I'm tired of this argument - we're only burning the bandwidth at this point. This has been hashed, and rehashed, and debated and defended until all involved have become entrenched in their camps.
Why this has become so political is beyond me. It seems to have become a police action, people want to make sure the truth is heard, or at least their version of it. What else can be said about the topic of USO? If they're as bad as people say, they will go out of business. This is not a maybe, but the law of economics.
When something sucks, it goes away; a self correcting problem. USO is still here for now, so we'll have to sit and wait to see what comes of this.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> but the bottom line for me is this: Has anyone who bought a USO scope and found a major problem been unable to either get their money refunded or get a scope that worked? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Here's what really turned me off USO; about a year ago there was a thread on one of the other web sites about a customer purchased one of the fixed 10x power scopes, loaded with options pushing the price tag over $1700.00 He then experienced a slew of problems with it and USO's customer service. When he posted his first hand experiences, he was promptly viciously attacked by the USO faithful. Then our friend DMCI ( who spends a remarkable amount of time pushing USO products, yet claims he has no financial incentive to do so ) posted a reply signed by John Williams III that addressed the issue and ended with words to the effect that:
My Father has taken legal action against people for this sort of thing.
Now, that post has since been deleted, so that is not a verbatim quote. But since then, we have seen other posts on these boards from USO's management - written by their lawyers http://snipersparadise.com/snipercha...pic=2568&st=30 ( there were more on another site, but those too have been deleted ) and we have seen people of this community be threatened, and actually sued by USO for voicing their experiences on USO products.
The message is clear. USO's service department is their attorneys office. But unfortunately for them, they don't seem to be winning too many suits. Right "Doc"? [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img] Perhaps that's the reason for the 300% price increase over other scopes.
So Blaine, if you ask me, that's just another angle that USO uses that their customers don't expect.
I suppose that their legal battles would be justified if their scopes actually preformed as they claimed they perform. But too many people who use their rifles beyond bragging rights wall hangers have leaned from they professionals in the field that they are not the hot set up after all. Perhaps it's an American misconception that if you pay more you get more, but this is NOT the case with USO. You just pay more.
"Doctor" Williams, if you ever get the SN-3's working like you now advertise them to work - alas, how they SHOULD work, regardless of the inflated price tag, I'll buy one and post a pic of me holding it online just like your picture of your pretty office girls. But know this first. I broke the heart of a good friend after I proved to him this spring that his SN-3 was exhibiting the same problems traditional with USO's line. No, they just don't track right. Period. You will have to prove to this community FIRST that such issues are resolved and no, I don't have the funds to be the crash test dummy. My friend replaced the SN-3 with an $850 Gen 2 Leupold from Premier Reticles, and strangely all the problems disappeared. Low and behold he was able to hit the targets at long range.
So people, what's the better equipment - A $2300.00 + super scope that you can hammer nails into boards with, or an $850.00 scope that you can hit the target with?
I own USoptics, S&B, Nightforce, and Leupold scopes.
There are specific reasons I like each of them. I like the Nightforce because it has so much elevation adjustment, the thing I don't like about the NXS is that there is only 10 moa per rotation of the knob so it takes me 6 and 1/2 turns to get to 1800 yards. I have also been having some issues with the parallex and focus knobs on the NXS. I am currently waiting for a 3.8-22x44mm SN3 from USoptics that will have their 90 click BDC turret with over 70 MOA of elevation which will allow me to get to 2000 yards in less than two turns of the knob. If everything works like it is supposed to I think everyone can see the benefit of the USoptics over the NXS at least anyone who has been off a full revolution when it counted most. The thing I do not like about the high magnification USoptics scopes is the focus is located on the objective lense and is difficult to reach from behind the rifle, I really wish they would make a sidefocus knob like everyone else.
The USoptics ST10 10x44mm, I like this scope because of the BDC and the ranging brackets on the reticle, this is a very fast and lethal system which is very easy to use. I also like the clarity of the scope much brighter than Leupold. Things I don't like about the scope, the eye relief is a bit short and if I am not shooting in proper shooting position then it has bumped my eyebrow. I also wish the scope was more light weight. I cannot complain too much as it is the same weight as the S&B 4-16x PMII and the NXS 5-22x.
The S&B 4-16x PMII is an excellent scope and is the most perfectly designed scope I have come across. I love every feature about this scope. I wish more people made 34mm rings for it. I also wish they would release a higher magnification variable say a 5-22x scope with at least 70 MOA of elevation adjustment. My friend had difficulty getting a S&B scope repaired under the warranty, apparently one of the lenses moved slightly out of alignment giving some distortion along the edge of the field of view. He sent it to S&B to be repaired and received it back several months later with a letter stating that indeed there was distortion from the missalignment but that the lense was within acceptable tolerances so they didn't fix it.
Leupolds, these are the most economical scopes around. They get the job done, they are lightweight rugged scopes. The glass is very good, not near as good as the Nightforce, USoptics, or S&B, but the price makes up the difference. I am happy to see that Leupold scopes can now be had with the reticles in the front focal plain.
I have tested several USoptics scopes and all of the tracked perfectly and continue to track perfectly. I know others have had differing experiences with USoptics but I will continue to support John Jr. and his attempt to recover from the significant blow the company has sustained as a result of his father. He is an honerable man who has always been of great assistance to me.
I've watched these threads for a couple of years now (yes - years). I've had a couple of USO scopes through my hands - I had to sell a 3000.00 scope for 1500.00, and it broke my heart, but the tax man wanted a chunk of my butt. I had some minor problems with tracking, but in all fairness JB3 and his Dad have both been VERY accommodating to me. I cannot complain. I sent top of the line SN3 in, and Dr. Williams sent me a NEW scope as replacement within a week. (the one I had to sell) I will own another USO in the future if $$$ allows.
USO has treated me fairly. I'm no USO flag-waver, but I do recognize a good product when I see one.
Would I like to see a "zero defect" QC goal being met. Sure. But in the meantime, if the company makes good on every purchase, this hue and cry that the product wasn't perfect in the first instance is unfair I believe.
I believe a custom shop such as USO should not let any scope out the door that is not perfect in every way, and if that maeans selling less scopes to acomplish this, so be it, they'd be all the better for it. May be, they couldn't stay a float with those small numbers going out the door though, who knows. Someone with a decent head on their shoulders reviewing these failures and USO's overhead could surely tell.
The point is, nobody wants to see USO go under, but everyone that sees clearly knows they will if they don't start making every damn scope that goes out the door, stay out the door first time. People only give you a pass for so long. John makes a good point about a custom gunsmith letting flaws slip through the crack. This would be totally unacceptable and even if he did make it right in the end, what does that say about his attention to detail, and his interest and ability to satisfy his customers. I personally know of a couple gumsmiths, and have heard of many more than that, that would NEVER let a rifle go out of their shop that isn't perfect. Letting the customer bring it back and tell them something wasn't done right just isn't how they do buisness. But you know as well as I do, there are MANY, MANY people that operate this very way. Lack of respect for their customers, and pride in their work is what it comes down to.
USO has really gotton noticed from the advancements and otherwise unavailable options they've brought to us, but this in no way eliminates them from operating their buisness unscrupulously, for any reason, weather it be lack of revenue or lack of management, and I do hope they pull it together quickly... for everyones good.
It sounds to me, by the number of very nice scopes that function flawlessly that are in the hands of several guys, that they DO have the ABILITY to make the scopes the way we want them... PERFECT. The question is WHY is it that, either all the parts are not manufactured perfectly, inferior parts make it to the person doing the assembling, assembled incorrectly or sloppily, why they're not each tested rigorously for TRACKING and everything else, and anything else I forgot. The answers are right there somewhere, and believe me, they know exactly what is leading to every problem that happens, and you never will. They will either stop having them and correct what ever was the cause(s), or they will not and you will see more of the same results. Money talks, and if money's tight they may change. If they indeed are concerned with not letting a single inferior product out the door, which should be their GOAL, this will help us when times $$ are good. If they are truely in this just to make money with something no one else has quite yet, and not build a name into an awesome reputation at the same time... they are doomed. Their reputation is already creating problems for them that has undoubtedly cost then serious cash. I hope for their sake, they are not set themselves on a path to make up this loss in QUANTITY. Without QUALITY first, they are nothing.
I can seperate the fact from fiction and the reality of the situation for myself, so I appreciate being able to read all sides of these stories, I only hope there is more info to come, and from both sides. The more debate, the more I get a feel for what's really happening.
If I had bought a USO scope already and did have good luck with it, I would have to, in all good conscience tell them that their odds of getting a good one may be better than 50/50, but how much I'm not too sure of yet. Could you imagine having to say that about a custom barrel maker, a gunsmith, stockmaker, bullet maker, etc???
You live or die by your reputation. Sometimes folks get started off on the wrong foot putting something on the market too quick, sometimes they get things figured out quickly enough it don't hurt them too bad, sometimes they never recover from it. We almost always end up as guinea pigs at some level on a new product.
The guys that choke at the thought of spending that kind of money on a scope will just have to get over it if they want one. I know it would be a hard pill to swallow for me, but if the tone changes and they prove themselves worthy of my hard earned money, I've been known to help in the rewarding. Until then, I read on...
That's my bla, bla, bla... [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> So Blaine, if you ask me, that's just another angle that USO uses that their customers don't expect.
I hope you are wrong about this. I know that there is currently a lawsuit pending that I am most unhappy with and will be glad when it is settled. However, I have tried to separate the product from the personalities. Sometimes that is difficult.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> I broke the heart of a good friend after I proved to him this spring that his SN-3 was exhibiting the same problems traditional with USO's line. No, they just don't track right. Period. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Now, this is interesting as I have an SN-3. It seems to be working just fine, but if you can describe the method you used to check the tracking, I'll use it and report the result.
No Problem Blaine, Here's the story. After exchanging a number of Q&A emails with a SP patron ( Urban PD SWAT team member ) who did not have access to a long distance range, I invited him down to my place as I am fortunate enough to have my own range "in the back yard". To my delight he accepted my invitation and after confirming the SN-3's zero at 100 yards, he was eager to shoot the 400 yard targets. When we got there he mentioned that he never shot that distance and asked what the come up was for Federal 168's. I told him I use only Black Hills 175's but given the variables, it should be somewhere around 8.5 MOA. What followed was a lot of intense spotting, wondering and head scratching. Before he was able to make a hit at 400 yards, he was dialed down to 3 MOA. First suspecting the ammo, we switched my BH & his Federal through both of our 308's. There was a slight difference in the splash through both our rifles, but nothing surprising beyond the suspiciously low drop of either ammo fired under a USO.
Going down the line and eliminating all other possibilities ( rifle, rail, rings, ammo, chronograph ect...) we then conducted the following tests; After first zeroing the rifle at 100 yards - range verified by a construction tape measure & LRF, we commenced "the one MOA +" Five one half inch dots were put on a sheet of paper in a "+" formation. The center of each dot was exactly 1.047" from the cross' center dot. Then holding the crosshairs on the center dot at all times, left 1 moa ( 4 1/4 MOA clicks ) fire three, up 1 MOA - right 1 MOA fire three, ( ect ect ect.. ) until all dots were engaged with three rounds. Allowing for shooter error and ammunition deviation, it was close, but definitely not correct. We then expanded the test To verify the problem, we put a dot on the back side of a B-27 target, checked the 100 yard zero, came up 4 minutes - fired three, came up 4 minutes- fired three ect.... but all the while holding the aim on the bottom dot. Now, the first group above the zero dot should of been at 4.188" above the dot, the second at 8.376 ect.. and should allow for 1/2 MOA margin of error on account of the rifles accuracy. I don't remember the exact particulars off hand, ( Give me a break here Blaine, it's 0430 Hrs in the morning [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] ) but the first group was at about 6.5 inches above the dot, and the more you dialed it, the further it was off. But that readily explained the "Flatter Trajectory" when the rifle was wearing the USO at the 400 yard targets.
This was NOT a one time test! We repeated and went back & forth, over and under this issue once a week for the next 2 1/2 months expending over 1 case of Federal Match ammo in multiple scenarios. Same problem. What finally resolved the issue? A Premier Reticles Leupold Vari X III 4x14x50 M1 Tactical. No surprises after that.
I will say this about USO. If they ever get their act together, they could be a dominating force in the world of rifle scopes. I was very impressed with the clear glass and entire reticle illumination. But those advantages mean nothing when it's not tracking correctly.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> I have tried to separate the product from the personalities. Sometimes that is difficult. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In a community this small, It's not difficult. Its impossible. Most of these companies are so small that individually they with all their staff can comfortably sit in my living room, and same with the teams this gear goes to. So bullying people with lawsuits is career suicide. And it's more then just Mike Miller. USO needs to dazzle us with their product line brilliance, not baffle us with BS litigation. Add to the mix that their products are failing at an alarming rate whilst charging as much as three times over comparable scopes of their competitors..... Not the way to win friends and keep them. IMHO.
I meant what I said about buying a USO AFTER all the problems are worked out and AFTER it is thouraly field tested and AFTER they have a MAJOR change in their engineering and management. On paper, It's the best scope out there. On Paper... If they ever can get them to do as they claim, there may be something worth buying. But sure as H3ll not now. Again - MHO.
Perhaps USO and their faithful need to look at people like Snip1er, myself and others as offering a real solution to their woes, instead of cut, pasting & forwarding our comments to their Lawyers.