uso or nf

John M's analogy is the best Ive heard.......

John.......its not you man.....its the by one they rob you of your sanity........

I can see where you’re coming from, but never in a thousand years will you be able to convince me that a customer, who pays top dollar for a specialty product, should be responsible for modifying the scope or developing elaborate computer programs in order to create a firing solution. There is just no excuse for it not being right when it leaves the factory. I’d easily forgive an occasional mishap if it were backed up with a fast, no cost repair, but threatening to sue your customers for demanding that their company hold true to their advertisements is nothing but disgusting.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> I've seen some posts on other forums that are incredibly vicious and destructive in their negativity <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Every kettle has it’s boiling point, and after seven years of defective products, outright lies, ( Such as Premier Reticles patent pending Gen 2 in USO’s catalog without Premier’s authorization ) warning posts from USO’s attorneys, their threats to sue customers who reported their failures first hand, and their suing of highly respected members of this community, and most recently – the not so subtle hint that web boards and those who participate on them ( may be ) their next target, I’d have to say that it’s over due for that pot to boil over!

You reap what you sew. All I can say is that they brought this down upon themselves.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> It is possible to be critical in a supportive way and I would hope that we as a community can move away from the rabid attacks that serve little purpose other than to inflict as much damage as possible and shift instead into positive, healthy criticism. As consumers, we can only benefit from the latter approach. It does not serve our interests to have fewer choices in the marketplace. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps fewer choices that actually do work would be more desirable. If they can’t get the **** things to function properly on a consistent basis, then why the H3ll are they still shipping them? What benefit is there to having another market choice if that choice that is defective? So far as constructive criticism goes, H3ll - I offered to buy one of their scopes providing they actually get them to perform as advertised. Then Nighthawk posted an email reply from Williams warning of “a change on the web after the first of the year”. No change in quality control or engineering or service, just a not so discreet warning that more lawsuits are immanent. Tell me, how can we “work with” that mindset?

Here is another way of looking at it. Few people will detract from USO about their entire reticle illumination. Often I have heard, if USO can do it, why can’t others do it? But have they done it? By that I mean that perhaps, just perhaps, the reason we don’t see this feature in other scopes is because their engineers have found that such a design would compromise the correct operation of the turrets. (?) I don’t know. But it’s food for thought.

USO bills themselves as a CUSTOM SCOPE MAKER. Now, when I think about custom anything, two principles cross my mind. 1.) Expensive ( Ok, USO has that covered ) 2.) Quality above and beyond what could be produced from a mass production facility. - Sorry, USO does not meet this standard. But the insinuation here is criminal. Claim you’re a custom scope maker and charge a custom price. But without alluding to the fact that you may have to devise your own method of attaining a firing solution specific to that and only that scope. … Gee, what a great deal over their competition.

So far as their being an American made; well they are assembled in America, yes. But with who’s parts? Made on who’s machines? With raw materials shipped in from where? So basically, they are just as “America” as Leupold or Nightforce. Again, given the choice of a defective product versus a well working one, location of assembly is irrelevant, at least to me.

As I pointed out earlier, the problems with USO are not new. They have had years to correct them. But instead of fixing what’s wrong, what do they do? Announce their new expanded product line!!!

That begs the question, how many more years should we give them and what is the number of lawsuits that we in this community should deem as “acceptable”?

So far as Vicious & destructive comments from many members of this community against USO, well, where there’s smoke - there’s fire.

Big John
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>Nightforce <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually mine is stamped and painted in "Made in Japan". Also if you are interested, the Nightforce NXS looks as if it uses a 2-piece tube. (or at least to me)
Nighthawk (Leupold LRT Thread) <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR> posted 12-27-2003 02:03 AM
I was wondering how well the Leupold Vari-X III 6.5-20x50mm scope or the new VXIII would be able to see a deer at 1500 yards. Anyone have an answer? Need a backup just in case I get shafted with the SN-9 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now I've heard everything!

Nighthawk, post pics of you with your rifles and scope and I'll send you $100 bucks!

Pic has to have you holding sign with date and time and must be posted within 12 hours.

Make it $125, to cover the cost of 1 hour photo and disposable camera after you say you don't have a digital camera...
Big John, I understand where your coming from and you are not wrong. There is no reason why you or anybody else should spend that kind of money and be less than completely satisfied. By the same token, I guess maybe I have a greater threshold of pain. I really don't mind that the scope isn't perfect - I have faith that it will be and that the problems will be solved in a reasonable amount of time. I can put up with little problems here and there because overall, I am extremely satisfied with the scopes I have purchased. What I object to is the attack without a purpose. Honest criticism is never out of line. Both the consumers and the manufacturer need to see it.

Regarding the litigation, I agree it isn't good customer or public relations. On the other hand, I think some of the more mindless attacks on the company have been grossly unfair and a source of concern to the company.

I will say this - I am gratified that this particular thread has been positive, non-personal and objective and for that I think we owe ourselves a drink (I'm buying.) Here's to ya.
DANTEC, the caliber is a .338 Lapua. John M, calm down a little bit would ya. I asked a question about a Leupold scope for something I don't really plan on starting for many months. I figured I would ask because it was on my mind at the time. I would post some pictures if not for these reasons, no barrel for rifle, don't know how to post pictures anyway, don't know how to use the scanner, don't care to until I actually get a barrel. And yes there will be a sign of me holding a sign with the time and date so you might quit thinking all is do it lie. Also I do have a digital camera that my dad bought a year and a half ago. Please excuse my sarcasm. John, I once recall a topic that we all had over a year ago and you said something about wiping the slate clean between us, is that possible for a second time?

[ 12-28-2003: Message edited by: Nighthawk ]

And you get 3 month of delivery time on a 338 cal barrel ?

If you spend time to read posts on this forum 338 LM is not the best for real long range shooting , that a military caliber with 1200 yards effective range and surely not a low cost / hight preformance caliber , far better to use a 300 Ultra or a good 300 Win mag to punch paper

and really not a caliber for beginer shotter who need to shoot a lot and practice to learn a lot

If you really shoot a 338 LM or plan to shoot a 338 lm what the need of a SN9 scope with 250 Moa because max usefull range ( subsonic ) is just over 1 miles and 100 moa scope on 20 moa base is far enought for 1 miles .

good shooting

DANTEC, I choose the .338 Lapua for this and this reason only. While S1 was still on this site I began to read his topic on the .30 Wolf and became really interested in it, but after thinking about it I decided that i didn't want to mess around with the fireforming and case prep. Since the .338 Lapua was the parent case I just choose to stick with it because, it had no belt, good brass, and was powerful enough to take to long rangess. I believe the SN-9 that I got has 100 MOA on it instead of 250, but I could be wrong. What calibers do you shoot?

when you choose a caliber you check bullet BC / case capacity to get interesting velocity if the goal is real long range

338 LM with 250 gr Scenar is good but not amazing and 338 LM need BIG receiver to be SAFE for shooting use ( steel fatigue is safety problem )
with 300 SMK velocity is not amazing at all case is too small

if that just to shoot paper or steel gong a 300 Ultra can do the same with a regular mag action and with less money

I shoot caliber most are 222 REM , 6 Norma BR , 243 WIN , 6.5/08 , 6.5/06 , 6.5/300 , 7 REM MAG , 300 WIN MAG , 300 Ultra , and 510 DTC Europ ( an IMP 50 BMG design for shooting target ) I have one 338 LM ( not aazing caliber ) and I plan to rechmber soon in 338 LM Rogue but for ultra long range 338/378 Wea is abetter choice if you doesn t want to fire form

I work on 30.338 LM IMP for 1 mile shooting too but actually my 6.5/300 WIN YUMA is enought to make nice holes in paper at 1600 meters

and if you plan to practice and shoot a lot 338 LM is far not the best caliber except if you are rich

last question : SN9 is very hight on receiver that perhaps a clever idea to try if you can reach the optic axis with your yee without very hight check piece and very hight check piece is not th ebest cofort to shoot prone ...

my original project with SN9 ( before USO deliver failure !!!!!!!!........) was to built a 338/50 BMG short for 2500 meters shooting I have restart the project with home made canted base ( from 0 to 120 moa by 20 moa step ) and IOR scope and for diffrence between my set up and the SN9 I have put money in the rifle .

good shooting

Naw, first round is on me Blaine. To paraphrase our former *Kommander in cheek*, you have had to feel enough pain.

Honestly, a few years back I myself was very, very ( perhaps too ) close to putting in an order for a SN-3 MK IV. Fortunately, the reports began to surface on forums such as this and I listen to what other USO users were saying. That saved me a lot of pain!

As far as the lawsuits go, I’ve never met anybody outside of prison inmates that honestly believed that this country needs more litigation. But we do need to take into account that while USO’s management is fully aware of these conversations and product failures, their response is typical with past procedures; Look for changes “on the web”. IE, expect more litigation. Also notice how they completely ignored your request for assistance on Snipers Hide with your link to this URL. What could be more revealing?

I can’t fault you for your hope that they will eventually get their products to work correctly. As I said before, if their products actually did work as advertised, they could be the dominating scope on the market. But it’s abundantly clear that they are gambling on enough of their customers not being aware of the defects, overly forgiving of the defects in light of other features, or are afraid to debate they are right over a man with a supposed PHD. If those solutions fail, then gag those who resist with litigation. Hence, the reason for their renewed efforts for “changes on the web”. It is for these reasons that I personally believe that this community may be better off if USO folded. The perceived benefit - with the Kerr Culled, the our fellow shooters wont be distracted by their propaganda and will then select from the line of quality products currently available from other manufacturers.

I’d also like to thank you Blaine for your honesty and congeniality. I will admit that such attributes are rare in a USO thread!


John M.,
I think the shooting community would be better off in USO stays around and gets their QC and customer service together - I haven't had any problems with their products or service, but others here have. I think JBW3 has been quite a boost in the customer service area, now they just need to make sure that every scope leaving the shop has been thoroughly checked for tracking, etc. etc. There is no reason for this not to happen with the prices they are charging.

Regardless of the various complaints, they offer products no one else does - for that reason alone they need to remain a part of the community, at least until someone else offers a full custom optics service. It sbad enough that the anti-gun foilks are attacking the industry - lets not help them out or eventually we will be posted threads about scopes we used to post on our guns before the gov't took them away.

Other ways do exist in order to have enough MOA for longer ranges other than having it in the scope. Custom made inclined bases (Badger, Near, USO, IOR, , adjustable base (USO makes this), or adjustable rings (Ivey/Barrett/Burris).

For KISS I would expect that fixed rings and a fixed base with all the adjustments in the scope tube would be better. but $$$$ ouch. This was posted at another site but it is the new USO online catalog, eyecandy? USO

When I was shopping for a scope I was looking at both the NXS and the ST-10 with a few options. The end result was that USO was not open during the time I was able to use a phone, so for convenience I ordered the NXS. The NXS is truly a heavy duty scope with emphasis on heavy. (extra metal added to prevent damage) If I happen to buy one more rifle in the future I will have to try the ST-10 or a S&B PMII Gen III.

Like I said earlier, the only way to truly evaluate these scopes will to be buy one each then totally disassemble them looking for anything and everything, and even measure the glass. (I don't know anyone who would do this.) USO goes into detail in their catalog about the internal specs of their scopes, I would like to see NF do the same.
Warning! This thread is more than 20 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.