Rifle Scopes SB versus Zeiss conquest

[spotswood]

I had come to the conclusion to scope a new Rock RIver Predator with a SB 4x16x50 until my shooting buddy picked up a Zeiss Conquest 4x14x44 rapid Z800 with the ballistic reticle for the identical reifle. Now he is making me second guess my decision. The scope does not seem bad for $800 bucks. Is the SB really worth 5 times as I figure it will be about $3100. He thinks I am nuts to spend that much more.
We punch holes in paper from 300 to 600 yds with these and once in a great while may go to shoot small varmints.
Thanks
Gary

 

[Guest]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Waste of money IMO. USO ST-10 is half the price of that SB. A Nightforce is even less than that. Both are more scope than you need for what you are doing.

 

[padronanniversary]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Things changed. You might want to go hunting, do competitive matches in the future. Glass is one thing I prefer to put money in.

The S&B does keep their value relatively well.

One rule of thumb I've been preaching lately is buy once cry once.

 

[hexades1]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

S&B PMII beats the c**p out of any present day Zeiss scope including Hensoldt versions if we talk about ruggedness and ability to take abuse of rifles like 338 Lapua Magnum and bigger. Only the Helsoldt 6-24X72 is something S&B can no offer in the objective size. On a 308 both bradns survive just fine.

Comparing a 800 USD Conquest to any S&B PMII is like comparing a Dodge Neon sedan to Porsche Turbo 4WD. Of course you can do it but what is the point. In optics you get what you pay for. You have to decide what you want first.

 

[hydro556]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Blanket statements that end with "beat the crap out of XX" are rarely true when comparing high end optics from reputable makers. Just sayin'

 

[M21tactical]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: spotswood</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I had come to the conclusion to scope a new Rock RIver Predator with a SB 4x16x50 until my shooting buddy picked up a Zeiss Conquest 4x14x44 rapid Z800 with the ballistic reticle for the identical reifle. Now he is making me second guess my decision. The scope does not seem bad for $800 bucks. Is the SB really worth 5 times as I figure it will be about $3100. He thinks I am nuts to spend that much more.
We punch holes in paper from 300 to 600 yds with these and once in a great while may go to shoot small varmints.
Thanks
Gary </div></div>
I will make you feel better. You made a very wise choice in scope selection and your buddy is jealous. It is very much worth the extra dough and you get what you pay for in scopes for sure. I agree with the other poster "Buy once, cry once". So very true from the voice of experience. I went through the scope selection morass and ended with S&B. Now I am spoiled for life, but then I have no need to ever upgrade. "Say out loud: Buy once, ..."

 

[Swamper]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Why cry at all?

If you are going to make your RRA a longrange viable rifle, consider a new Leupold mk4 #60000 with illum TMR reticle and have Leupold install the M2 turrets.

Zeiss Conquest is very good, except not much elevation or windage range. The 4.5-14 mk4 has 100moa E&W something not many scopes even begin to approach. Cost you about $1200 if you buy right. Buy an S or T serial # model used and leupold can still change turrets over to M2 (1/2 moa per click) type with BDC cam and stop.

If you want to shoot really longrange, look into a White Oak Precision barrel and maybe get their Pac-Nor in 1:6.5 twist to shoot 90gr bullets which are viable to 1000yds.

Is the Great Glass scope worth the money? I am a heretic here ans say NO! Buy an S&B classic or hunter scope if you want their gear. Or buy a Zeiss Diavari/Victory. The Conquest 3-12x56mm is really a sleeper for value if you don't want 100moa elevation range

 

[exhogflyer]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Can't comment on the S&B but I have a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x50 on a 25-06.It's VERY nice glass, well made, tracks true and is better than my Mark 4's and I'd say as clear as my NF's.Only neg is the 1" tube for elevation adj but it's fine for what I do with it.

 

[PullinTriggers]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

You need to know that the Rapid Z 800 was designed for bullets with muzzle velocity higher than 2950 FPS and for weights of 140-200 grain. If you are running this on a .223, go with the 6.5-20x50 rapid z varmint. If on a .308, then the 4.5-14 rapid z 1000.

Consider this, if the conquest scopes were assembled in Europe, they would increase in price over 25% to cover taxes. They are the best Value in the scope market.

 

[hydro556]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

I had a Zeiss Conquest in 6.5-20x50 with mil dot and their target turrets. I liked it fine, especially for the $699 (IIRC) price. Comparing it to the MKIV 4.5-14x50 with ill. TMR (model 60000), I would much rather have the MKIV. The glass was about the same IMO, but the MKIV had much better turrets, I prefer the TMR over the standard mil dot and it was illuminated. Just much better all around optic for precision shooting, IMO. (Optics are about as subjective as a subject can be, but..) I have tried a bunch of scopes, and, despite the recent anti-Leupold sentiment that has become popular, I still think the model 60000 is the best all around optic in the 1K price range. But, I am not one that has to have FFP, mil/mil etc.. A lot of scope for the money IMO.

 

[HOGGHEAD]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

I do not think you need anyone to tell you that a S&B is the better scope. There is no doubt about that.

However when I buy scopes I always consider what they are going to be used for. And if the parameters you listed are exactly what you are going to do. Then the quality of the S&B is totally unnecessary for your parameters. Just my opinion. However the Zeiss is easily capable of doing everything you want to do-and do it with ease. However I think your price is a bit high. Check with Doug at CameraLand for a better deal.
He should be able to get you a 6.5X20 sample for less than that.

If you have the money to spend then by all means buy the S&B. However by the way you worded your question it sounds like you are questioning your decision. Tom.

 

[rundm]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

you could also go with the sightron for the same money as the conquest if not a little less. 30mm tube and 100moa adjustment. tried and true tracking and won't break the bank. If you have the money for an s and b, great but you could also get the premier 5x25, save a cool 1k and have as good or better glass and scope then the s and b.

 

[ROK]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Spots,

As discussed in your previous thread you should decide what the scope will be used for first, what do you really need, and your budget.

Zeiss:
Good Glass
I dont think its FFP
Good Price
Will not take a beating like the S&B
Reticle?... I guess this goes to the argument of Holdover vs Mill.

For me, S&B justifies the price based on need.

 

[hilbillee]

Re: SB versus Zeiss conquest

Bottom line is buy the best you can afford. Don't go into a hole spending more money than you can afford to put out. All the glass mentioned is of excellent quality. Just decide which one of them will suit your needs and bank account. Don't go the he has a certain brand so I need one route.