• 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!

Rifle Scopes SEALs Scope... I know!!!

Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

At the tie of this post armednsafe's post history is 45/69 (~65%) in this thread in the past two days. Multiple posts after one another for no apparent reason. So this leads me to the question- what is he wanting to sell?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

If this forum is not for discussing any equipment that isn't "for the serious tactical marksman", then you're right. I should not be talking about this scope. But people also discuss Super Snipers here too, and those are not "for the serious tactical marksman" either. However, if you talk about a SS, you don't get attacked personally the way I have for talking about a CounterSniper. So, which is it? Can we talk about lower priced optics or can't we?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

LOL I guess this isn't the place to admit I like Weaver Scopes.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

If you would have posted your review on arfcom, you would have received the internet equivalent of being lifted on peoples shoulders and joyously carried through the streets in celebration.

You reviewed a turd. Yours may be polished, but it is still a turd. Don't expect us to smell it and slap you on the back for a job well done.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CIzgPU90BnI"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CIzgPU90BnI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

Congratulations to the OP on his shining effort.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I am in the wrong forum, then the people here must not be interested in the truth. It doesn't matter whether this scope performs like an S&B or USO, or shits out like an NC Star. What matters is how the scope performs in reality, right?</div></div>You might want to re-read what you wrote because you are contradicting yourself.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But I'm not going to just compare adjustment precision, there is more to a scope than that. But, if it has better glass, more adjustment range..</div></div>If the scope doesn't track it's broken. Period. An adjustment range that makes the error bigger is then not a feature, and an inferior scope that won't track when new is not going to have "better" glass, whatever you mean by that.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And no, I don't think it's 'good enough' for what I want to do.</div></div>That's not what you've been saying so far. This is what you've been saying:<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you don't mind making adjustments after your first shot and don't want to spend $2500, or $1000 even, then a CounterSniper MIGHT be the right choice. </div></div>
Your review and your comments here show that you do not understand precision optics: What makes them useful; how they are made; what makes features important, and why.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this forum is not for discussing any equipment that isn't "for the serious tactical marksman", then you're right. I should not be talking about this scope. But people also discuss Super Snipers here too, and those are not "for the serious tactical marksman" either. However, if you talk about a SS, you don't get attacked personally the way I have for talking about a CounterSniper. So, which is it? Can we talk about lower priced optics or can't we? </div></div>

I don't think the issue here has anything to do with lower priced opticed... It has to do with gear that is legit, regardless if it is being used to defend your life, punch holes in paper or ring steel. The problem is that the company that produces this scope has proved to be deceitful and untrustworthy, so much so that even if they were able to produce a product that was noteworthy (unlikely), their reputation has been tarnished to the point of no return. 

Some of their offesnes being:
Their initial price offerring (in the thousands) trying to reap 99% profit on a Chinese scope
False advertising on multiple accounts
Designing reticles for Video Gamers? (pretending to be state of the art)
Over runs...
Dropping their prices and displaying them as 75%+ discounts 

What is left to trust? Their is no consistency, you may buy a scope thats clear and the next is not. They may be the same model but have parts from different places and vary drastically in the limited performance they can offer. Maybe one batch was made in China by a bunch of children and it got to expensive so they move to a factory that works their younger sibling at a lower rate. 

Things they could lie about or change without notice:
True magnification range
Types of optical coatings
Where parts came from
Where it was assembled
What different parts are made out of ( is it really that grade aluminum?)
The amont of true total windage and elevation adjustment
Inaccurate adjustments (not true .1 mil or .25 moa)
The accuracy of their reticles (not scaled properly)
Ability to withstand recoil
Warrantee
Inaccurate parralax adjustment

With that being said there is a plethora of modestly priced glass that comes from reputable manufacturers thats discussed here frequently. Not everyone on here has the means to mount a 1k+ optic on every rifle they own (although plenty do).

For instance, (although far from a perfect company) Bushnell offers very moderately priced glass as well as Vortex, Nikon, Leupold, SWFA, Weaver and Zeiss with their "conquest" line. Although from time to time there is the occasional lemon or marketing discrepency, more than likely any issue you run into will be unintentional and not the result of a deceitful practice.

Eg. I recently purchased a Bushnell Tactical 2.5-16x42, although its nothing amazing I do know
It is 2.5-16x
It is made in Japan
It is Argon purged
It does have fully multi coated glass
The mildot reticle is correct at 10x (where they indicate)
They will likely be around as long as I own the scope

I also own a super cheap Elite 3200 2-7... Although it is not the same leauge as its bigger brother I know it clear, will still hold zero, and possess all of the features that Bushnell claimed it has. They are both value minded scopes and I have overviewed both of them here. 

The 3200 (japan) does not try to be a gadget ridden long range scope. Its simplistic 
The Counter Sniper has to many bells and whistles, for to be done properly would require attention to detail, good materials and workmanship that neither Dark Ops or China has

China:
I have a CP on a break barrel air rifle. The glass is suprisingly clear for what it is and can focus sharply through mag up around 10-12, however it lacks a definition and contrast thats very evident once compared to better workmanship (or used in less than ideal light). I'm not suprised that you felt the CS was clear but cant imagine it has the same depth as others in its class.


Dark Ops= Pimp
Counter Sniper = Old Prostitute

No matter how much you try to remove her from the pimp she's still dirty and infected. The Pimp can have her get plastic surgery and breast implants...
But I'm still not touching her, there's a reason no one picks her up anymore

I don't mean any offense, and if your happy with your purchase thats great as well. I was just hoping to offer a bit of insight from at least my perspective. I'm aware of your objectivity in this situation but its too tainted even for consideration in my opinion.

Absolutely nothing to do with you or your review
Good luck 
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If I am in the wrong forum, then the people here must not be interested in the truth. It doesn't matter whether this scope performs like an S&B or USO, or shits out like an NC Star. What matters is how the scope performs in reality, right?</div></div>
I wrote then when I was drunk. You're right, it doesn't make a whole lotta sense.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If the scope doesn't track it's broken. Period. An adjustment range that makes the error bigger is then not a feature, and an inferior scope that won't track when new is not going to have "better" glass, whatever you mean by that.</div></div>
No scope tracks perfectly. There is always error in real equipment. I've asked this before and not gotten an answer. At what level of precision and accuracy does a scope go from being "broken" to "not broken"? I've addressed the issue of more adjustment range even though the adjustments are not accurate or precise enough to make those first round hits at extreme ranges. Even if you can't make the first round hits, you can still walk your rounds onto the target. Without the adjustment range, you could not hit it at all. Better glass means a sharper and brighter image. I thought this was common parlance.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally Posted By: armednsafe
And no, I don't think it's 'good enough' for what I want to do.
That's not what you've been saying so far. This is what you've been saying:
Originally Posted By: armednsafe
If you don't mind making adjustments after your first shot and don't want to spend $2500, or $1000 even, then a CounterSniper MIGHT be the right choice. </div></div>
Let me get this straight... I say what the scope is capable of, and a decision making process that might lead someone to buy the scope. I, myself, go and buy a better scope. I say that the CounterSniper is not good enough for what I want to do. And therefore I've contradicted myself? Where?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your review and your comments here show that you do not understand precision optics: What makes them useful; how they are made; what makes features important, and why. </div></div>
If that is the case that I don't know what I'm talking about. Please, correct me. I don't want to be an ignorant boob spouting nonsense. But let's get into specifics of the content of what I've said and address the errors with reason and evidence.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="font-weight: bold">If that is the case that I don't know what I'm talking about. Please, correct me. I don't want to be an ignorant boob spouting nonsense.</span> </div></div>


<span style="font-weight: bold">Too late.</span>
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

Wow! You jumped right in without name calling! Thank you. I can understand your distrust of the company and why you would choose another brand over them.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

The ignorant boobs are the people who shy away from reason and evidence and resort to name calling.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If that is the case that I don't know what I'm talking about. Please, correct me. I don't want to be an ignorant boob spouting nonsense.</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No scope tracks perfectly. There is always error in real equipment. I've asked this before and not gotten an answer. At what level of precision and accuracy does a scope go from being "broken" to "not broken"?... Even if you can't make the first round hits, you can still walk your rounds onto the target. Without the adjustment range, you could not hit it at all.</div></div>We don't 'walk' rounds to the target. One adjustment on the scope should equal one of those adjustments in the real world, throughout the adjustment range.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The ignorant boobs are the people who shy away from reason and evidence and resort to name calling. </div></div>

p1PwI.jpg
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

That answers none of my questions. Who is this 'we' that doesn't walk rounds onto the target? You might not do it and just give up after one shot, but lots of other people will take more than one shot to hit a target if they miss their first time. And of course, the adjustments SHOULD be accurate. But I'm more interested in an objective criteria for determining whether a scope is broken or not. If the criteria is perfection, then all scopes are broken. So, why don't we try to find the minimum amount of precision and accuracy that will allow us to accomplish a verifiable stated goal?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I put together an educated opinion of these scopes based on almost a year of use. Here is a link to my review of the 4-16x 50mm mil-dot FFP reticle model.
Counter Sniper 4-16x50mm FFP mil-dot Review </div></div>

<span style="font-weight: bold">I hope your scope evaluation skills are better than your video linking skills:</span>


<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vumyw317SLw"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vumyw317SLw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>



Maybe not:

" <span style="font-weight: bold">I would rate the glass quality 8/10.</span> (0 is completely opaque and 10 is completely distortionless and 100% light transmission) Brightness is top notch, but clarity around the edges could be better."

Really?

</div></div>

I would trust my life on a scope made by a company who can't even spell warrantied correctly.....
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I would trust my life on a scope made by a company who can't even spell warrantied correctly.....</div></div>
You would? That doesn't sound very wise. I'm kidding, I know it's a typo. I agree, it's not the scope you would want to have on your rifle if you were needing it to survive.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this forum is not for discussing any equipment that isn't "for the serious tactical marksman", then you're right. I should not be talking about this scope. But people also discuss Super Snipers here too, and those are not "for the serious tactical marksman" either. However, if you talk about a SS, you don't get attacked personally the way I have for talking about a CounterSniper. So, which is it? Can we talk about lower priced optics or can't we?</div></div>


The issue as I see it is the CSS company has used deception and lies to sell their low priced products. You don't see SWFA, Bushnell, Weaver, Vortex etc. using these tactics to sell their low end products. That makes all of the difference to me. This deception lures the uninformed into a product that is not what is advertised.

My heart sinks every time I get a call from someone asking me about CSS after they have purchased one.

Nothing wrong with talking about low priced products to get someone started in the long range game. There are a few good ones out there to get started.

The way I see it, look up DECEPTION in a Thesarus. It will describe the way that
CSS uses to sell their products. They prey on the gullible. To me that's the difference, of course, this is my opinion.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FLIGHT762</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If this forum is not for discussing any equipment that isn't "for the serious tactical marksman", then you're right. I should not be talking about this scope. But people also discuss Super Snipers here too, and those are not "for the serious tactical marksman" either. However, if you talk about a SS, you don't get attacked personally the way I have for talking about a CounterSniper. So, which is it? Can we talk about lower priced optics or can't we?</div></div>


The issue as I see it is the CSS company has used deception and lies to sell their low priced products. You don't see SWFA, Bushnell, Weaver, Vortex etc. using these tactics to sell their low end products. That makes all of the difference to me. This deception lures the uninformed into a product that is not what is advertised.

My heart sinks every time I get a call from someone asking me about CSS after they have purchased one.

Nothing wrong with talking about low priced products to get someone started in the long range game. There are a few good ones out there to get started.

The way I see it, look up DECEPTION in a Thesarus. It will describe the way that
CSS uses to sell their products. They prey on the gullible. To me that's the difference, of course, this is my opinion. </div></div>

Well put FLIGHT762. Great post.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FLIGHT762</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't see SWFA, Bushnell, Weaver, Vortex etc. using these tactics to sell "their low end products".</div></div>
Crap, I just bought from one of these brands, I was under the impression that they were Great....
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnny-bravo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FLIGHT762</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't see SWFA, Bushnell, Weaver, Vortex etc. using these tactics to sell "their low end products".</div></div>
Crap, I just bought from one of these brands, I was under the impression that they were Great.... </div></div>

They are good brands.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

I'm not going to defend their advertising. They don't make "the world's finest military optical gunsight". They say their scopes are from "contract overruns" hoping that people will think they are MILITARY contract overruns. Would I prefer if they stopped using these little gimmicks? Of course. However, I'm not going to throw out the scope because of it.
The problem I'm having is that my experience with the scope has been mostly positive. I don't feel deceived by their advertising. Not because they're advertising turned out to be true, but because I never believed it in the first place. (But since when does anyone immediately believe advertising claims?) And I don't feel ripped off. And the company had decent customer service when I had a problem. People (including you) seem to get really offended over their advertising claims. I guess I don't.
So, is there a general rule on this forum that if a company makes misleading or false advertising claims then they can't be discussed? Or is it that we just can't talk about CounterSniper?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

armed.... Go to an airsoft forum where you can extoll the virtues of said optics---this is just not the place

and if you're selling something I kinda doubt there will be much interest if you get the spindrift
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Who is this 'we' that doesn't walk rounds onto the target? You might not do it and just give up after one shot, but lots of other people will take more than one shot to hit a target if they miss their first time.</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> But I'm more interested in an objective criteria for determining whether a scope is broken or not. If the criteria is perfection, then all scopes are broken. So, why don't we try to find the minimum amount of precision and accuracy that will allow us to accomplish a verifiable stated goal? </div></div>Seriously?!

This is too good: I mean, I couldn't make-up better Troll food.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

Is there some sort of forum you could go to that talks about ad-hominem baseless attacks?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

I think you and BERTMAN need to go to that same forum that talks about ad-hominem baseless attacks all day.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is there some sort of forum you could go to that talks about ad-homonym baseless attacks? </div></div>Probably, but I learn more about shooting and precision optics in a Forum dedicated to serious tactical marksmanship. Before you do your next review, or attempt to reinvent your next wheel, perhaps you should consider attending a course that offers professional instruction.

BTW - It's <span style="font-style: italic">ad hominem</span>. Homonyms are words that share the same spelling but have different meanings. Again you appear to have no idea about what you are describing.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

I do intend to take some professional instruction some day when I can afford it. Right now, I'm working on getting my masters of science in mechanical engineering majoring in controls.

Yeah, I realized I made the mistake with homonym about 3 minutes before I read your post. I corrected it for you.
smile.gif
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, I realized I made the mistake with homonym about 3 minutes before I read your post.</div></div>Hmmmm.... I suppose only you know for sure; because it took you nine minutes after my post to edit.
wink.gif
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

If it makes you feel better, I didn't know any better until I read your post and you helped me correct my mistake.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it makes you feel better, I didn't know any better until I read your post and you helped me correct my mistake. </div></div>

Pussy, You need to STFU and stick that POS chink scope up your ass. You are just embarrassing yourself without even realizing it. If you weren't so fucking ignorant and stubborn, I would think you were a first class internet troll.

You are insulting people of good standing on this site with knowledge of optics well beyond your capability or experience.

You should be ashamed of this entire thread Mr. Scope Expert, Counter Sniper Martinson.

Show some respect to the proficient members on this site or crawl back under your bridge before it gets ugly. (It's all ready to go.)
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Pussy, You need to STFU and stick that POS chink scope up your ass.</div></div>

In other words, welcome to Sniper's Hide! Enjoy your stay lol.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

If all these people, that you claim I'm insulting, are experts they should be able to explain where I've gone wrong in a well reasoned manner. I haven't seen that. If I've missed it somewhere please show me.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If all these people, that you claim I'm insulting, are experts they should be able to explain where I've gone wrong in a well reasoned manner. I haven't seen that. If I've missed it somewhere please show me. </div></div>

Please be polite and realize you are defending an inconsistent, low quality optic of dubious marketing ploys. From your video I can tell you are much better man than to stake your reputation defending that scope. I'm hoping you can become part of this community and be a contributor

Your video was very thorough, it is just that the scope couldn't track through adjustments and you had to lock the turrets when it was in a "sighted in" situation to have it be accurate. You need to understand that those two deficiencies are deal-breakers on this forum.

Can you understand that and we can all drop the subject?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BCP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Pussy, You need to STFU and stick that POS chink scope up your ass.</div></div>

In other words, welcome to Sniper's Hide! Enjoy your stay lol. </div></div>

No kidding...
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

After your previous post, you are the last person that should be telling me to be polite.

I understand that there are people on this forum that would not want to have a scope that tracks like this one does. It's really not acceptable for a competition or tactical role. But there are also people on this forum that are casual target shooters and hunters.

I do not intend to put my reputation on this scope. I intend to put my reputation on the integrity of the data I've collected and presented.

If you want to drop the subject, just stop attacking me.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

Ironically, for the $450-$500 you spent on this "scope" you could have bought a proven product, sure it wouldn't be the best but at least it would be worth the $500.

I don't want to come across like i'm flaming you but you're starting to sound like you work for Counter Sniper.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

You have my word that I do not receive any money from Counter Sniper or any of it's affiliates.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tofst4u2no</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I predict that this thread will continue for about 51 more replies by armednsafe. After that expect to see stuff from him in the for sale section </div></div>

Got a good laugh from this.... Thanks
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armednsafe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">After your previous post, you are the last person that should be telling me to be polite.

I understand that there are people on this forum that would not want to have a scope that tracks like this one does. <span style="color: #CC0000">It's really not acceptable for a competition or tactical role. But there are also people on this forum that are casual target shooters and hunters.</span>

I do intend to put my reputation on this scope. I intend to put my reputation on the integrity of the data I've collected and presented.

If you want to drop the subject, just stop attacking me. </div></div>

From your video it is really not acceptable for anything you have mentioned, highlighted in red. At this price point there are clearer better tracking scopes that do not have to be fiddled with to hold zero. They are also have edge to edge clarity. I expect more from a hunting scope than you have accepted as ok for the price from a CS. I can buy a scope that doesn't track from Wal-Mart for much less than $300. Of course it may not have a ranging reticle within a reticle and a 50mm objective. I have a remote control for my TV and cable with 50 buttons that each provide a function. I use 10 of them with absolutely no use for the other 40 but they all work. Now wouldn't it be a hoot if only 10 out of the 50 worked and none were the 10 that I use? I doubt you will find the logic in my well thought out ramblings.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

I do have a button on my remote that allows me to watch TV WHILE I am watching TV. I have used it once or twice...very handy.
laugh.gif
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shankster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Please be polite and realize you are defending an inconsistent, low quality optic of dubious marketing ploys. From your video I can tell you are much better man than to stake your reputation defending that scope. I'm hoping you can become part of this community and be a contributor

Your video was very thorough, it is just that the scope couldn't track through adjustments and you had to lock the turrets when it was in a "sighted in" situation to have it be accurate. You need to understand that those two deficiencies are deal-breakers on this forum. </div></div>

Armednsafe,
Its Not<span style="font-weight: bold"> you, or your shooting, reviewing etc...</span>
IT IS THE COMPANY-

You might get flack for purchasing a product that has been flagged here as a scam, proved to be a rip-off, or otherwise sub par product that has been proven to be useless.

Reviewing said products (after its already been done several times) with a positive outlook comes off as:
You are dismissing what others have already established
You are becoming part of a deceitful process to encourage others to buy the something
You do not have the experience or intellectual capacity to review and make suggestions
You have an agenda: either to stir the pot or sell something

Nothing wrong with having a difference of opinion or establishing a different view of a product. Its different when that product is this controversial or has been beat to death in discussion a hundred times.

Arguing your take on this situation will not lead anywhere good and will not be changing anyones opinion about CS. This is not a productive topic for debate. I'M NOT SAYING ANY of this is YOU, only (from my observation) what insues during this type of thread. Remember DaveMu-- and his special zee rings? He was a complete idiot and a whiny little douche. Glad he got weeded out but don't make the same choices he did and stay the center of attention.

You're pissing into gale forced winds on this one. Just made a wrong turn man, no one is flaming you for anything else.

Good luck
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

Are you speaking from personal experience with a CounterSniper scope?

I wouldn't consider locking the turrets "fiddling".

The glass and tracking on the scope were very similar to the Nikon Buckmasters that I used previously, which most people would consider adequate for hunting in most situations.

I think I see what you're saying with the TV remote analogy. You're saying the tracking accuracy of the scope is like the 10 buttons you use on the remote. And without that feature working the scope and remote are not useful. But I have to ask, how much precision and accuracy do you require to say that the tracking "works"? And to say "perfect" is to say no scopes at all work.
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

I see what you're saying. People really don't like this company. And they take great offense to someone saying anything but the scopes are garbage.

One of the big problems I'm having is that people say, "The scope is broken because the tracking doesn't work." And I ask for what level of precision and accuracy they would accept as "working" or "not broken" at this price level or any price level for that matter. And to that question I have NEVER gotten a response. You seem capable of thinking. Can you answer that question?
 
Re: SEALs Scope... I know!!!

What level of repeatability is acceptable? Hmm That is really a tough question. I don't know...like say for instance: I have shot about 7 22TSC matches this year, dialing from 57, 112,163,210,240 and back to 57. In practice and matches I have done this exercise about 14+ times, my lack of time to practice is the only thing limiting this number. I arrive at 57 and am dead on each time. I have not had to change my zero. It does drift maybe a half minute on occasion due to CONDITIONS but the scope and its internals are solid. That is a pretty small statistical sample but others here have much larger samples. If your scope can't track for one range session IT IS JUNK and should be sent back or you should get another scope.
If having to "lock" a turret is acceptable to you then you shouldn't be reviewing scopes. Yes I consider locking turrets to be a feature I shouldn't need in a quality scope. The scope you have reviewed has serious shortcomings and as such I would expect it to be priced at less than half of what you paid. I have owned these junk scopes and some would actually hold zero without a locking turret. They would not however track worth a damn and sighting in was a hunt and peck affair. I ascribe a total value on those types of scopes at less than $100.
Noone has doubted your veracity nor manlihood here...except maybe Shankster, and I tend to side with him in this troll fest. Being sincere is great and lots of folks are sincere but it doesn't negate being sincerely wrong.