Print Page | Close Window

S&B vs. USO

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Tactical Scopes
Forum Description: Police and military tools of the trade
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=9041
Printed Date: March/28/2024 at 13:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: S&B vs. USO
Posted By: Manuel
Subject: S&B vs. USO
Date Posted: December/19/2007 at 02:54
Scope will be mounted on a sako trg 22. .308

Which S&B scope most closely mirrors the one chosen by the USMC?

At this price range I highly doubt that the Optics are going to out-do the eachother by much much but of these choices which would you recommend?

USO ST10

USO SN3

S&B fixed 10 and variables most closely resembling USMC choice.

ALL will be gen II mildot



Replies:
Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/19/2007 at 14:41
I think the USMC made a mistake in taking the S&B over the USO - and I can say that, I was a HOG in the USMC.

The SN3 is the way to go, no question: best service in the industry, best product I have used.  Be ready to wait awhile though.
I think S&B sells a version that is all but a dead-ringer for the USMC version - and it ain't fixed 10X.

I have faced the same choice and I went with USO.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: December/19/2007 at 14:46
if you dont mind me asking rancid... what stick are you shooting and what sn3 variation did you get?


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/19/2007 at 23:21

The only reason to choose USO is for an american to support the US industri.

In my opinion there is nothing that could make me pay  for an USO and I am not impressed at all.
 
There is probably a very good reason why snipers in the whole world are choosing SuB over for USO.
 
Regards Technika


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: December/20/2007 at 08:25
Technikia - The sniper instructors here where I work dont like S&B and have not had very good customer service from them most of our guys Police and Military are using Leupold and I know its is not as good of glass but they are reliable and have great customer service.  I know George at GA Precision swears by USO and I would probably buy a USO before I would buy a S&B that said I'm using Leupold on my rifles. Who is behind the trigger is more important that which brand scope is riding on top and Police distances are relatively short range almost always under 100 yds where the Military targets are average 300 yds to 600 yds more often than not all well within the useable range of any of these optics. 
Manuel I know Chris has one of the Marine Corp scopes on the table in the break room when I dropped in on him a few months back - call him and see if he wants to sell it or can get you another one if that is what you want, its all personal choice I would perfer a 4-16x50 Heinsoldt to these but the new Leupold 6.5-20x50 FFP should be a great scope and the IOR 3-18x42 FFP should be awesome and what a great power range that would be.


-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/20/2007 at 09:24
I am using both Hensoldt and SuB, prefering Hensoldt as the optics are better, but I don' know about the mechanics(I have not had any problems with my Hensoldts).
Outside of USA USO i close to nonexisting and Leupold are not very popular either (in sniping)
 
My negativism with USO is from the one I have owned and there is nothing more than the price that impressed on me (to high to the quality)
 
Regards Technika
 


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/20/2007 at 13:07
Manuel,  this is the best I can do for now (why can I not upload an image on this new board?)
http://www.rancidkoolaid.com/images/cheek5.jpg - http://www.rancidkoolaid.com/images/cheek5.jpg

I will take a better shot soon and post it.  The rifle is a Rem 700 PSS in 300WM with a Karsten cheekpiece, Badger bolt knob, Badger mounts, Seekins rings, USO level bubble (a great aid for me - a natural canter-er) and an SN3  3.something -17.  This rifle can shoot 1/3 - 1/2 MOA out past 600 yards.  I thought about having more custom work done on it, but couldn't justify the expense.

The scope has the GAP reticule, EREK elevation, red illuminated reticule, side parallex adjustment, and no low-profile anything.  The glass is fantastic, the controls are exactly what I want, the adjustments are perfect, it is the best scope I have ever owned or shot - and it ain't my first USO.

Technika, I do understand.  Several years ago, USO's product was variable in quality and their Customer Service was down-right terrible - things have changed dramatically since then.  As consumers, we vote with our $$ and I understand reluctance to spend money with a company that burned you once.  I don't do business with Hilton Hotels or Leupold Scopes or AT&T for exactly the same reason: don't wanna serve or back your product, don't get my money.

At this moment, I can recommend USO without hesitation.  If you have questions, concerns or comments, pick up the phone and call the owner, I've done it: what other scope company offers that level of service and customer care?  I had an issue with my scope when I bought it (from the previous owner, not from USO.)  They took care of it immediately, had it back to me in no time, and went far beyond what I asked or anticipated.

The only issue with USO is the waiting game, it might take you 6 months to get one new.  And if you buy used, buy from someone you trust (not on Ebay) and call USO and check the serial number first.

I've used jsut about everything but S&B and I will buy USO again - I might buy S&B.  I've handled S&B, shot it, looked through it, and thought it nice, but not USO nice.  And I want Customer Service, especially at this price point.
  Everyone knows what opinions are like - and there is mine.


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/20/2007 at 16:10


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: December/26/2007 at 20:36
why can't I do that, or am I just retarded?

-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/29/2007 at 09:34
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

why can't I do that, or am I just retarded?
 
Whistling  Wink


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/29/2007 at 11:24
I have problems uploading pics too. Matter of fact, I can't upload anything since the forum changed over...Dead
 
I just go to File URL: in the upper irght side of the page and place the web addy in there. Viola!


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/29/2007 at 18:31
OK you guys are way over my scope optics level but just from what I've heard and seen posted I thought the USO scope with american made owens corning glass lenses with the lead and arsenic impurities just couldn't compare with the cleaner euro glass. Maybe I've been told wrong but I thought the highest level lens grade glass simply made the best lenses. I'm not talking ruggedness, options, service, or anything else....just pure lens quality. Are the S&B lenses that inferior to the top level zeiss and swaro? It amazes me that USO can manufacture their lenses from US glass here in the US and exceed the best euro glass in the world. If thats the case I have certainly learned something on this post that I never heard before. I would like to see some real brightness and resolution tests done between USO and the top zeiss and swaro scopes I guess, maybe the S&B are not on the top level of euro scopes....

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 00:48
FOcus
 
You don't hae to see testcharts.
Take a zeiss (divari V or hensoldt NOT older or american made) and compare it to an USO in the eventing, before the sun goes down and after.
Compare the brightness of the illumination, the feeling of the turrets and zoom ring.
If somebody have told me the USO was made in Russia I wouldnt be surprised, cause that is EXCACTLY the impression I got from the scope first time I looked on one.
 
Regards Technika


Posted By: Critter
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 03:31

The scope I ordered last week was the SN-3 1.8-10x37 Compact variable, with Metric EREK, Ergo, and MILGap lit green Reticle.

Here is a picture of it that I took at the factory in SoCal:



Posted By: Critter
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 03:41
Originally posted by www.technika.nu www.technika.nu wrote:

There is probably a very good reason why snipers in the whole world are choosing SuB over for USO.

 
Regards Technika
 
In my view, exactly the same reason they picked their current service pistol. POLITICS! Of course many European Nations are flying the wildly popular F-16, so I guess fair is fair, but personally I prefer the Colt 1911A1.
 
USO scope as proposed to HM Canadian Forces sitting on my target rifle:
 
 
 


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 04:21
I bought a 3,2-17x56 with a lot of bells and whistles (second hand but never used) on (had originally costed 4200 dollar), I was so dissapointed by it that I let a friend buy it for 700 dollars.
"Russian" feeling at the worst.
Regards Technika


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 05:27
Yeah, and my 3.2-17x44mm SN-3 with ERGO knob and MOA reticle was in a word.....SUPERB!!
 
Not to discount Technika's experience or any one elses, but I was totally satisfied with my USO and I let several other guys use this scope and they had the same opinion as me. Wonderful!!
 
When I first got the scope via a group buy at Sniper's Hide, the scope had a small amount of debrise @ the 3:00 position. I called USO and JBW, the president of USO, answered the phone.
He told me to send it in AFTER he asked me to and I quote...
"Beat the objective housing against something hard...like the edge of a desk or table"..... Stare 
I did as asked and he was yelling over the phone "Hit it harder!! HARDER!!"  "The debrise still there??" he asked.. "Yeah" I said.
"Send it in on our shipping account at Fed Ex, sorry for the trouble" he stated. 
Got it back about a week later and the rest was "optics zen"....Hippie 
 
Oh, as an aside....
Happy Birthday JBW3!!! USO's president's birthday is today...Happy%20Birthday 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 06:53
I notice everyone is talking politics and ruggedness but no comments on how well the lens quality actually stands up against the best euro scopes.....except technika....I know they're built like a tank and have tons of features and options.....but I can't believe the lens quality is up there with the best....not with american glass and glass grinding and polishing, not to mention lens coatings.

   Focus

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:05
I think Technika must have a knock off USO every one I have looked through has be very clear high quality scope.
 
Duce Smile


-------------
Duce


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:21
We tested the SN-3 with a 5.5-22x 56mm Night Force NXS on a VERY hot day and the mirage was wicked. No low light testing was done that day. 
The group consensus was the USO had better clarity and resolution to US. There were 3 of us doing informal testing, so take that as you will. We had AF charts out to 300 yards.
The USO seemed to cut the mirage a little better than the NXS, but the NF is still a hell of a nice optic.
 
I thought the USO was optically equal to my old 3-12 S&B Variable Hunting model I had. Too close to call for me. That's all I got Dave.


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:23
We tested the SN-3 with a 5.5-22x 56mm Night Force NXS on a VERY hot day and the mirage was wicked. No low light testing was done that day. 
The group consensus was the USO had better clarity and resolution to US. There were 3 of us doing informal testing, so take that as you will. We had AF charts from 100 yards and out to 300 yards. Mirage was so bad that we did the charts just at 100 yards.
The USO seemed to cut the mirage a little better than the NXS, but the NF is still a hell of a nice optic.
 
I thought the USO was optically equal to my old 3-12 S&B Variable Hunting model I had. Too close to call for me. That's all I got Dave.


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:38
Thanks Mark, the nightforce is a LOW from Japan I believe so it should be with the trijicon and 4200 elite for lens quality.....least there abouts. I had always heard on optics forums that the S$B was a touch under the topline zeiss and swaro glass......perhaps that is true. Not trying to start a this vs that deal but am honestly interested in how good american lenses can be made...

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:54
I have heard more than one saying that USO lenses are asian made.
I don't know if it's true or not.
 
On the USO i had, was the frontthread so loose against the sunshield that it almost felt like you could remove it without screwing it off.
 
Regards Technika


Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:58
One of the big factors is the price of high quality optical glass it is over a thousand a pound for just the blank for high quality lens glass. It is more about how much you are willing to pay.
 
Duce Sad


-------------
Duce


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 07:58
Roger that, Focus.
 
The S&B and NF were all I had available for comparisons, so I can't honestly say how the USO would match up with the other Euros.
 
Maybe we could look through the archives over at Sniper's Hide to get a better testing sample?
 
 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 08:04
To answer you technika the USO president has went down on record as stating that the lenses are 100% US made and finished. Yes maybe over on SH they have done some threads on which scopes have the absolute best glass. Good Idea CT.....I'm tied up this morning but will check that out later this afternoon.

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 08:32
this is about as close as your going to get to a definitive and substitive answer.
 
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=383961#Post383961 - http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=383961#Post383961


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 08:58
Funny with all the USO owners that none ever compared their scopes in depth to the upper level euro scopes. I'd say after reading your link that they tend to want to not actually talk about it either, jokes are much better than the truth sometimes :>). I will go down on record saying that if the USO president is a truthful man and if their scopes are truly 100% US made including the lenses. Owens Corning does not have the glass quality of the euro glass and I doubt the lenses are on an equal par with the zeiss and swaro top end stuff. Too much impurities in the US glass compared to the euros that have different impurity standards. Guess we won't know until a knowledgable gent that actually owns current USO optics and at the same time owns high end zeiss or swaro optics takes the time to do some simple low light and resolution testing.....

Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 09:17
Rob01 over @ SH is as devout a USO guy as you will find. I believe he also owns, or has owned the new S&B PM II, IIRC as well.
I value Rob's opinions greatly.
 
It seems to me, tactical shooters place LESS emphasis on glass quality and MORE on mechanical precision and repeatability.
(I'm admittedly not a former or current tactical guy either.) 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Critter
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 09:18
When I visitied the USO factory about 6 or 7 years ago, John Williams Sr. had some Optical Standard Lenses that he had borrowed form CALTEC (a technical university). He had these on a optical bench and was comparing these to the lenses being made for the SN-3 objective. He told me that these lense standards were individually worth over $10,000 each.
 
You could see that they were virtually identical in resolution tests as they were being compared there with Airforce high resolution charts. Color resolution and light transmission values while not quite as good very close, and these intended for rifle scope application.
 
I was sold from what I could see on the instruments. Also light sources were calibrated as well, so you were comparing apples and apples, something you rarely see in optical tests.
 
American%20Flag


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 09:18
Originally posted by Duce Duce wrote:

One of the big factors is the price of high quality optical glass it is over a thousand a pound for just the blank for high quality lens glass. It is more about how much you are willing to pay.
 
Duce Sad
 
YIKES!!!!


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 09:40
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

Rob01 over @ SH is as devout a USO guy as you will find. I believe he also owns, or has owned the new S&B PM II, IIRC as well.
I value Rob's opinions greatly.


It seems to me, tactical shooters place LESS emphasis on glass quality and MORE on mechanical precision and repeatability.

(I'm admittedly not a former or current tactical guy either.)


I agree Mark, I think that real optical superiority is probably not that important in relation to options, repeatability, and ruggedness. Just something I've always wondered about. Money buys to a certain level of quality with lens glass and after that the glass country of origin kicks in as all glass is not created equal...

Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 10:09
Good points, as always Focus.
 
You also mentioned "options", where I failed to.
I think you would be hard pressed to find a scope maker more "custom" than USO either.
USO is a REAL custom scope manufacturer, where even the mighty Schmidt and Bender's PM II is a "take it or leave it" deal, as far as I know. They don't even do their own reticles..Premier does. Smoking
 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 11:57
the post from sh reflects the situation there, which has been hashed and rehashed so many times the regulars won't answer it.
if you will accept a summary it usually runs like this
uso is the preferred scope because of the ruggedness and choice of reticles offered
if this is not as important the S$B gets the thumbs because of better glass.
alot of those people's job description include "live target" and don't believe a 100% increase in cost and a 10% increase in glass, is worth a 20% decrease in repeatability. 2 of the moderators prefer nf, 1 owner of the sight prefers S$B, has 13 of the little buggers.
uso>sb>>nf>>>>>ior -- zeiss doesn't even enter into the conversation except for some of the f class and long range target shooters, but this area is ruled by nf


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 14:19
Thanks Dale.....so there we have it, as I thought the actual lens quality is off-set by the use and other options/fearures available. Makes sense to me and answers my questions. I'm sure if tactical/sniper was my focus USO/S&B would get the nod......if long range target was my goal NF/leupold would probably be my pic......if just plain the best lenses for resolution and low light hunting was my end plan than zeiss/swaro would have my attention. Thanks for the info guys, it really does depend on what your ultimate goal is....

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 18:09
It's really not that easy.
A lot is about traditions and regional choises.
In US mostly people would choose something that goes in imperial/moa, while in europe mostly people would not choose anything at all in imperial/moa and instead use metric.
So the european shooter would regardless if the Leupold was better not choose that one because he is not interested to start thinking Imperial.
 
Same thing in Bullseye pistol competition, in US 98% of the shooters would buy a custom 1911, while here in Sweden 98% would use a SIG P210.
That doesent necesaraly mean that either one of them are right, that does more mean that both are wrong........
Personally I always shot with a custom lugerpistol and scored higher with that than I would with either my 1911 or SIG P210.
 
So it's about finding something that fits you.
imperial turrets, sloopy threads, uselessness in lowlight/nighthunting, poor FOV etc doesent fit me, and therefor would I never use Leupold or a NF even though I actually own both of them (NF 8-32x56 and Leupold longrange 6,5-20x50) for a serious gun.
 
Regards Technika
 
 


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: December/30/2007 at 21:30

I think the operating term here is live target. I'm sure I'll get corrected if wrong, but I'm willing to bet there are 10x more swat call outs in the USA than europe, virtually every county sheriffs dept. has a "sharp-shooter" and I'm willing to bet that there are 10 leos out in those depts. for every Zeiss. and S&B. Soooo-- what you and I use don't mean squat.

Even most accross the pond shooters in USDPA use 1911's, Lugers and sigs have been tried here in both action sports and NRA bulleye but they don't cut it.



Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 01:10

You surely have more than 10X more sharpshooters in USA than we have here.

But just because they have choosen Leupold doesent mean it's the best choise.
It's more the traditional choise.
In Europe I don't know of any sharoshooter or sniper that use Leupold.
There is a few that uses NF but mostly go for Smith u Bender and a few go for Hensoldt.
A sharpshooter that chooses Leupold is doing a bad choise, as he is then limiting his ability to work in poor light by a lot.
 
I am still very convinced that the choise to go for Leupold and 1911 in USA is most of all a traditional choise and not the smartest choise.
For some people might or is the 1911 the right choise, but many other would have a better scores with a P210.
And the P210 is by far a more well made, user friendly pistol than 1911 EVER will be regardless of gunsmith.
 
Regards Technika


Posted By: Critter
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 01:59
Personally, I haven't been able to buy a decent scope for 30 years. I am therefore forced to use US Optics.
 


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 02:14

I have been looking for an old Unertl like yours, for a long time, but find them to expensive for the limited use they have. So I have to stick with my old English Ross.

Regards Technika
 
Here mounted on a old Mauser .22 lr.
 


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 07:37
I don't want to appear cautious technika........but if you have a good sight picture in the above photo.......thats the worst most dangerous eye relief I've ever seen. Hope the recoil factor is pretty much nil.....maybe 1/2" to your eye glasses????

   Focus

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 09:22

I completely agree, terrible, but it doesent matter on a .22 LR rifle.

Regards Technika


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 10:39

Gallensons in SLC has one currently on a mod. 52 target for $1000 if you interested give them a call.

disagree on the sig, again, if a competitor can "buy" points they will do it. Sigs have never been competitive.



Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 10:57
Sigs have never been competive in US because it's against tradition.
Here almost all competitions have been won by P210, and often 28 out of 30 competitiors are using P210.
P220-P240 are almost not used at all here, it's the P210 that is the gun........
Latest 10-15 years other guns have been starting to be used, CZ, pardini, 1911(custom or better factory guns) but still mostly major competitions and records are held by P210.
Just because US shooters not have understood and given certain guns a chanse dosent automaticly mean that the US shooters are right, becuase they are as much ruled by tradition as everybody else.
 
Do you have any experience from the P210?
triggerpull, accuracy, gripangle, height of gun?
I have worked as a gunsmith almost as much on both, custombuilt quite a number of 1911 and I regard them equally as high in the hands of a good shooter.
But the 1911 is only a good gun after there is spent loads of hours and dollars in it, while the P210 is a winner just out of the box.
 
M52s can be bought here for a few hundred dollars, they are really not worth anything here....(because in the classes where they are allowed they are worthless compared to the other guns like .32 sportspistols)
Same thing with High-Standards or S&W 41, almost no value at all and here is no market at all for them.
 
 
My own non-out of box P210.
Bought cracked and in terrible condition for about 100 dollars.
Welded up beavertail, bomarsights, checkered front strap
Regards Technika
 


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 11:11
can you do an el presidente in 5 sec. with a reload with that gun and still make major??


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 11:26
Originally posted by Focus Focus wrote:

OK you guys are way over my scope optics level but just from what I've heard and seen posted I thought the USO scope with american made owens corning glass lenses with the lead and arsenic impurities just couldn't compare with the cleaner euro glass. Maybe I've been told wrong but I thought the highest level lens grade glass simply made the best lenses. I'm not talking ruggedness, options, service, or anything else....just pure lens quality. Are the S&B lenses that inferior to the top level zeiss and swaro? It amazes me that USO can manufacture their lenses from US glass here in the US and exceed the best euro glass in the world. If thats the case I have certainly learned something on this post that I never heard before. I would like to see some real brightness and resolution tests done between USO and the top zeiss and swaro scopes I guess, maybe the S&B are not on the top level of euro scopes....

   Focus
 
Hi, Focus.  All glass is made to a certain spec, so where the glass comes from is basically meaningless.  It's what the optic manufacturer does with the glass, the overall design of the whole instrument, the quality of the lens grinding and polishing, and the type of coatings used that matters.  Corning is neither inferior nor superior to Schott, Hoya, or any other glass manufacturer in this regard, because they produce what the customer orders, whether it be an expensive fluorite optical lens or a glass coffee pot; it's all made to specifications from the customer.  Leica is a good example of a German company who uses Corning glass (as well as Schott) in some of their optics, and their reputation among optics manufacturers needs no explanation.  Zeiss uses Schott glass because Schott is owned by Zeiss.  S&B owns their own glass lens manufacturer, and their scopes aren't in any way inferior to Zeiss or Swaro optically (in fact I have all 3 and personally consider S&B to be superior to Swaro, and essentially equal to Zeiss); but, it's really an "eye of the beholder" thing and you'll never find 100% agreement on which is better.  The fact that you won't get a consensus on which is better optically tells me that there probably isn't a significant difference once you get to that level of quality.


-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 12:25
Hey Rifledude, I notice you didn't address the aresnic and lead impurities in glass that varies by specific manufacture and point of manufacture. US standards are much different than euro in this point and would certainly reflect on the overall quality of the raw glass used to create those lenses. Zeiss is very good at producing glass with almost no levels of these impurities, I'm not sure about other in this case of US manufactures who don't have to by regulation. Its also odd that when europeans discuss the top end optics they always rate S&B below zeiss and swaro as do the deva type scope tests conducted over there. Must be a regional thing I guess.

-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 13:06
I am surprised that some of the manufactures have not gone to polycarbonate type lens like the eyeglass manufactures have. You can get scrach resistant coating and higher light transmission and a much lighter scope. I would think the glass makes up a large part of the weight of any scope. Just a few wandering thoughts.
 
Duce Smile


-------------
Duce


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 13:24
Originally posted by Focus Focus wrote:

Hey Rifledude, I notice you didn't address the aresnic and lead impurities in glass that varies by specific manufacture and point of manufacture. US standards are much different than euro in this point and would certainly reflect on the overall quality of the raw glass used to create those lenses. Zeiss is very good at producing glass with almost no levels of these impurities, I'm not sure about other in this case of US manufactures who don't have to by regulation. Its also odd that when europeans discuss the top end optics they always rate S&B below zeiss and swaro as do the deva type scope tests conducted over there. Must be a regional thing I guess.
 
Actually I did when I said all glass is made to specs laid out by the customer ordering the glass.  The lead and arsenic used in optical lens manufacturing were not "impurites," they were added to the glass on purpose for use in ED lenses for the low dispersion properties imparted into the glass. 
Here is a good link that explains this:
http://academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Glass - http://academickids.com/encyclopedia/index.php/Glass
The trend has been toward getting away from lead and arsenic in lens manufacturing not because of adverse optical effects but for environmental and weight reasons.  Fluorite has begun taking the place of these heavy metals in ED, HD, APO glass.  All the major glass mfgs will supply whatever the customer requests.  Many optics manufacturers besides the Euros now use arsenic and lead free glass across the board in their optics and all glass manufacturers will provide whatever type of glass is requested.  Corning offers arsenic and lead free glass just like glass manufacturers in other places of the world.  Again, Leica is a German manufacturer that uses some Corning glass. 
 
As for the statement that the europeans "always" rate S&B below Zeiss and Swaro, I haven't seen that to be the case at all.  From all the reviews I've read, conclusions have been mixed on which is the "best."  Plus, each have their strengths and weaknesses, so "best" is application specific and involves more than a little subjectivity.


-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 13:57
Originally posted by Dale Clifford Dale Clifford wrote:

can you do an el presidente in 5 sec. with a reload with that gun and still make major??
 
Nope, I can not.
And the P210 does not have a place in IPSC, but it's very strong in Bullseye and PPC.
I have never seen any seruois competitor use P210 for IPSC.
 
Regards Technika
 


Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 14:20
If you look at Dow-Corning they are the largest silicone supplier in the world and they are in every Continent http://www.dow.com/facilities/index.htm - http://www.dow.com/facilities/index.htm
They will make any kind and quality of glass.
Duce Smile


-------------
Duce


Posted By: Focus
Date Posted: December/31/2007 at 15:54
OK thanks Duce and Ted for the quality information on the glass. I didn't know a lot of that, this place is always good for a deep well of information. I was going mostly off what I had seen on campfire Ted.....and you probably know how that is :>) Like I said I don't have any of the high end scopes to really do comparisons with, my area is the mid level leupolds, conquests, sightrons, and elites. But I don't feel too bad cause I don't have any scopes with eye relief like technika's :>).......... and on top of that, I can't do the el presidente in 5 seconds, reload and than make anything :>(......heck it took me longer than that to type it ........

Focus



-------------
I Can See Clearly Now......<><

If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting......


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 14:59
Germans make good stuff - they made great tanks during WW2.   Mitsubishi manufactured the planes that bombed Pearl Harbor.

That we kicked the sh*t outta Germany twice holds much value in this Marine's heart.  I buy US when possible.  I've compared USO to S&B side-by-side and couldn't tell a difference in lense quality.  That a P210 is a better handgun, history has not proven that true.  Lugers are good guns, I have 2, my wife's grandfather took them off surrendering or dead Nazis while fighting the forces of evil.

US law enforcement and military use of Leupold has more to do with pricing than it does to do with quality: Leupold makes a great product at a great price - so long as you get the military and LEO discount.  At full price, tehre is almost always a much better option - in my opinion.

To belittle American will to buy American proves much to me regarding your way of thinking.  Congratulations on all the pistolsmith experience, I'll carry my 1911 today and tomorrow with greater confidence knowing a Swede considers it inferior.

Happy Freak'in New Year!


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Duce
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 15:16
RC have you tried the new XD springfield? I have one and it seems to fit my hand better than the 1911 I think I am likeing it better than my old one. I had a Luger easy to point and shoot but very sensitive to any dirt, easy to jam.  I guess I am just not a fan of 9mm pistols try a new XD if you get a chance I would like to hear what you think of them
 
Duce Smile


-------------
Duce


Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 16:13

RC

Here is a big differance betwen many americans and this disussion would never occur on an european forum. I can't understand what politics has to do with quality, and if you prefer to use lower quality due to politics please do so.
Personally I am interested in best obtainable quality, Í don't care what fit's us politics or what fit's local socialist policiticians, it's both of equal low interest.
Regards Technika


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 16:18
I have, I like it; however, I prefer external safeties on my carry weapons.

It is a good gun, as is the M&P.

My wife bought me a Nighthawk T3 for Christmas, it is fast approaching the mark of being my daily-carry gun.  Even if Technika prefers his Sig.

Sorry to highjack the thread.

I have looked at USO and S&B side-by-side.  I prefer the USO.  The glass, to my eye, was equivalent in light and failing light.  I prefer the EREK knob to the USMC S&B knob.  I prefer the illumination system in the USO.  I prefer the GAP reticule in the USO.  And I genuinely appreciate that I can pick up the phone and call the guy who runs the whole show - try that with S&B.
At the end of the day, it is all personal preference.  I have a very good friend (who also served in my Beloved Corps) who prefers the S&B PM2 to  USO SN3.   I have a Nightforce and like it allot.  I did shoot a nice 3-inch group at 600 yards with the USO about a month ago - and if memory serves, most of the rounds were within a 1/2 inch spread.




-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 16:31
It ain't about politics, it is about choosing where I spend my money.  As I said previously, you view my choices as poor, I view yours as poor; let us agree to disagree.

I've been on both ends of hot weapon, I know what happens under fire, I've been there.  I trust my gear.  That you think yours is better is fine by me.

"Best quality" doesn't really do justice to the conversation. I'd guess that 90% of professionals (using this gear, that is) couldn't tell a discernible difference between USO and S&B optically.  Sure, one has a tint the other does not, but as for clarity and resolution, I can't see a differentiable difference.  Then, I go to features - and my USO is spot-on as for the features I want, the S&B was not. 

At the end of the day, it is preference.  I prefer the USO, I bought the USO.  Many prefer other things, fine by me.  When the zombie apocolypse finally comes, we'll see made the better choice.

Cheap, I don't have a "File URL" in the upper right side of my page - have I been forbidden?




-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 16:35
And, in closing, a clarification: my initial post was somewhat insensitive and not altogether representative of what I was trying to say.  If it offended anyone, I do apologize.  It has now been edited for general consumption.

For those who did not read it before it was edited, you are free to imagine the very worst.

"Ready, Fire, Aim!"


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 17:07

The assumption that the use of leo by le in the us is polictical and traditionalistic is offensive for 2 reasons. (before you kill the messenger, I'm not saying they are the greatest). Perhaps le snipers have a special talent that when the moon strikes the roof tops their leos do some voodoo that makes it work for them. I'm not going to say they can't, ain't, or don't. The point is, they are the ones controlling and deciding the equipment they need. I'm sure their real happy when someone comes in and tells them their job. Secondly, by saying they are using any inferior piece of equipment makes the statement that the hostage for example is not worth a "best" piece of equipment (and in this case a critical piece).  



Posted By: www.technika.nu
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 17:51
There we have it, you belive in woodoo and thus finds my opinion about leo offensive.
Smart guy,
This is great, when a technical disusion is about to be lost there is people beeing offended for nothing and political issues for choosing certain equipment.
 
I don't care about your political issues or personal feelings for certain equipment, I am here cause I am interested in the technical aspects.
 
 
I am out of this discussion now.
 
Regards Technika


Posted By: tahqua
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 20:02

I don't find opinions about Leo tactical scopes offensive at all. The USMC choice of S&B, not included, because their riflemen are at the top of the game anywhere, anyplace.

The US Army uses Leo and are second to none. To think the choice for Leupold is based on politics is pure B.S. There is no voodoo involved. The people that need voodoo are everyone else on this planet who is a far distant second best. If anyone was close, they would show their cards. It's not happening is it?


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: January/01/2008 at 20:28
So much to say, no reason to say it.

I bet he even has a little army pocketknife with tweezers and a toothpick - and my Strider has neither.  Dammit!


-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: sakosf
Date Posted: January/04/2008 at 10:21

Personally, I feel that the top of the line Zeiss scopes have best optics. The last S&B scope that I owned, I quickly traded it for a Zeiss scope. I try to by American made as much as possible and try to avoid what I think is manufactured in a 3rd world sweat shop, but it is getting more difficult to do. When it comes to a high dollar item, I buy the best I can afford, regardless if it is made in the USA, Japan or Western Europe. I generally have been impressed with manufactured goods from Germany. As far as the comments about Germany and their arms in WW2. Not to take anything away from our fight in the war, but Germany lost the war on the Russian front. I think if you research it, you will find that Marshall Zukov was responsible for more Gernman casualities then any of the Western Allies commanders. The Germans did produce some excellent tanks, but they did not come out until after the war had already turned against Germany and the Germans were not able to manufacture that many of those better tanks, compared to what the Russians & the Western Allies could produce. The German arms industry was not yet ready for war, when the madman in Berlin attacked Poland in 1939 and started WW2



Posted By: noddah
Date Posted: January/17/2008 at 17:12
I too have owned  S&B, Zeiss and Leo Mark4s...
 
If I was to put it in a nutshell:
1. I was most impressed with lens clarity in the Zeiss. (Resolution & Shadow Response)
2. The S&B has equal Shadow Response but resolution not quite that of the Zeiss.      Meanwhile I love the build quality, reticles and turrets in S&B the best.
3. The Leo Mark4 is the jack of all trades. Nothing wrong with Leo.. but again nothing memoriable; at a grood price.
 
I have compared S&Bs and USO Scopes and thought of them equal in glass; but because of weight did not buy the USO.  I have to admit though I have come close to purchasing the USO Products on more than a few occassions; and with the dollar /euro issues my next scope might be a USO.


Posted By: MontanaYeti
Date Posted: March/28/2008 at 14:45
Hello,

I sat a S&B PMII 5x25 (not mine) next to a USO SN-3 3x22(or whatever it is) with the 58mm objective (mine) last weekend while I was picking up a rifle from a gunsmith. There are features of each one that I liked better than the other. The gunsmith doesn’t think to much of my USO but loves the S&B. I could beat the S&B flat with my USO, but there is a weight difference. I liked the layout of the S&B knobs better, I would take the EREK knob over the high S&B.   As far as the glass is concerned, I couldn’t tell much of a difference at all. Frankly I think both of these are great scopes and I am glad that there is the competition out there to keep each other innovating. I didn’t have my super wammadyne spectrometer with me to check the lead, arsenic, and dog crap levels in their glass…but I suspect it is fairly low in both cases…..and frankly…I don’t give a sh*t. I can only tell what I like after I put my hands on it and look through it. My next scope will most likely be the S&B, just because I don’t have one yet and I liked what I saw. Find someone who has all of these and put your hands on all of them and find out what YOU like….I would bet you will not be disappointed with either.

As far as handguns go (1911 vs. Sig P210)….this is another bullsh*t topic. I have a Sig X-five that will shoot circles around any 1911 it has been put up against…would I take that to a gunfight?....hell no!....it weighs entirely to much to run around with it. I have a combat P220 that shoots very well…does it run with the comp 1911’s….nope…but I would have that sob in a gunfight. I have a 1911 that is also a great gun, but I wouldn’t carry it because I an not a fan of the cocked and locked carry method…I would rather have a sig DA/SA with one in the pipe…no safety to mess with. Now…does this mean that a sig is better than a 1911?.....nope….just my opinion that I formulated after I tried BOTH of them.

You want to know what the best is? Go out and buy one of each…pick one you like and sell the rest….this is really the only way that you will be able to answer the question for YOURSELF…nobody on here is going to be able to tell you what YOU are going to like.   


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: March/28/2008 at 14:52
Originally posted by MontanaYeti MontanaYeti wrote:


As far as handguns go (1911 vs. Sig P210)….this is another bullsh*t topic. I have a Sig X-five that will shoot circles around any 1911 it has been put up against…would I take that to a gunfight?....hell no!....it weighs entirely to much to run around with it. I have a combat P220 that shoots very well…does it run with the comp 1911’s….nope…but I would have that sob in a gunfight. I have a 1911 that is also a great gun, but I wouldn’t carry it because I an not a fan of the cocked and locked carry method…I would rather have a sig DA/SA with one in the pipe…no safety to mess with. Now…does this mean that a sig is better than a 1911?.....nope….just my opinion that I formulated after I tried BOTH of them.

You want to know what the best is? Go out and buy one of each…pick one you like and sell the rest….this is really the only way that you will be able to answer the question for YOURSELF…nobody on here is going to be able to tell you what YOU are going to like.   


Hey bro, welcome to the OT.  You may as well move all that to the firearms section where we can get a debate going.  Big%20Smile  I just can't think of one reason why anyone would want a Sig over a good 1911. Poker


-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: Rancid Coolaid
Date Posted: March/31/2008 at 17:37
Originally posted by MontanaYeti MontanaYeti wrote:

Hello,

I didn’t have my super wammadyne spectrometer with me to check the lead, arsenic, and dog crap levels in their glass…but I suspect it is fairly low in both cases…..and frankly…I don’t give a sh*t.


All that"crap" is there for a reason, it ain't - as some think - contaminant.

Originally posted by MontanaYeti MontanaYeti wrote:

As far as handguns go (1911 vs. Sig P210)….this is another bullsh*t topic. I have a Sig X-five that will shoot circles around any 1911 it has been put up against…would I take that to a gunfight?....hell no!....it weighs entirely to much to run around with it. I have a combat P220 that shoots very well…does it run with the comp 1911’s….nope…but I would have that sob in a gunfight. I have a 1911 that is also a great gun, but I wouldn’t carry it because I an not a fan of the cocked and locked carry method…I would rather have a sig DA/SA with one in the pipe…no safety to mess with. Now…does this mean that a sig is better than a 1911?.....nope….just my opinion that I formulated after I tried BOTH of them.


Not liking "cocked n' locked" is a preference and I frequently recommend people not carry a 1911 for that reason.  That your Sig or any gun can "shoot circles around anything it has been put up against" indicates you've shot against some really crappy 1911s or you are a better shooter than the 1911 owners or some combination of those.  Your anecdotal evidence is strong for you; for me, not so much.    I've trusted my life to a few 1911s over the years and consider myself at no deficiency with my Blackhawk on my belt.





-------------
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.


Posted By: M21
Date Posted: April/01/2008 at 21:14
Originally posted by Rancid Coolaid Rancid Coolaid wrote:

I've trusted my life to a few 1911s over the years and consider myself at no deficiency with my Blackhawk on my belt.
 
Yeah the trusty Rugar SA Blackhawk (which I also own) can't be beat.  Big%20Grin  I know you meant the Nighthawk Custom T3.  Just a quick rib.  Anyways, there is no one perfect weopon for all reasons.  That's why I have many to choose from.  But I will say the 1911 is one awesome classic.  I love my NHC 1911 Predator.  Such quality, function and accuracy is hard to beat.  But there is also a big place for my SIG P229, CZ85, Glock 19/22, S&W M&P 40 and on and on.  I love them all, but my favorite is the NHC Predator for just fun shooting.  But it's not fare to compare a custom hand made $3,300 NHC Predator to the others costing $500-1000.  For just all around simple cheap utility it's hard to beat a Glock.
 
I am here for the ride on the scope issues, as I am learning what will be my next nice scope.
 
Thanks all.


Posted By: IsleofGough
Date Posted: April/11/2008 at 10:19
I've had Leupold scopes (Mark IV and lesser), swarovski, a MST 100 USO, a SN3 TPal 3.4-17 and S&B 3-12 police marksman scopes, as well as lesser (Simmons, tasco, etc.)  In good light, they all work. If one is shooting with the sun in your eyes late in the evening long range, there are definite differences. I've tested resolution with test images (USAF) at 600 yards. My experience is that the only ones that worked well in low light and sun in front of me were the USO, S&B, and Swarovski.
For low (1.5-6) magnification, I like Sworovski for hunting, but the higher powers I've had didn't have focus knobs and images were frequently out of focus. The cross hairs were bad in bright light.
The USO MST 100 had great optics, but was was fixed power. It is built like a tank, except not waterproof.
At maximum settings 17x, the USO SN3 looked somewhat soft. Actually, I couldn't see a resolution improvement between 12 and 17 x. At equivalent powers, the S&B and USO had exactly the same resolution but the S&B appeared to have slightly more contrast. The USO but not the S&B was very fussy about slight movement of the eye: a mm off up or down and the image lost some clarity. At perfect site position, they were equivalent.

Remember this is experience generally with just one scope of each type and your experience might differ.


Posted By: IsleofGough
Date Posted: April/11/2008 at 11:37
A few other comments: mechanically, there are moderate differences between the low to mid priced scopes and the high end ones that more than makes up for optical differences. I have qualifications for the M9 and M16 - but both are non scoped weapons. I would take iron sites any day over a mechanically unreliable scope that has zero drift or non reproducility.

So back to USO vs S&B (SN3 tpal vs S&B 3-12 police marksman to be precise): with better quality optics, a focus adjust becomes more essential. It is like having a low f-stop camera lense where focus precision is more important. The USO I have is not accurate on the numbers and focus distances, but the S&B is. However, it really doesn't matter, as one adjusts the focus without looking at the dials while looking downrange. I had to send my USO back for adjustment as initially it was too stiff. The S&B is perfect. The USO is without doubt more rugged, however (even if the S&B did the best with the USMC water test). If your rifle gets knocked around a lot, I think the USO might have an edge. (I use erek knobs on the USO, and they are built like a tank).
 
All this is mostly of academic interest. Unlike the test target on a good day in mild conditions, military and tactical scopes are used with rapid temperature changes in poor optical conditions and in bad weather. What works best in one test situation probably has little bearing on the other. When it comes to my shooting match grade rifles with the two scopes you mention, there is absolutely no difference in my sub moa accuracy. I think that has more to do with how much practice, how tired, etc. I am.

For military, I use what they give me. For personal use, I have gotten rid of all but the two scopes you mention and a swarovski 1.5-6x for a hunting rifle. I use the S&B on a LBC AR15 and the USO on a M40 custom rifle. The both work.

Just as the lens matters some for portrait photography in a studio but may not be as important as lighting, pose, etc., I think the desire for "best" in rifle scopes might be a bit overrated in it's importance. In the military, snipers deter enemy troop movement and have psychological benefits, but most kills are very imprecise. I find that unfortuate but true.


Posted By: IsleofGough
Date Posted: April/12/2008 at 03:17
A comment regarding USA vs European glass: much of optics is subjective. I have an old beat up unertl spotting scope which I prefer to a zeiss which I own because I like it's greater contrast.

In poor contrast settings (head on sun, late evening, woods, etc.) the lens coatings matter as much or more than the glass. Some of the generalizations I've seen do not meet my experience. I have a swarovski and leica binocular of same power and prefer the swarovski due to greater contrast, but the glass should be very similar. However, an older leica camera I used had more pleasing optics than the best recent lenses from Canon and Nikon.

I think rather than dealing in generalizations about USA vs European, one really needs to look at a particular model and make. Even within that, two different productions of the same scope may vary in quality.


Posted By: jager)#17
Date Posted: May/21/2008 at 04:00
this is to urimagryfrnd who can i get ahold of and ask about that sb 8541 to buy i would like to see if it is still for sale. and i have had really great success with the 8541 with the window turrets and since the marines put the click thump turrets on i am not happy with them. the variable power is a must and i have many great stories about the durability with the scope also. but i am a huge fan of all tactical scopes i just love mils and not MOA. i picked up mils really quick and have not worked with MOA since.


Posted By: mercenary1947
Date Posted: May/21/2008 at 21:15
 Hummmm .... military uses whoever puts in the lowest bid for general specs .... Glock's a good handgun .... but looks like a daisy water pistol or pellet gun .... hate composite plastic . Local cops here get them issued and revert to 45's .... knock down = stay down  power over a 9mm . Some jurisdictions won't let them though .  

-------------
One Shot One Kill .... *S.O.F * Head Shots Only
               SWFAM


Posted By: BSA
Date Posted: May/22/2008 at 14:20
too bad Hensolt scopes are not being sold here


Posted By: Mithran
Date Posted: May/22/2008 at 15:56
Originally posted by mercenary1947 mercenary1947 wrote:

 Hummmm .... military uses whoever puts in the lowest bid for general specs  
That I definetely agree with.
 
Originally posted by mercenary1947 mercenary1947 wrote:

.... Glock's a good handgun .... but looks like a daisy water pistol or pellet gun .... hate composite plastic . 
That's your opinion, and Glocks are great handguns.  Likely now the most widely issued handgun worldwide.  The U.S. would be wise to learn an adopt it.  I mean come on the Iraqi police carry a Glock 17 and we have a big hunk of Italian sh*t.  Unfortunately when it comes to arming the grunts they U.S. is way behind the power curve.  Take optics whether red dot or low power scopes, the Euro's understood well before we did that they are good things, and now you can't find a carbine or rifle in the sand box without glass on.
 
Originally posted by mercenary1947 mercenary1947 wrote:

Local cops here get them issued and revert to 45's .... knock down = stay down  power over a 9mm . Some jurisdictions won't let them though .  
Bullsh*t, yes .45ACP has more thump, because physics tells us that a bigger objects in motion with similar velocity transfer more energy.  Caliber size in no way trumps shot placement.  I agree 9mm hardball is a weak cartridge but some of the hollowpoints available such as Gold Dot's, Hydrashoks, Ranger's, TAP's and such sare just as effective as a .45ACP.  Maybe what they need to do is spend more time at the range.  Fact is all handgun rounds suck ass.  I would rather have an officer armed with a 9mm who can place their shots rather than an officer with a .45 who can't.
 
Okay we can return to our normally scheduled discussion.  By the way hello guys.


-------------
Fight Smarter
Not Harder


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: May/22/2008 at 17:17
Originally posted by Mithran Mithran wrote:

Okay we can return to our normally scheduled discussion.  By the way hello guys.
 
He lives!!! Howdy


Posted By: Mithran
Date Posted: May/22/2008 at 17:28
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

 
He lives!!! Howdy
 
Yup


-------------
Fight Smarter
Not Harder



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net