valdada vs vortex pst

[405win]

Not knowing much about valdada, I was hoping someone here could help me out. I found a used valdada 4-14x50 mil/mil sfp with their unique zero stop and ill reticle in what looks to be excellent ccondition for $900.
is this a good scope and a decent price or am I better off with a pst 4-16.
thanks for the help.

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

I have a vortex pst and though an excellent scope for the money... I've heard that valdada glass is much better... And that they are military hardened scopes... Tough as nails. I was actually looking at picking one up this last month, but a bushnell hdmr 3.5-21x50 H59 fell in my lap with a larue 111 and an accuracy 1st scope level for $1250. The difference in price swung me to the Bushnell... But I wouldn't hesitate to buy either a pst or valdada... Though all things being equal price-wise... I'd probably throw down on the IOR.

 

[405win]

I was thinking the same way. Thanks for the info, I'll throw some coin at the valdada.

 

[ZSteinle]

go with the IOR. much better glass. The PST's are ok but I cant stand the 12 MOA per turn on the turrets!

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

go with the IOR. much better glass. The PST's are ok but I cant stand the 12 MOA per turn on the turrets!

I concur on the Ior, but my pst I believe is 5 mils for a single turret rotation.

 

[405win]

Thanks guys. I grabbed the IOR.

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

Thanks guys. I grabbed the IOR.

Sweet 405win! Let us know what you think once you've had some time behind it! Congrats. Hope you wind up loving it.

 

[Kurt]

ior has a less than stellar track record and service is not the best. it isnt my money though just hope you dont get one of the lemmons.

 

[405win]

I was able to play with it for a night. I stuck it in the freezer for about 3 hours, no problem. I mounted it on my gun and used a leupold bore sighter to check the tracking, again, things seem to work ok.
I'll take it out this weekend and do a live fire test.
I'm excited, I hope it works out okay and is not just an expensive paper weight. It is heavy.

 

[Outlaw6.0]

ior has a less than stellar track record and service is not the best. it isnt my money though just hope you dont get one of the lemmons.

Kurt is right, the early IOR scopes were kinda sketchy. Now, IOR does have some of the best glass period so keep that in mind. I've "been told" the new IOR products have corrected most if not all of their original failings. I do have to say i'm seeing less & less "My IOR took a sh#%" threads started. So either they are getting better or folks aren't buying them anymore

I'm not trying to scare you, just sharing what little info I have. I came within seconds of giving my CC# for a new IOR with the new MOA reticle.... I still wouldn't mind trying one out, I do hope their CS has changed for the better...

If it were my choice, I'd probably have gone the same way you did.


t

 

[Unofficial Gun Addict (UGA)]

Yeah... I think that IOR must be doing something right, because they were one of 4 scopes that got a perfect mechanical score in the "Precision Rifle Blog's Scope Test" where they looked at $1500 plus scopes and did a comprehensive test of their optical quality, mechanical performance, amenities, etc. Ior did fairly well... But one of their scopes was perfect mechanically. Considering the competition, this feat alone is impressive.

I'd get an IOR and feel comfident in doing so.

 

[Kurt]

Yeah... I think that IOR must be doing something right, because they were one of 4 scopes that got a perfect mechanical score in the "Precision Rifle Blog's Scope Test" where they looked at $1500 plus scopes and did a comprehensive test of their optical quality, mechanical performance, amenities, etc. Ior did fairly well... But one of their scopes was perfect mechanically. Considering the competition, this feat alone is impressive.

I'd get an IOR and feel comfident in doing so.

that test is flawed and has been discussed ad nauseam so using that to judge any thing is just like some one saying my one scope is the best ever.

 

[405win]

We shall see how this pans out. The scope is a 2010 or 2011 but not sure which. Its a mil/mil which while good, is something I'll have to learn.
I'm hoping to stretch its legs in the next day or so and will try to post pictures, whether good or bad.

 

[bruce_ventura]

that test is flawed and has been discussed ad nauseam so using that to judge any thing is just like some one saying my one scope is the best ever.

I read that test report and concluded there were some flaws, but that some of the results may be useful. Some tests were not designed well, and important performance criteria were not addressed at all. I think that the overall rankings would be different if the flawed and superfluous data were removed from the analysis, and more important criteria were included.

Where has this report been discussed "ad nauseam"? I would like read that thread.