I'd still take the S&B. BUT, at $3200 vs. $2400, the Heritage becomes quite an unbelievable optic. They are certainly in the same class performance wise (IMO), and the Heritage is a solid 30% cheaper.
A couple more random thoughts -- I wish the Heritage had yardage markings on the parallax knob. This is a huge omission in my opinion. I know the markings are not always perfectly accurate, but I like that they at least get you in the ballpark, and fine tune from there. Also, I really like the placement of the Illumination rheostat on the Heritage. I like that the rings can be space much further apart on the Heritage since it doesn't have an additional knob on the maintube. Since in my applications the illumination is very seldom used, I like that the rheostat stays out of sight when not in use. Very clever innovation.
I'll shoot it more over the next week until it goes back to Jason, and will try to post any new info or findings.
Anyway, if anyone would like to have me address a certain aspect of this optic, and offer my opinion, please ask away and I'll do my best to give an honest assessment.
Thanks for reading.
Somewhat meaningless, visual comparisons:
Well, I made it to the range today. Unfortunately, I didn't really come away with any major revelations either way. The Heritage performed exactly like it should, and that was expected.
First of all, I of course was not going to subject this (or any other) optic to some hardcore durability test. I'll leave that to the others here. No freezing, dragging behind trucks, lighting on fire, hammering nails into boards, etc... I'm just going to take it for granted that any of these optics are more than durable enough for my uses.
For me, the 2 scopes I pay much attention to are the S&B PMII and the Heritage. You might not see too much about the USO Canadian here because honestly, I'm just not that big of a fan of USO and will probably not own another one. Just my personal opinion here. The customer service is fantastic, but unfortunately I've had to use it more than I think is acceptable.
A few issues I wanted to address:
1) Tactile feel of the turrets, and how audible the clicks are.
2) How accurate the clicks are relative to the target, i.e. does 3.0mil on the scope translate to 3.0mil POI shift on target.
3) Return to zero after clicking up into at least the second turn (15mil +).
4) Quality / Resolution of the glass and reticle subtension of the GenII.
I'm far from an expert, not even close, but I have owned several samples of some of the best glass out there. Here's what I came away with.
1) We set up the rifles and I took a few pictures for comparison. The S&B is a 5-25x56 PMII, CCW Mrad, P4Fine. I just sold and traded 2ea 4-16x50 S&B's last week. So the 5-25x's are all I have left to compare. Just checking out the turrets prior to shooting, the clicks of the Heritage are spaced fairly close. Not TOO close, but any closer would be too close IMO. I definitely would not want a single turn version of this scope. I did like the heavier click at each 1.0mil. It would be much easier adjusting these turrets in darker conditions having that feature. The sound of the clicks is much different than the S&B, but I guess either is fine. The S&B has a bit more defined tactile feel on each click though IMO, and "overshooting" the come-up is less of a problem on the S&B, i.e. stopping on the correct number is a bit easier on the S&B. I had mixed emotions about the "zipper" tool-less turret adjustment at first, having heard some people say they worry about it "coming loose" at an inopportune time. I can confirm these will NEVER come loose on their own. There is plenty of cam pressure when closed, and they take quite a bit of force to even open them. This is really a great idea and innovation. For someone like me who switches optics around quite a bit, or even switches to new reloads and requires much optic re-zeroing, I think this is a great feature. Thumbs up on the tool-less adjustments IMO!!! Both the turrets on the S&B and Heritage are much more tactile and audible than my USO Canadian. No question about it. One small detail I like better about the S&B turrets, is that the numbers are brighter and a bit easier to visually locate. May be a small advantage in lower light. All in all, I really like the turrets on the Heritage. The size is perfect, and they seem very solid and precise.
2) I zero'd the Heritage at 100yds and that was rather quick and uneventful. Then I performed a small box test going 3.0mil up and fire a shot, then 3.0mil right, 3.0mil down, 3.0mil left. We measured the distance between all shots and they moved just under 11" which is just about perfect for 3.0mil. Return to zero was perfect. I've done this a few times before with this particular S&B and it has always been perfect. I did it again anyway, and again the adjustments were perfect, and return to zero was right on.
3) We shot briefly at 1000yds, and the come up for my 300gr SMK is 6.1mil. I didn't shoot the S&B at anything further than 100yds because I already know how it performs, which is to say fantastic. The Heritage of course tracked to 6.1mil and was dead perfect elevation wise at 1000yds. We came back down to 800y, 600y and 500y and it tracked back down perfectly. At that time, I remembered I wanted to get it into the second turn then track back down. So I clicked up to 20.0mil and back down 3 times. Shot 2 shots at 100yds, and to nobody's surprise they were dead zero. That's a big deal to me, probably one of the most important aspects of a good optic, is perfect return to zero.
4) When we first set up at the bench, I carefully focused each optic, and made sure they were absolutely parallax free, at least as close as I could possibly tell. The S&B was set to 15x. My buddy and I both looked through each scope at the 100y target many times. This was something I was very curious about since I've heard/read here the glass of the Heritage rivals or even surpasses that of the S&B, which I thought would be quite a feat. I have to say -- it's very close. In my very honest opinion, I'd give a slight edge to the S&B in clarity and resolution, with possibly giving it to the Heritage at the edges. Of course, both have FANTASTIC glass, but I could read more of the smaller text of the target through the S&B. Same with my friend. Maybe 2 other samples would produce different results, but the 2 samples I'm looking at provided these results. I give the glass edge to the PMII, but it's really splitting hairs as they both have awesome glass.
The GenII reticle is actually quite thick for precision work. At first sight, I thought it appeared much finer. That only lasted until I compared it to the P4Fine, both on 15x of course. The GenII appears to be almost twice as thick as the P4F. Not a problem at all though, since I assume the GenII XR in the Heritage would be thinner for more precise applications. The GenII is a great reticle if one plans to spend much time dialed down from 15x, shooting close range, or movers, etc... Having both options of GenII and GenII XR should suit everyone's needs just fine. I liked the slightly wider FOV at 15x with the Heritage, while still maintaining what seemed like a bit more eye relief.
The S&B and the Heritage I have to say, in my very limited experience, are quite similar. If both were in front of me and I had to choose only one, I'd still take the S&B. BUT, at $3200 vs. $2400, the Heritage becomes quite an unbelievable optic. They are certainly in the same class performance wise (IMO), and the Heritage is a solid 30% cheaper.
A couple more random thoughts -- I wish the Heritage had yardage markings on the parallax knob. This is a huge omission in my opinion. I know the markings are not always perfectly accurate, but I like that they at least get you in the ballpark, and fine tune from there. Also, I really like the placement of the Illumination rheostat on the Heritage. I like that the rings can be space much further apart on the Heritage since it doesn't have an additional knob on the maintube. Since in my applications the illumination is very seldom used, I like that the rheostat stays out of sight when not in use. Very clever innovation.
I'll shoot it more over the next week until it goes back to Jason, and will try to post any new info or findings.
Anyway, if anyone would like to have me address a certain aspect of this optic, and offer my opinion, please ask away and I'll do my best to give an honest assessment.
Thanks for reading.
Somewhat meaningless, visual comparisons:
