I'm sort of loathed to start this thread but......

[Chrismadrid]

I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

At least I feel I'll get sensible measured replies and not some babble about how people didnt get on with Fred or Edith so and so.

Here goes. I like 1st Focal plane scopes. Why? - god knows, I just do. It seems that over here in Europe - Yup despite all rumours to the contrary Spain is not Africa - There is a demand for FFP to be filled.

And it really miffs me that there is so little about. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

Anyway to cut along story short I'm thinking about the "under development" IOR 3-18*42 FFP. No Side focus which is a bit of a B*gger and no illumination which is less of an interest. But as there's no transatlantic shipping involved - maybe I can save a € or two.

Now here's the thing. Where do we put IOR in the great scheme of things. And to make this something I CAN RELATE TO some questions.

Optics:
Better or worse than Zeiss Victory?
Better or worse than Swarovski?
Better or worse than Leupold?
Better or worse than NIKON?
Better or worse than NightForce?

Mechanics:
Tougher than Leupold?
Tougher than NIKON?
Tougher than Zeiss Victory?
Tougher Than Swarovski?
Tougher than Nightforce?
More repeatable (box test) than Leupold?
More repeatable (box test) than NIKON?
More repeatable (box test) than Zeiss Victory?
More repeatable (box test) than Swarovski?
More repeatable (box test) than Nightforce?

I'm making the assumption that it will not shape up to the PM2 - But then it's a good bit cheaper. My marriage I doubt will survive anther PM2 at the moment.

Sorry to hit you all with this - but the only IOR i've used is the lowly 4*24.

Chris

 

[älg]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

Chris, roll-y-own sells one in the sell section.- dont know if it´s ffp though.

It´ll be interesting to see the replies--- I have never even seen one of those... also was wondering why there was no comparison with the SB´s..... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Matt27]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

Chris

Get ahold of of Scott at Liberty Optics. He posts here some.

I have not owned an IOR but in reading about them and poeple's experience with them some were good and some bad. To me it seemed that was in the beginning and seems like it is on the up and up now.

 

[Chrismadrid]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

[ QUOTE ]
Chris, roll-y-own sells one in the sell section.- dont know if it´s ffp though.

It´ll be interesting to see the replies--- I have never even seen one of those... also was wondering why there was no comparison with the SB´s..... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]I doubt it's FFP simply because at the mo they only do one - a 2.5-10. The 3-18*42 should be ready in mid Nov.

I get the feeling the older models were a good deal more hit and miss.

In a perfect world Messrs S&B would have sold me at least 4 PM2's by now.

 

[ds]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

Hi Chris,

S&B is the way to go....two out the three have turned up, with the third I hope this week. The P4 Fine is about perfect.....buy another S&B the wallet pain only hurts so much (do it at IWA when still intoxicated....it will be easier the justify to the missus, untill the intoxication wears off). But first have a look if Hensold have anything out in FFP - said to be something in the 3-12x / 4-16x range....but that does not really compare with S&B 5-25x and focus down to 10m.

Are you getting my emails about the comp?

David.

 

[älg]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

Chris does that mean you are running out of patiente and thinking about a different brand??? it´s easy, while you wait for the scope to turn up and look at the forums, to start giving other brand a deep thought......

 

[Chrismadrid]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

David - yup gettin the mails though attendance is uncertain. - This working for a living thing is very overrated.

Want summat smaller than the 5-25*56.

A 4-140r16ish would do and a smaller objective. The IOR looks pretty close to my need. I can reparallax it. I suppose a 4-16*42S&B PM2 would be an option.

 

[älg]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

Chris, yoú ´re not getting too many replies on the IORs.

Guys, is he gonna have to post the same thing in Snipers Hide????Someone here must be using the IOR´s /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[Chrismadrid]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

[ QUOTE ]
Guys, is he gonna have to post the same thing in Snipers Hide????Someone here must be using the IOR´s /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]Snipershide - Would just be a slanging match.

 

[CatShooter]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

The glass on IOR's is very good, and the internal machnicals are also good, but they use multi-piece steel tubes which is pretty much dark ages technology.

The "El Paso" Weaver scopes were the last US company to use steel tubes, and they went "down the tubes" (so to speak /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif ) because of it, and only came back when they got modern.

 

[MachV]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

A rednecks opinion
I have a lot of hours behind 2 16x,2 6-24x30mm and a 6-24x35mm IORs.They have all passed the box step with flying colors but I use the MP-8 Reticle a lot more than turning the knobs.
The glass is better than and they where cheaper to purchase than a NF 5-22NXS,nothing wrong with a NF with R2 riticle!
Zeiss and Swarovski are not popular in the area are spendy and didnt offer a reticle to my likeing.
Nikon makes a good scope for the $$ but again the reticle options where real limited.
Leupold???Well all my scopes used to say leupold on them but there are only 2 3-9s left.Leupold fell asleep at the wheel and lost my business by takeing soo long to offer a range finding reticle.Leupold makes a good scope but to me they are real overprice today for what they offer.

<font color="red">Optics:
Better or worse than Zeiss Victory?<font color="black">no experience</font>
Better or worse than Swarovski??<font color="black">no experience</font>
Better or worse than Leupold?? <font color="black">better than any I have lookt through</font>
Better or worse than NIKON? <font color="black">Definatly better than any I have lookt through</font>
Better or worse than NightForce? <font color="black">The new 35mm IORs are better and the 30mm are at lest equill to any NF to my eyes</font>

Mechanics:
Tougher than Leupold?? <font color="black">In my experiense yes</font>
Tougher than NIKON?<font color="black">In my experiense yes</font>

Tougher than Zeiss Victory??<font color="black">no experience</font>
Tougher Than Swarovski??<font color="black">no experience</font>
Tougher than Nightforce?<font color="black">In my experiense just as tuff though others have reported more warrentee problems than NF</font>

More repeatable (box test) than Leupold?<font color="black">In my experiense yes</font>

More repeatable (box test) than NIKON?<font color="black">In my experiense yes</font>

More repeatable (box test) than Zeiss Victory??<font color="black">no experience</font>
More repeatable (box test) than Swarovski??<font color="black">no experience</font>
More repeatable (box test) than Nightforce?<font color="black">Just as repeatable..they all workt as advertised</font>

</font>

 

[Chrismadrid]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

[ QUOTE ]
The glass on IOR's is very good, and the internal machnicals are also good, but they use multi-piece steel tubes which is pretty much dark ages technology.

[/ QUOTE ] Thanks.

So basically - GOOD/REPEATABLE but a bit old fashioned and maybe not SUPER ROBUST. That'll do as I dont NEED super robust but do need repeatability and good glass.

Sounds as if they might be easy to strip and so easier to GUNKOTE too. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif - We do our own repairs here as a mate is repair specialist for just about every cinematic lens in existence. He even builds from scratch once every so often - just for fun!

 

[Boss Hoss]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

I have or have had all of the scopes mentioned above with the exception of the Nikon and IOR. See the attached link to my newest USO Scope which is the first one of it's kind built to date. When it gets down to it the PM's and USO scopes are the nuts but on some of my rifles they are just too big! This USO fits the bill perfectly and I will be getting a couple of more.

Pic of the new USO Scope.

 

[Chrismadrid]

Re: I\'m sort of loathed to start this thread but......

RIGHT THEN.

Purely in the interest of scientific investigation (just in case the missus reads this) I have decided to order one or two IOR to play with - (I mean test and actually 5 of them /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif ). The 3-18*42 FFP is however a way off sadly. Looks as if the prototype will JUST make the SHOT.

USO - well in general terms being over to the right of the Atlantic I'd go for an S&amp;B except MAYBE an SN-9 ( I have a totally irrational desire for an SN-9 - and if anybody is throwing one out - I'll give it a loving caring home)

BTW - that benchrest is pure F*cking sex.