have these problems been worked out on the gen IV's? i almost bought a used one the other day, but i still think its the right scope for my intended use and my budget. ive heard the customer service/warranty has gotten better too. can anyone attest to that?
They say the latest gen IV's are good, but I still find it hard to recommend them without first seeing for sure on my own rifle.
That said, I do know for a fact the new 3.5-18X50 and 6-24X56 were tested extensively on braked 338 Lapuas long before being sold to customers. Had they done that with the original, the whole ordeal could have been avoided. As far as I know not a single one has broke yet, so they're probably safer bets. I haven't put one on my 300 though but not for that reason--just because I wanted a lighter scope to hunt with this year. I must say, I do really like the upgrades to the 3-18:
The 50mm objective makes it much better in low light. The illuminated reticle makes seeing it a non-issue. The new eyepiece give much better eye relief. I'm not too excited about the secondary pointers on the knobs and the zero stop design, but they're there and they work.
Resolution testing side by side with the Premier 3-15 was a tie on 15X, and of course the IOR wins when cranked up to 18X. The Premier has a slight edge perceived brightness in low light, mainly due to the tone of the coatings though it's pretty close.
Reticle straightness, click value, etc, are perfect as closely as I can measure.
All in all, it's one heck of a scope for the money. If it just wasn't 38 oz (basically identical to the Premeir) I would have hunted with it this year without hesitation. There's nothing you can't do well with this scope.
