Huskemaw optics

[Sendero_Man]

Originally Posted by muleymaster

I purchased a huskmaw scope last fall. Let me tell that is by far the nicest long range scope I have ever used. For a hunting application I fell there is not a better scope out there. Set up correctly it gives anyone the ability to take awesome field shots eaiser and more preicise then any nightforce and with much more ease then a leupold. I killed an muley this last fall with it at 760 yards first shot. And where ever this info about them being compared to a low grade bushnell came from thats the dumbest thing i've heard.

more precise than any NF.... ???

How are you basing that ? Just curious on your comparsion....

Have you owned a NF ? Has one failed you ?

How does this make shots at more "ease" than a leupold ?

thanks for your time. I'd appreciate an explanation of your findings as I know little about these Huskemaw scopes.

[adam32]

I would like to hear more about this scope too. I will be in the market for a scope to put on my .243 AI in about 3 months and it looks like it might be pretty good.

[muleymaster]

yes i have had experience with nightforce and leupold. I'm not saying they are better then a nightforce im saying they are as good as a nightforce. I say they are easier to use the leupold because they have a zero stop, so you aren't a turn off on accident and the have windage marks in the reticle calibrated to your load of bullet. There might be a better target scope, but for a long range HUNTING scope they are number one in my book.

[Sendero_Man]

you didn't explain how they are "easier and more precise" than any NF ????

[muleymaster]

Sorry I take that back, I dont think they are more precise then a nightforce, but they will track just as good. Some of the other scopes are more precise for adjusting for wind. But I love the huskemaws windage marks in the reticle because they give you a pretty accurate quick shot in the wind, that is many times needed in the field. Its not the best bench rest scope, it just works awesome for hunting.

[sw_hunter]

Wow that was a fun read! lol

SO anyone here buy or test one of them out yet? I am looking at buying a good "hunting scope" with a good reticle, I like mil's and the Zeiss rapid but am looking for something more load Specific.

P.S. I hope I didnt stur this up in any bad way.

[Rcoolaid]

Wow, just wow!


My first post here, just a few observations.

1. As an owner of Nightforce, USO, IOR, Zeiss, S&B, and a few others; the hype is almost insurmountable. hell, Premier's new scope makes similar claims and has a price-tag 3X this one.

2. That guys on a hunting show (kept in business by marketing) recommend something means nothing to me. I've read too many Guns n' Ammo articles telling how great Taurus handguns are to believe someone selling ad space will be honest about the products of the companies to whom they sell the most ad space.
3. Leupold is a good scope - not a great scope, an overpriced scope, great customer service; but Leupold is far from the gold standard in real optics circles. Anyone else notice that "Made in the USA" has disappeared from most Leupold boxes?
4. To sell a scope before it is available is, in my eye, not a great idea. If you have a custom product like US Optics and require a deposit on a known value, that is great; if you have an unknown selling to back-woods rednecks who saw it on a show and now must have it - not good business practices.
5. I see MANY questions online about the scope and no hands-on reviews (though I'm guessing someone will now point me to one.)
6. Final point: a scope has to stand on its own, not on a pedigree, not on claims. The Super Sniper scopes had to overcome the tasco pedigree before they saw wide-spread acceptance; however, they overcame, because the product was a greaqt value and a great scope for the money.


It seems to me that if one wanted to introduce a scope in the absolute worst way possible (or if they wanted to introduce an OK scope way overpriced) this is exactly how they'd do it.

First post. Rebuttals?