We are taking pre-orders at 916-670-1103 on these fantastic optics!!!
Last edited:
Rifle Scopes Z Comp Optics, heard of them? SHOT Booth N451!
- Thread starter Basher
- Start date
The more I'm seeing and reading, the more I'm liking. IF I can get one of these shipped to Australia, I reckon I'll wait until they're released and do it, tax time dollars could be spoken for now...
No reason why we can't get one , however expecting around the $4800 AUD since that's what the NF 7-32 is at
Oh shit, people. Hype is REAL now lol. Pray for my wallet.
Sounds like a tough problem to have with your great options already. I am probably most curious about the ZC527 right now and how it compares to the Minox. I had started saving my pennies for the Minox with MR4. I do like the MPCT2 just a hair more than the MR4. This would be going an a current competition/do all build I am working on. I have the luxury of not needing to decide if the upgrade from one to another is worth it as it would be my first alpha level optic, therefore I have a little different perspective. The question becomes, if you were to buy once cry once assuming you have no other optics in your collection, which do you go with out of all the alphas? Obviously it hinges on reputation and proven reliability/function and more info is needed.
Fuck, first the new Mausingfields now this. 
For me, the ZC527 is what appeals to me most, as whatever scope I go with will be going on a switch barrel TL2 used primarily for competition.
The AMG appeals to me moreso than a Razor GII primarily because of 1) weight, and b) the EBR-7B reticle. The EBR-2C is a great reticle overall, but I'd like the .2mil hashes to help narrow things down more with wind holds, etc. The list of optics I'm trying to decide between includes:
-Vortex AMG
-Vortex Razor GII 4.5-27x
-Kahles K624i
-Minox ZP5 5-25x
And now the ZC527. The AMG happens to be the most affordable of the bunch with .2mil holds. Aside from the Razor GII, the others appeal to me because of their reticles. They offer the advantages of .2mil holds with a holdover tree, but their .2mil marks are less intrusive than the AMG. The Razor is a proven optic that's built like a tank, but it does weight a ton. The AMG offers almost all of the advantages of the Razor, but at a lighter weight. I don't feel I need a rev indicator, and the L-TEC turret on the AMG is set up in such a way that you can scribe different alignment marks for different calibers, meaning the switch between .223 and 6.5 would be exceptionally easy, requiring only a quick fine-tune of my zero between the two.
So I've definitely got some homework to do. ZCO's entrance into the market has muddied things, as they appear to have everything I'd like in an optic with a greater mag range, cleaner reticle, and still being at a reasonable weight. The cost is now going to be my biggest block, and I may very well have to await a used model on the second hand market. Regardless, they've put themselves on my radar in a very strong way, and I'll continue watching as things unfold and reviews start popping up, and I intend to remain active in this and any other threads involving them so I can stay informed. Exciting times we live in!!!
But wouldn't the ZCO look sweet on the Mausingfield...first the new Mausingfields now this.
Basher, if you don't mind the weight I think you'd be happier with the Minox ZP5 over the AMG, it truly is that much better optically, not saying the AMG is poor by any means, the Minox is just better, when you first bring it to your eye there is a "what the heck!" moment where you realizing what you've been missing with lesser optics. The Minox is German design with Schott glass and the ZCO is Austrian design with Schott glass so I am hoping for very similar results - meaning optically this scope will be best of the best regarding resolution, contrast, depth, color, CA (or lack thereof) and so forth. If you read HKDave's thread between the Tangent Theta and Minox he basically says its very hard to tell the two apart optically and that is my expectation from ZCO. Alex (Mute) said he spoke with Jeff yesterday and Jeff was thinking the ZC527 might come in around $3500, in the video Nick mentioned "possibly well below $4000" and as pricing has not been firmed up yet we simply don't know. The Minox is listed at $3000 and I'd be shocked if the ZCO came in at the same price (pleasantly shocked but I'm expecting it to be a bit more), will $300 or $500 more for the ZCO make a difference for you? Do you already own 34mm rings and if you went with ZCO you'd have to buy 36mm rings, that would be an additional expense. My thought is the decision comes down to reticle. I am not a huge fan of Christmas tree reticles though I've owned plenty and I have to say of all the Christmas tree's my favorite is the MR4 from Minox and I prefer it over the MPCT 2 from ZCO because Minox uses a bunch of dots for it's Christmas tree whereas the EBR-7/B and MPCT 2 have solid lines which I find more obtrusive. For me, the MPCT 1 is my reticle of choice as it reminds me of the SKMR and the new MSR2 which I prefer. I like to dial elevation and hold windage so the Christmas tree does little good; however, if you like to hold elevation and windage that's where that can come in handy. Maybe it's the way my brain works but I find "busy" reticles like the Horus to be too much, traditional Christmas tree's like the EBR-7/B and MPCT 2 are a happy in between and the MR4 is the best for my tastes. I write a little about this in my review of these scopes - https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...ht-tactical-scope-evaluation-part-ii.6255263/ and you can see some through the scope reticle images there as well.
Out of curiosity, how many Tangent Theta owners would consider selling their TT525 to get a ZCO ZC527 if the optics and turrets are comparable?
Funny you should link to your review, as I've read through it a few times. It's what built my interest in the ZP5, actually.
Cost for me is a very fine line. I've been out of the game for a LONG time, only recently piecing together another rifle to get back into things. As such, I have a lot of other gear to acquire as well, namely an LRF, a ballistic calculator, spotting scope, tripod, etc., etc. So I'm trying to squeeze as much value as I can from my dollar. The AMG ticks the most boxes in my price range right now. I COULD save up for something a step above like I said, but that would cut into sourcing other items I need. So I have lots to consider there. For the money, the AMG is the best shot I have if I want to leave room for the other items. If I want to put those on hold for a good while, I could save up the difference (another $1200 or so) and jump to the Minox, ZCO, etc. But that much of a difference would be a solid year or more delay unless I make significant sacrifices elsewhere. Just gotta play with the numbers and see what makes the most sense.
Rings are a different issue. I run an LRTS in Badger lows right now, so an AMG would fit right in. Anything else is a separate expense, so the difference between 34mm and 36mm is the same for me. Another check for the AMG right now.
But that's the nice thing, too. I can always upgrade my CZ455VPT to the Badgers and then I'm not nailed down one way or the other with a larger tube. I get a fresh start. Choices, choices!
Ultimately, with a Q2 (or later) release, plus the time for people to get these in hand, test them, and post reviews, I'm looking at a year wait anyway before I'm likely to drop over $3K. But I think it's gonna be a fun ride seeing what happens and making the decision!
I should add that, aside from the AMG and Razor GII, the other options would be acquired used, thus dropping their cost to me into the $2000-2500 range. New, the others are outside my present budget if I want to account for the other gear I need.
^^^ I highly recommend used as you can get some killer deals on shooters who get bored of their scopes or want to upgrade way too often (like yours truly, but I finally think I've settled down). That being the case, I do not think you'll find used ZCO scopes for quite some time and certainly not in that price range.
Right, thus my situation. Skip the LRF and ballistic calc and get a really nice scope, sell a bunch of other stuff to bridge the gap, or settle for a "lesser" scope that'll definitely do the job and still have funds for proper gear and ammo so I can shoot now and build skills.
I'll likely go with the latter option. I'll learn just as much with an AMG or similar as I will with a fancy new ZCO, but I'll be able to learn more due to fewer strains on the ol' pocketbook/more money for ammo. An alpha class scope won't make up for my lack of skills!
I'm FAR from writing ZCO off, though! I'll just delay and let them get established before I jump in, and as mentioned, I'll absolutely be following along!
That’s just not true. You’ll see your misses better!An alpha class scope won't make up for my lack of skills!
I literally walked from the ZCO booth to the TT booth. The TT is still supreme and not by a little (fit/feel/glass/knobs/anything other than rect)
Now its impossible to give a solid opinion on the scope. I told Jeff that when he asked me my thoughts on the scope that doesn't have a single "production" part on it other than the glass... and when evaluating the glass I was inside of a poorly lit convention center I cant really say how epic the scope is going to be. That being said, it will be a solid package that will compete directly with S&B and Minox. The illumination was cool how it turned off when vertical and off after couple hours of no use
My one question was how does the FOV compare and I didn't get a response. This is my favorite aspect of a scope after tracking.
IIRC he told me will have 35 mils elevation. which is great. Everything else will probably have some changes of some sort.
2 things I saw I didn't like - one was the zoom ratio on the mag ring. If you look above at the 4-20, the 18x and the 20x are like a 1/16 turn apart. Its the same on the 5-27. The 20x and the 27x was the same close. Not sure how/why it will affect anything optically, I just like a larger space when adjusting zoom (but not HUGE like the USO)
Second was the locking knob, which is the exact same as the Gen2 Vortex. Snap up and down to lock. With my Gen2 I would accidentally lock the knob with weight of my hand in stressful situations when dialing. Nick said they were going to change the snap tension, I just hope he makes it WAY overkill.
Other than that, it looks like a tank which is good. The reasoning for the 36mm tube was to be able to fit all the mechanics in it without compromising on anything. They mentioned wanting to release July-August this year. I hope they don't release it this year and run it in matches for a year like TT and others did before release to work out any kinks...we all remember other scope fiascos.
Last on the price, as mentioned, they said more than $2k and less than $4k...I felt it would be closer to the $4k mark.
Regards
DT
Thank you DT and also for clarifying that these are indeed pre-production models so hard to tell anything. We won't know about glass until it gets side by side with a TT, Schmidt, Minox, etc. from a good shooter. I still would like more information on their explanation for 36mm, I understand they were saying they had to do it in order to "not compromise", but that infers that Schmidt, Tangent Theta, Minox and the like have all compromised? And does that mean that IOR with their huge 40mm tube is even better than ZCO? (I know I'm going to get it for bringing up the name that shall not be named.)
This comes right from ZCO's website:
Schmidt also gets 36 mils of elevation from it's 34mm tubed Ultra Short 3-20x50, so based on the statement above that means that Schmidt had to compromise optical performance in order to do this with their 34mm tube, the proof will be when someone puts a ZC420 up against a S&B US 3-20x50 for a good comparison, I'd love to be that person but I have to purchase all my scopes outright and I don't see that happening soon unfortunately. Then there is the TT or Minox ZP5 compared to the ZC527, both the TT and Minox get 28mil and have the best glass out there, so is ZCO saying they gave up 7 mil of travel in order to get such amazing optical clarity and resolution, how many shooters need more than 28mil of elevation? Granted, with some scopes you do not want to bottom out your elevation for 0 and maybe that's what they designed it for so that the scope still delivered top optical performance with the turret being close to or bottomed out for ELR?
But again, to say that they used a 36mm tube so they wouldn't compromise infers that other scope companies have compromised and we'll have to wait until the ZCO gets reviewed against the best to find out if that's just marketing hype or if it really means they did something no one else has been able to do with 34mm tubes.
This comes right from ZCO's website:
Schmidt also gets 36 mils of elevation from it's 34mm tubed Ultra Short 3-20x50, so based on the statement above that means that Schmidt had to compromise optical performance in order to do this with their 34mm tube, the proof will be when someone puts a ZC420 up against a S&B US 3-20x50 for a good comparison, I'd love to be that person but I have to purchase all my scopes outright and I don't see that happening soon unfortunately. Then there is the TT or Minox ZP5 compared to the ZC527, both the TT and Minox get 28mil and have the best glass out there, so is ZCO saying they gave up 7 mil of travel in order to get such amazing optical clarity and resolution, how many shooters need more than 28mil of elevation? Granted, with some scopes you do not want to bottom out your elevation for 0 and maybe that's what they designed it for so that the scope still delivered top optical performance with the turret being close to or bottomed out for ELR?
But again, to say that they used a 36mm tube so they wouldn't compromise infers that other scope companies have compromised and we'll have to wait until the ZCO gets reviewed against the best to find out if that's just marketing hype or if it really means they did something no one else has been able to do with 34mm tubes.
Thanks for taking an interest in the new rifle scopes from ZCO. We had an excellent response during SHOT Show, it was incredible!
I’ll try to address many of the questions that were raised here in this thread as well as at SHOT.
1. Where are these made? We have our very own ZCO office and manufacturing facility in Austria. We have absolutely no relation or partnership with any other company. We stand alone, our very own company making our own parts on our own machinery. Individual parts and pieces including lenses from Schott are hand assembled in Orofino, ID.
2. Yes, Jeff Huber is the main person in charge with ZCO. Yes, he has extensive experience at NF and he and I together worked extremely hard as the importer/distributor for Kahles from about 2012 to the end of 2016. It was during those four years that the K624i underwent some significant changes as well as increased popularity especially within the PRS community. A large portion of that was due to the contacts we made and the hard work of our team partners and shooters. In short, we have a lot of industry insight and a massive amount of knowledge of what it takes to build a high end precision rifle scope as well as establish a new company in this industry specifically. We are using that knowledge to build what we believe will be the finest rifle scope, and this is our own company so we have the capability to adapt as needed.
3. Scope rings and mounts are readily available from American Rifle Company and Spuhr right now. Several other ring manufacturers are very likely to be producing 36mm rings in the near future.
4. Please read our web site on why we went with 36mm tube size: http://www.zcompoptic.com/construction-qualtiy.html
Much of our optical design does reside internally with larger lens elements. This does allow us to utilize the entire amount of elevation and windage travel without having that blurry aspect near the edge of the FOV at max adjustment or when zoomed out. We didn't want to "compromise" optical quality to provide mechanical range of adjustment and quality. We also didn't want to compromise mechanical system to provide excellent optical quality throughout the entire adjustment range.
5. At this time, we do NOT expect to have our prices near $4000 but much closer to the $3000 point. Please understand, we still have some finishing work to do on the scopes until we can completely finalize the pricing.
6. Availability is currently anticipated to be around June when we should be shipping out to our dealers. The scopes will undergo an extremely thorough battery of tests prior to releasing them.
7. We plan to only take on about 15-20 dealers throughout the country right now. Maybe 25 at the most. We will obviously have limited production quantity, we are still a small company trying to grow. We want to fulfill orders but product quality will NOT be sacrificed in order to get scopes shipped out. Keeping a minimum number of dealers is the best way for us to work with them and get products shipped out in sufficient quantities.
8. Yes, we will have a scope or two sent out to Frank as soon as possible. We also have a few other key evaluators in mind who have already shown high quality non-biased reviews. Please stand by for the reviews from sources you trust.
9. Please refer to our web site on warranty. Also take into account the people and their track history for producing top quality products and their results in the rifle scope industry. http://www.zcompoptic.com/warranty.html
10. Lastly, we completely understand we are a new company and we need to “prove” our products. We get it.
I’ll try to address many of the questions that were raised here in this thread as well as at SHOT.
1. Where are these made? We have our very own ZCO office and manufacturing facility in Austria. We have absolutely no relation or partnership with any other company. We stand alone, our very own company making our own parts on our own machinery. Individual parts and pieces including lenses from Schott are hand assembled in Orofino, ID.
2. Yes, Jeff Huber is the main person in charge with ZCO. Yes, he has extensive experience at NF and he and I together worked extremely hard as the importer/distributor for Kahles from about 2012 to the end of 2016. It was during those four years that the K624i underwent some significant changes as well as increased popularity especially within the PRS community. A large portion of that was due to the contacts we made and the hard work of our team partners and shooters. In short, we have a lot of industry insight and a massive amount of knowledge of what it takes to build a high end precision rifle scope as well as establish a new company in this industry specifically. We are using that knowledge to build what we believe will be the finest rifle scope, and this is our own company so we have the capability to adapt as needed.
3. Scope rings and mounts are readily available from American Rifle Company and Spuhr right now. Several other ring manufacturers are very likely to be producing 36mm rings in the near future.
4. Please read our web site on why we went with 36mm tube size: http://www.zcompoptic.com/construction-qualtiy.html
Much of our optical design does reside internally with larger lens elements. This does allow us to utilize the entire amount of elevation and windage travel without having that blurry aspect near the edge of the FOV at max adjustment or when zoomed out. We didn't want to "compromise" optical quality to provide mechanical range of adjustment and quality. We also didn't want to compromise mechanical system to provide excellent optical quality throughout the entire adjustment range.
5. At this time, we do NOT expect to have our prices near $4000 but much closer to the $3000 point. Please understand, we still have some finishing work to do on the scopes until we can completely finalize the pricing.
6. Availability is currently anticipated to be around June when we should be shipping out to our dealers. The scopes will undergo an extremely thorough battery of tests prior to releasing them.
7. We plan to only take on about 15-20 dealers throughout the country right now. Maybe 25 at the most. We will obviously have limited production quantity, we are still a small company trying to grow. We want to fulfill orders but product quality will NOT be sacrificed in order to get scopes shipped out. Keeping a minimum number of dealers is the best way for us to work with them and get products shipped out in sufficient quantities.
8. Yes, we will have a scope or two sent out to Frank as soon as possible. We also have a few other key evaluators in mind who have already shown high quality non-biased reviews. Please stand by for the reviews from sources you trust.
9. Please refer to our web site on warranty. Also take into account the people and their track history for producing top quality products and their results in the rifle scope industry. http://www.zcompoptic.com/warranty.html
10. Lastly, we completely understand we are a new company and we need to “prove” our products. We get it.
This indeed helps answer my question about the extremes of the range of elevation and was the only thing I could think of that would require the larger tube as everything else seemed to be "attainable" from smaller tubes. Thank you for all your answers, I find your responses to be very beneficial and to the point.
One other question, will you be putting a number of your scopes on a system much like Killswitch's humbler? As a PRS shooter yourself I'm sure you understand the need for absolute accuracy mechanically when you are dialing your scope for long range shots, so if you could show that you are, in fact, testing for this very thing (that the turrets stay true throughout the range) that would go a long way, maybe even having a video much like KSE's that would show how the reticle is staying true while dialing. PM sent, thank you Nick.
Last edited:
I've been following KSE's posts, very good stuff. Our scopes are actually put on a dedicated collimator costing around $8K. We can see the tiniest amount of reticle movement and deviation. Every scope, and we truly mean that, EVERY scope gets tested for reticle perpendicularity and well as turret tracking accuracy, for both Elevation and Windage, throughout the entire adjustment range. We use true mils, not the rounded off Army number, for the reticle as well as turrets. We know without a doubt these scopes will be tested for this. It is extremely critical, and one that we pay attention to. I may very well take a through the scope video of our testing.
Thank you Nick, you'd think every manufacturer would do this, at least for the Military/Tactical market, but maybe that's how some save costs - by not doing this and thinking the consumer doesn't have the equipment to validate. I don't think I'm alone in saying that seeing a video of your collimator test and seeing a scope go through the elevation and windage range would be valued on this site. One thing that cannot be properly measured (or at least I have yet to see it properly measured) is glass quality, IQ, optical clarity, whatever you want to call it but basically the experience when you look through an alpha class scope and say "WOW! This thing is amazing." Obviously this is often an "eye of the beholder" type of situation and one that I've spent countless $, hours and testing pursuing the "ultimate" scope (for me, as each person has a different idea of the ultimate scope). I'm really looking forward to seeing some reviews of ZCO scopes as compared to other alpha class level scopes, the more I hear the more amazing they sound. But like ILya mentioned earlier the proof will be "in the pudding".
Thank you Nick, you'd think every manufacturer would do this, at least for the Military/Tactical market, but maybe that's how some save costs - by not doing this and thinking the consumer doesn't have the equipment to validate. I don't think I'm alone in saying that seeing a video of your collimator test and seeing a scope go through the elevation and windage range would be valued on this site. One thing that cannot be properly measured (or at least I have yet to see it properly measured) is glass quality, IQ, optical clarity, whatever you want to call it but basically the experience when you look through an alpha class scope and say "WOW! This thing is amazing." Obviously this is often an "eye of the beholder" type of situation and one that I've spent countless $, hours and testing pursuing the "ultimate" scope (for me, as each person has a different idea of the ultimate scope). I'm really looking forward to seeing some reviews of ZCO scopes as compared to other alpha class level scopes, the more I hear the more amazing they sound. But like ILya mentioned earlier the proof will be "in the pudding".
Just to be clear: there is no magic to properly measuring image quality. The company I work for builds this equipment for a living (among other electro-optical test equipment). Now, this is not the equipment routinely available to the consumer and, if you want to do quantitative measurements, you need to know what you are doing to understand the test results. There are quantifiable and measureable differences between scopes and other DVO instruments.
Every once in a while, I take a scope to work and set it up on one of our test systems. That is not what I publish, so I do not have good pictures of the set up, but I found a couple on my cell phone from when I was looking at Leupold VX-6HD.
This specific system is not a dedicated riflescope tester. It is an EO payload test system I use for customer demos, but it can do all sorts of camera and laser testing, so I use it to look at scopes once in a while.
I am toying with an idea of setting up a dedicated riflescope/DVO tester to demo during tradeshows. It would be more compact than a typical payload tester, so it is easier to move around.
Now, here is the catch: the system in the pictures runs around $150k and it is one of the less expensive systems of this type. A dedicated riflescope tester is less expensive, but still isn't cheap.
I do not know what kind of equipment different riflescope manufacturers have, but at a minimum they have basic resolution testers (I suspect that is what Nick was referring to as their collimator; but I havn't seen it so I can't tell you for sure). I know several others who have fairly sophisticated test systems.
ILya
D
Dr59860
Guest
Ilya...are you in the Seattle area?
No. Southern California.
Thanks for all the info!
I do have to point out the irony in there is a mis-spelling in the URL for 'quality'....
qualtiy != quality
Thanks for all the info!
I do have to point out the irony in there is a mis-spelling in the URL for 'quality'....
That's pretty funny I didn't notice that before on their website under products it says "Construction Qualtiy"
Ironic indeed.
Thank you ILya, you have all the fun toys. I thought Nick mentioned they do have an $8k device that tests tracking very accurately, but maybe I misunderstand and he was talking about resolution. When I bought my Kahles a few years ago I had a long conversation with Jeff Huber, we talked a lot about resolution as well as the instruments they have to measure resolution, at the time he shared the Gen III K624i was able to resolve better than the S&B (5-25 I assume) what I found interesting was that it sounds like at least some of the manufacturers do have this equipment and they do measure but they do not post those specifications. Why? Is it because manufacturers don't want to get into "Spec Wars" with one another and would rather the consumer make decisions based on other factors?Just to be clear: there is no magic to properly measuring image quality. The company I work for builds this equipment for a living (among other electro-optical test equipment). Now, this is not the equipment routinely available to the consumer and, if you want to do quantitative measurements, you need to know what you are doing to understand the test results. There are quantifiable and measureable differences between scopes and other DVO instruments.
Every once in a while, I take a scope to work and set it up on one of our test systems. That is not what I publish, so I do not have good pictures of the set up, but I found a couple on my cell phone from when I was looking at Leupold VX-6HD.
This specific system is not a dedicated riflescope tester. It is an EO payload test system I use for customer demos, but it can do all sorts of camera and laser testing, so I use it to look at scopes once in a while.
I am toying with an idea of setting up a dedicated riflescope/DVO tester to demo during tradeshows. It would be more compact than a typical payload tester, so it is easier to move around.
Now, here is the catch: the system in the pictures runs around $150k and it is one of the less expensive systems of this type. A dedicated riflescope tester is less expensive, but still isn't cheap.
I do not know what kind of equipment different riflescope manufacturers have, but at a minimum they have basic resolution testers (I suspect that is what Nick was referring to as their collimator; but I havn't seen it so I can't tell you for sure). I know several others who have fairly sophisticated test systems.
ILya
Camera manufacturers are now posting MTF charts for their lenses and DxOmark is doing independent tests to find out just how "sharp" a particular lens is among other factors, but here's the thing, there are other nuances to a lens besides sharpness that make it desirable, things like bokeh, color rendition and the ability to control CA, flare and so forth. I believe scopes, as an optical device using glass elements to transmit light to our eyes, also have these nuances but it's much more difficult to quantify in a rifle scope because we cannot directly connect a digital imaging device (like a DSLR) to the scope and get a "good" image from that device for proper evaluation. Therefore we must rely on our eyes, which is a subjective analysis and open to certain bias' or preferences (even disabilities) and therein lies the basis for many debates on this forum and others, and I fall prey to this as well at times where if you take a step back and look at the debate for what it is, it's all about how one person is trying to prove that vanilla is the best flavored ice cream and the other insists it is mint chocolate chip.
The next thing we want to do is to justify our purchases or defend a brand favorite. The argument goes "I paid $XXXX dollars of my hard earned money for this scope, and your scope only cost $XXX; therefore, my scope is certainly better than your scope" or "because my Grandpappy shot with brand X and I know shoot with brand X; therefore, brand X is the best possible scope you can buy and there just ain't no amount of evidence that you can provide that will convince me otherwise." These aren't things we necessarily say out loud or write down in a post, but they are things our minds think which has influence over our perception of reality. Before Snipers Hide ruined my life (I say that in jest) I was perfectly happy with my $XXX dollar scopes and felt I had done my due diligence and found the best price/performance scopes I could, I did not want to believe there could be better scopes out there or rather that I "needed" a better scope. But then I would read all these posts from Hide members about these so called "alpha" class scopes and thought "how much better could they really be?" So when I had the money for a new scope I posted a thread asking for advice and the advice I got back was all over the place, some would say get this or get that and others would say no don't get that get this, and because most of these scopes are not available from your average sporting goods store how on earth was I going to make a decision? That's when I decided that the only way for me to make the best decision (for me) was to use them myself and compare them to one another and my first review was put up 5 years ago. And the rest, as they say, is history in my ever obsessive search for the perfect scope (which by the way doesn't exist).
I am not an optical engineer but I do know what my eye likes when looking through a scope or at an image. It may be difficult for us to quantify exactly what we're seeing so we end up using terms like IQ (Image Quality), depth, eyebox, parallax, turret feel, etc. but I feel in large part those can all be subjective based on the observers opinions and definitions. As an example I've used the term "finicky parallax" or "forgiving eyebox" before, but what does that really mean and can that be measured objectively ,and does it mean the scope is inferior to other models or brands? I can give a definition for what I mean by finicky parallax but other users of the same scope may not feel the parallax is "finicky" at all, in other words they can correct for parallax very quickly and don't feel there is a hindrance so they say the parallax is not finicky, but maybe what I really meant was not the ability to quickly correct parallax, but that other scopes are more forgiving with parallax and don't require as precise adjustments to obtain a parallax free image. As I continue to provide reviews and get feedback from the awesome Hide members I learn and try better to define or explain a particular aspect of what I'm testing to better help others make decisions. I am not a brand loyalist and am in favor of any brand that makes top quality scopes that meet my needs.
Which brings us back to the subject of this thread, ZCO. Two weeks ago most of us had never heard of this company and with the announcement of their two new scopes and their presence at SHOT they have garnered quite a bit of interest. Like Nick said, they were overwhelmed with the response. They did their homework extremely well and their first two scopes are ones that are in high demand from the shooting community. I like who they are, I like who they have representing them (especially that they have a presence on the Hide) so I have high hopes for ZCO to make a big impact in a short amount of time, I'm sure ZCO would love that even more. We all want the best scope for less, but let's be realistic, in the optics world you generally get what you pay for. Granted startups may have less overhead and better manufacturing processes that can drive costs down but in the end it looks like ZCO is going to deliver a pair of alpha class scopes that impress even the most discerning of us, they have a lot to prove and they know it so I'm encouraged and don't think we'll be disappointed. Just hoping they can get some scopes out soon to appease our voracious appetites
Last edited:
I get a queasy feeling in my stomach when one of the advertising points is "We use Schott glass!"
"Y'all got Schott glass?"
L O L
I used a Schott glass for my scotchy scotch scotch tonight. No queasy feeling...
Reading this again I realize that you are indicating that you actually have your own manufacturing facility in Austria that is dedicated to just making ZCO parts, do I read that correctly? And then all the parts are shipped to Idaho where they are hand assembled by a ZCO team here in the USA. That is fantastic and probably avoids a lot of export hassle. Also, does this mean that all warranty work will happen right here in the USA, meaning that if something happens to a ZCO scope it only needs to be shipped to Idaho and not overseas?
Finally, what is the proper way to pronounce your company name, is it Z-C-O or Zeeko or what do you prefer?
I'm thrilled that these are coming to market, and I hope you have nothing but success.
They will still be out of my price range.
They will still be out of my price range.
We are taking preorders now. We were impressed by them to say the least!
Give us a call, we'll get you one of the first ones
Give us a call, we'll get you one of the first ones
Yes, our very own ZCO owned and controlled manufacturing facility. Our equipment and tooling. And you are absolutely right, any warranty work occurs in Idaho where these are built. And Z-C-O as you are saying the letters.
Nick, we are extremely pleased to be one of your dealers on what will be an amazing product! Everyone here appreciates the time and effort of answering all the questions here and the response for your products has been out of this world! We've been taking pre-orders and everyone is excited for them to be released when they are ready. Here's a few more pics we took at Shot Show:
Warranty here in the states is a huge plus (for those of us stateside obviously), thank you for confirming. Glad to see your company rise from the needs of the community, reminds me of Premier Reticles when they first introduced their Heritage line of scopes. Man I can't wait to see these.
It's great to see some of the Hide vendors like CS Tactical and Mile High Shooting announce they'll be carrying the scope but curious what your production runs of the scope might be, after reading your website you are definitely not wanting to "rush" anything but ensure you deliver a "zero compromise" optic to the community. The reason I ask is that other popular scopes released by other manufacturers have sometimes had loooong wait times (some over a year) before they received their scope so it might be a good idea to get your pre-orders in now if you hope to get a ZCO anytime soon right?
We will do everything we can to get these together, tested, and shipped out. But yes, not going to rush them out the door either just to fill demand. That's not good business practice in the long run. We will do our very best to catch up with demand as soon as possible.
What is the cost to get your name on the list since pricing hasn't been released yet?
D
Dr59860
Guest
exciting news
Finally listened to episode 6 podcast on the everyday sniper and now understand better why this picture was posted as it is explained after the 44 minute mark. For anyone who has tried to get good through the scope images with your phones or DSLR's you know how much of a challenge it can be, due to finicky eyebox's especially when using another optical device (camera and lens) to take the picture you often end up with shadowed sight pictures or the image is blurred or distorted. Look at the picture again, look at the detail, sure maybe Frank got lucky or maybe the iPhone X has that good of a little sensor and lens but that is very hard to get that clear of an image showing that much detail through a scope, any scope. I have a background in professional photography and I may have to start a blog with pics taken from an iPhone through a ZCO and see if anyone catches on that it's not my Nikon with a 600 f/4 lens! I realize these are preproduction scopes and all that but the consensus of those blessed with the ability to attend SHOT and visit the ZCO booth all mention incredible eyebox and amazing glass, these can't come to market quick enough.
