Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
weatherby and swarovski
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Scot E" data-source="post: 636524" data-attributes="member: 10832"><p>I wouldn't say it was harsh use at all. Demanding, I will give you that. </p><p></p><p>No additional weight was added, they were used as designed and rightfully so in my mind. If someone makes a scope, calls it premium and charges a price commensurate to that claim then it should perform, no excuses. It may be of interest to note that the scopes that were outperforming Swaro's were silly brands like Bushnell Elite, Weaver, and some of the higher end Nikons. It wasn't like we were using the very top end stuff. </p><p></p><p>I will say this in an attempt to be fair, the demand for excellence in optics has risen drastically over the last decade. 10 years ago it was hard to find good shooters that really understood the differences between MOA, IPHY, and MIL. Not saying there weren't any just saying that compared to today the expectation and knowledge base is much higher. I am sure that in some ways manufacturers were simply providing products that met the general demand. I just get a bit testy when products advertised as premium under-perform compared to mid range scopes. And to be more fair Swaro wasn't the only one by a long ways. Also, I haven't used the newer Swaro models like the Z5 and 6 so hopefully things have improved from my experience. </p><p></p><p>Scot E.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Scot E, post: 636524, member: 10832"] I wouldn't say it was harsh use at all. Demanding, I will give you that. No additional weight was added, they were used as designed and rightfully so in my mind. If someone makes a scope, calls it premium and charges a price commensurate to that claim then it should perform, no excuses. It may be of interest to note that the scopes that were outperforming Swaro's were silly brands like Bushnell Elite, Weaver, and some of the higher end Nikons. It wasn't like we were using the very top end stuff. I will say this in an attempt to be fair, the demand for excellence in optics has risen drastically over the last decade. 10 years ago it was hard to find good shooters that really understood the differences between MOA, IPHY, and MIL. Not saying there weren't any just saying that compared to today the expectation and knowledge base is much higher. I am sure that in some ways manufacturers were simply providing products that met the general demand. I just get a bit testy when products advertised as premium under-perform compared to mid range scopes. And to be more fair Swaro wasn't the only one by a long ways. Also, I haven't used the newer Swaro models like the Z5 and 6 so hopefully things have improved from my experience. Scot E. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
weatherby and swarovski
Top