IOR 3-18 x 42 Scope

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by dbhunter, Jul 20, 2008.

  1. dbhunter

    dbhunter Active Member

    Messages:
    41
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Looking for some reviews on this scope. Will it hold up to a .338 Lapua?
    How does the 35mmx42 tube compare to a 30mm x 50 on light gathering?

    Thanks,
     
  2. royinidaho

    royinidaho Writers Guild

    Messages:
    8,853
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    It will do you well all the way around.

    You just got to wanna put out the bucks.
     

  3. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Any comprehensive internet search on the subject will find two divided camps, the scope rocks, or it's a POS. The truth is somewhere in between. Optically, it's great. Mechanically, it's great. QC and durability are the only real issues. It may hold up on a 338, it may not. The same is true with any scope.

    Brightness and clarity are superb with the over-sized internals of the 35m tube. Adjustment travel is limited on the 3-18, about 70MOA, so be sure to use a canted base.

    My buddy Mike @ CS Gunworks likes the Nightforce over the IOR and on a hard kicking gun I'd be hard pressed to disagree. I'm just not a fan of the Nightforce production glass, but the scope is proven tough, and it's in the same price range.

    Scott
     
  4. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    I’ve got one as most know so you can search my username for many past comments, pics, etc or feel free to ask anything about it here. I guess I never really gave a thorough review. I guess I can give some comments on it overall.

    Since real or perceived, about the only chink in the armor of this scope in my opinion is durability so let’s get that out of the way first. My 300 RUM at only 7lbs 10 oz without scope likely kicks as hard or harder than your 338 will, depending upon its weight, so it’s a good test. First, if you’re talking about the SFP version, I only know of a couple of those that have failed after many years and what must be many thousands sold so I think it’s got a pretty solid track record; Scott would know more.

    It’s the FFP that has some more proving to do. I broke my first two, both from the “first batch” that apparently had a flaw. They say they’ve fixed the flaw and my replacement from the second batch has held up just fine so far, though I don’t have a lot of rounds through it yet. Over the next few weeks I’ll be doing a lot more shooting so I’ll have a better idea then.

    The silence on this issue over the last few months is very good news I believe. The second batch+ has been out a long time now and we aren’t hearing about failures while in this timeframe the first batch seemed to be dropping like flies. I think the chances are very good the issue is solved. The only one from the second batch I’ve heard of breaking was Marc’s and it had a low serial number so we weren’t sure if it was a legit 2nd batch scope or not. Regardless, I haven’t heard of any of the newly made scopes failing. And now that they’re in stock, it is a comfort to know it does break they can replace it quickly. I really think the scopes are fine, but I won’t put my personal guarantee on it. It’s going to take time for the scar on their reputation to fade away.

    Beyond that, I simply couldn’t be happier with the scope. Over the years of doing this and using many different scopes I’ve learned through experience what I like and don’t like and what I want and don’t want from a scope for what I do. This scope goes right down the list of what I want from a scope damn near perfectly. It’s really hard to think of anything I’d change about it if I could. I suppose it could be a bit lighter. A tad more eye relief would be welcome for some though I find it’s plenty for me. Other than that, it’s pretty much perfect as far as I’m concerned.

    The magnification range makes it do everything so well. The FOV on 3X is nearly twice that of the 4.5X Leupold I used to use which makes it so much better when in the thick stuff. The extra magnification of 18X along with the glass quality makes it a huge step up from the typical 14-16X scope on the top end. You’ll see more detail and have a better view than you will with most 20X+ scopes. The glass is just that sharp and brilliant. It will spoil you. It makes looking through “regular scopes” really disappointing. I’ve never had the pleasure using a S&B or USO so I’ve never seen anything come close optically (except for other IORs, of course ;) ).

    The reticle is just perfect for big game/gong hunting. It is so fast and easy to pick up, even at low power. It stands out and is very visible in low light--the best I've had at that, the way it stays so black it just stands out against the target so well. The ½ Mil hashes are just right for holding over/under or wind precisely without being too cluttered.

    The FFP makes me wonder why I’d ever buy another SFP scope of this type ever again. I can hold wind at any power I feel like, and it’s always right. When “walk around hunting” I can dial up my 300 yd dope and know the first hash is on a 400, the 1 Mil mark is on at 500, etc, for example so if something happens fast I can just hold and shoot without having to mess with anything, even if it’s on low power. No chance of being on the wrong power at the wrong time.

    The new knobs are very nice. The 100 click elevation knob is simply beautiful in action. With 210’s I can dial up to 1400+ yds on the first turn of the knob when many scopes would be on their 4th already. Since I only shoot that far on very special occasions, this means the chance of getting mixed up on what turn it’s on, being off by a turn, etc, in normal use is basically zero.

    The knobs’ click value matching the reticle is the only way to go as well. I can hold or dial the wind, whichever I feel like doing at the time, using the same data. I can hold or dial elevation. I can dial elevation for one range and hold for another range using the data from a single dropchart. I can dial or hold corrections, using the same numbers…. It’s really the only way to fly IMHO.

    So there are some thoughts on it for you to ponder. Of course a big part of why I like it so much is how it lines up feature-wise with exactly what I want. Not everybody wants those same things (though many do). Many here don’t walk around with their rifles much when hunting, don’t hunt in thick stuff, etc, and have no need for the low power flexibility. Some don’t like FFP, etc, and that’s fine. But for my uses as a scope that does pretty much everything exceedingly well, it’s hard to beat. There are no scopes anywhere near its price range I would trade it for.

    Oh, compared with the 30mm tube by 50mm objective in low light, I compared it extensively to my 4-14X50 IOR and naturally, the 50mm objective will give a slightly brighter view. However, my 4-14 did not have an illuminated reticle and the thin SFP reticle would get lost when the 3-18's reticle could still clearly be seen. So even though the view was a little brighter, the 3-18 was actually useful later though that may have changed if the 4-14 had been illuminated. Though the 4-14X50 does give a slightly brighter view, in my opinion the 3-18 beats it in every other way.

    Gratuitous pic:


    [​IMG]
     
  5. katigroszek

    katigroszek Guest

    Jon A - judging from the picture You have exactly the version I'm considering - FFP mil MP8 Reticle and mil knobs. Can You tell me what is the lowest number of the "second batch" of the 3-18x42 scopes, that do not suffer from any known issues? I will have the scope imported privately from US, and will not be able to use a waranty should something happen to the scope. What exactly broke in those first batch scopes You've mentioned?

    P.S.
    More scope pics please! Especially magnification ring and eyepiece and turrets from different sides, mainly parallax adjustment! PLEASE!
     
  6. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Jon,

    That was a very eloquent review and detailed commentary, that clearly explained the advantages of the scope. Well done!

    A couple of comments:

    The 3-18x42 SFP does have a good track record, especially the last 2.5 years. I've know only a few to go south in that time span.

    The SH FFP scopes are out of stock, so there is a wait yet again on any warranty claims. Val screwed the pooch on that one.


    Scott

    PS - katigroszek, better talk to me!
     
  7. Bravo 4

    Bravo 4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,995
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    WOW, that's good to know Scott- THANKS!
     
  8. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    I don't think anybody really knows exactly. IIRC, Marc's was #109 and that's the highest number I know of to have a failure. My current one is 130 something which I believe was fairly early second batch, made in 2007.
    I think it was a washer that holds one of the lenses or something. All the failures had the same symptoms.
    Heh, OK. You asked for it!!!

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    I don't think I've taken a good one of the parallax adjustment but I could. One note on it, I find the parallax adjustment to work better/be easier to use than other sidefocus scopes I've used, including other IORs.
     
  9. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Jon,

    Please post how you did the turrets. I get questions all the time how to do what you did, with the quasi-BDC knob.

    Thanks,


    Scott
     
  10. Bravo 4

    Bravo 4 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,995
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Yeah Jon, do tell.
     
  11. shortshooter

    shortshooter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    139
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    IOR

    I have gotten to the point where I only want Nightforce, USO, and S&B. There are other optic brands I own, but they get little use or play. Presently I have one optic each from USO, NF, and SB.

    NF is IMO the one that gives a lot of durability/performance/value for the dollar spent.

    Now that I have these optics I don't want anything else, and I'mextremely happy I went the way I did.

    Although the IOR (Schott) glass is wonderful, I would choose durability over resolution any day of the week.
     
  12. katigroszek

    katigroszek Guest

    Jon A - Thanks for the pics!
    I've also noticed the change of the turret marks. Can You tell how it's done?

    One more thing - according to other thread here it is rare to find the distance marks on the side paralax adjustment to be spot on. They rather tend to be off quite a lot. Was it the same with Your IOR?


    Scott, I hope You know of a way to buy a scope in the US and have it sent abroad :) ? Do You? I'm from Poland, and though PL is a NATO member and all but nevertheless most shops deny to send optics outside US due to some federal regulations. And I'm not a terrorist! I'm a lawyer - perhaps too close to a plain crook :) !?
     
  13. Iron Worker

    Iron Worker Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,759
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Varmint/predator hunter

    Been looking at IOR scopes for longest time. I have a 6x284 12LB rifle. I'm not going to war,not going to drop my rifle. Shoot it off bench in load evaluation and Bi-pod or shooting stick in the field. Is the IOR going to fall apart on me? Unsure if I should go with FFP or SFP ? Thinking about the 6x24x50MM Tactical for the cool effect,or maybe the 3x18x42MM. I don't expect to ever shoot farther then 500yards? I've looked through Zeiss Conquest I felt those were better optics then Nightforce NXS. What say yee?
     
  14. ScottBerish

    ScottBerish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    325
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Got your message and will call you tomorrow. I was taking a fly casting class. Have a good evening.

    Scott