Schmidt & Bender PMII failure rate.

[Pete Lincoln]

I see that the other thread has been closed. I just wanted to post the factual info from S&B with regards to failure rates in the PMII line of optics. I recieved this email from S&B today.

"Schmidt und Bender, Service" <[email protected]> schrieb:
Sehr geehrter Herr Lincoln,

durch die komplette Überarbeitung aller Modelle vor ca. 8 Jahren ist die berechtigte Reklamationsrate so stark gesunken, daß die Belegschaft im Service um 40% reduziert werden konnte. Von den berechtigten Reklamationen bilden die PM II- Gläser eine schwindend geringen Prozentsatz von ca. 0,4%, da wir ja auch wissen welche harten Anforderungen an diese Modelle gestellt werden. Somit treffen Ihre Erfahrungen besser zu wie die anderen Gerüchte. Unser Vertrag mit dem USMC spricht eigentlich für die gute Qualität unserer Produkte.


Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Schmidt & Bender GmbH
Klaus Görzel

#translation:

Dear Mr Lincoln.
through the complete modernisation and upgrade program of the our whole range 8 years ago, the reclamation / return rate has been reduced so much that we have been able to reduce the number of staff in the service department by 40%.
From the true number of real failures, the PMII models represent 0.4%, this is because we know exactly the conditions and demands that are required of these scopes. Hence your experiences represent a true reflection or the situation, rather than any rumours that may be circulating.
Our contract with the USMC speaks in its self for the quality of our product.
Yours Sincerely.
Klaus Görzel

Pete

 

[älg]

Well I´m a lucky guy.. swarovs seem to be trash and mine works perfect since many years.. so my new SB PM II 4-16 x 50 will never be into that 0,4 % percentage for sure. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Tactical]

Pete, good to see you. I have not posted here in awhile but had to when I saw the not well informed man tell half truths and flat out not true things.

Firts off Pete is not a liar. Good to go all the way. Pete thank you for getting SxB to build the 4-16x42 PMII

Second, the no operator with experince will want the FFP reticle thing is just false. The US Army has made it a requirement for most all of the new sniper rifles programs in last four years. Leupold changed to this set up for the SR25s in the 3.5-10s

The USMC picked front focal plane reticles as a requirement for both the 50 and 308 rifle scope programs. Maybe thats way NXS did not test? Its a rear focal plane scope. It did not qualify for the tests. The only scope that passed the USMC tests was the SxB. Period dot. Thats how it was picked and it was tested against some damm fine scopes.

Now this and that about the Navy. A little bird told me they might be working on a FFP version of the NXS. Might want to check that out.

Now on FFP versus rear focal plane. There is no good reason for rear focal plane, under field conditions, except
1. The uninformed are bugged by what appears to be a alrger and smaller reticle as the power is changed on FFP.
2. The rear focal plane scopes are easier to make.

The reasons for a FFP are simple. The subtentions are the same on all powers. That means real distance the lines represent never changes no matter the power. How is that important? Well in real tactical of hunting world (Read off bench rest) field conditions change and powers get adjusted for light or moving targets.

Now lets see. With rear focal plane.
1.I am in pitch black and dial down to see target better. Wind makes sudden change and I dont have time to dial (or ability to see dial). I amke that adjustment and second target appears, how do I know what mil to use for hold over/under? How do I do this when my subtentions are different and I can not tell what they are?
2. The target is moving and I dial down for better FOV. What are my leads for the moving targets now?
3. I dial down for mirage. How do I know what leads and hold overs to use?

With front focal plane:
Its all the same and no need to change. reticle works across the board.

Now only a sniper/hunter for 25 years but it should only take one or two trips off static range to kow this.

Please dont insult someone because you dont understand.

Lastly on the NXS. They are damm fine scope. Optis are super clear. They are great deal for Bench rest and Static shooting but lack front focal plane for field use on non static things. The dominate static target shooting because they are best for money in that field. Just not what all the "operators" want. If NXS comes out with FFP look out, it will be hard to beat.

 

[ds]

Just think of it as the christmas fruit-cake.

david

 

[älg]

tactical, the other post was closed and I did not want to get into the same thing again. But I can personally attest Pete is an honest and true guy, the kind that unfortunately is everytime harder to find around. If he posted some info it is because it was true .

 

[Tactical]

ALG, my post is in complete support of Pete. He is great guy. My negative side of my post was directed at the guy who attacked him.

 

[ds]

Also if it was not clear my post was directed to Grizzz, post777, S1, THE DOCTOR or which ever other persona this idiot was using.

I reported it to the moderators because I saw the damage S1 & co did on other sites screwing up alot of good post to become a slanging match. That is not to say he did not have knowledge but it was not worth the agro.

I feel sorry for Thor his question got screwed.

The action taken by the moderators speaks for itself.

David.

 

[Brown Dog]

Tactical,

Re your 1st post on this topic:

Good stuff - and well explained! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[älg]

Tactical, your post was very clear.. my fault, i forgot to include an "also".. just ratifying what you said.

 

[Boss Hoss]

Outstanding---I have never had a problem with any of my PMII scopes or even the Zenith for that matter. I pretty much only buy the PMII or US Optics now except for my 1000 yd competition rifles. If US Optics will ever get the hunting line off of the ground then I will start using them as well. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[SAKO75HUNTER]

when is their hunting line going to move? is it the jaeger or denali? If they dotn offer something without and adjustable objective, i wont even look at it

 

[ChrisF]

Hi Pete ,

Chris from New Zealand here , dont let the assholes get to you , any person that researchs this topic of scopes for SWS can see thru the Pure BS coming from Mr Ggggg , did I spell it right , like you I use a Real Name ,

You are right in that AI has sold more SWS than any other maker , and most of these to Military clients , and that S&B PMII are the std all others are judged & are again used by more Mil units than any other , quite simple really , do a web search and find the Facts.

Most snipers would want a FFP scope if they had any say in it , the 2 things I would like in a PMII to make it better suited to me personally , is a slightly thinner P4 type reticle and more range in the diopler setting ,

In RE the Canadian sniper in A'stan , the photos I have seen of the 3 man group show a McBros 50 BMG , modifed for Canadian use , ie shorter bipod legs & a cheek rest , mounting a Leupold scope of some sort ,eihter a 16x MK4 or the Varipower 25x , and yes I can tell the differance between a Lopie & NF scope .
The other SWS used by the 3 man Canadian team , was a Parker Hale C3A1 rifle ( ie M87 ) w/ 10x Unertl version with turret marked in Metre's .

Funny I didn;t see the NXS's , I must be going blind ,
You are also right on the Blaser rifle , a fantasic marketing campaign , and a generally poor product , good barrel though , and if the GSG9 adopted them , shows very poor decision making process .

Like a lot of things posted on the Web , some are Pure BS , it only takes a little research and a small amount of logic to find the Truth , and if people can't do that for themselves , they deserve the all the BS Mr Ggggge can dish , baby ,


Later ChrisF ,

 

[Pete Lincoln]

Hi Chris, thanks for your support. that S O A B, wound me up with his indignant attitude. the bull that he was posting was in 90% every way contradictory to any sniper training ive ever had, of course, back then we didn't have the luxury of the PMII. we had a WWII vintage fosil onto of a re barreled WWII sniper rifle.( i remember thinking, i have a better scope on my winchester .22lr at home(which is where my brain child the 4-16x42PMII was born)i found it cheap skate of the MOD top issue us with near enough the same **** rifle my Dad had carried 30 and 40 years earlier. things did improve as the M85 as a stop gap was issued to some units, with either a 6x42 S&B, Hensold or Kahles zf85 ( i saw all 3) some no doubt came through local purchase from troop funds, and i mounted my 6x42 nikko stirling (stolen from my .22) on to a SLR as the spotters rifle, it also eventualy ended up on a (yuk spit) SA80.
The first ever L96A1 i built was a work of art, and it had a green S&B 6x42 on it.
anyways, i didn't want to go into a long and drawn out sniper thread on a long range hunting forum, however intertwined the 2 subjects are.
I agree with you on the requirement for a thinner reticle on the PMII and have pointed this out to as many of the S&B staff who will listen several times, including the boss. I know that this will become an option on all the S&B PMII range and the Klein ret is available on the 4-16x50 definately. i want to see a thinner illuminated reticle. this will all come along,
i also want to see the technology from the 1.25-4 CQB PMII scope incorporated into a 1.5-6x42 zenthith PMII, with Flash dot, 3 settings on the ret for NV. and also normal dark conditions illuminated reticle. This would make the optimim DMR scope, it would be very usable in MOUT scenarios, and would make a **** good driven boar ( or driven Haji) scope.
Pete

 

[Brown Dog]

MOUT? MOUT?! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif -you wannabe redneck!!
it's still FIBUA this side of the pond /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
...well, FIBUA within OBUA /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif



PS...has the gat arrived yet?