Schmitt & Bender feedback

[MudRunner2005]

I used to hear salesmen in gun shops say this all the time " you need to spend twice as much on your scope as you do on your rifle". It must have been a universal statement among gun shop salesmen. So a guy I worked with done just that. He bought a $1200 Browning eclipse & $2400 nightforce (nothing against night force, I think they are great). It bearly managed 1.5 moa. It was almost hillarious cause it was like he thought the nightforce should have made his gun shoot 1/2 moa. I had a $800 rifle shooting 1/2 moa with a $700 Leupold. Granted, he had a heck of a lot better scope than I did but I hooked up at greater distances than he did on game. This was 15-20 years ago or so. And I really was never impressed with the glass on that Leupold I had. Just a funny story I had to tell.

Like I said, I used to work in a gun store. I've said it hundreds of times to folks you can tell have money to burn. It's just a sales pitch to help you move the hard to move [expensive] products that typically sit and collects dust, because it's out of the price point for the common hunter's bank account. It's not different than talking up how cool they'll look to their buddies, or at the hunting camp to have this $3,000 scope on a $2,000 rifle, to help verbally paint a picture leading to a sale. I'm not saying it's always an honest business, because when is the last time you've met an honest salesmen trying to sell you something? Back in the day when a high-end rifle like a Remington Sendero or Browning A-Bolt II only cost $750, then $1,500 wasn't that outrageous to spend on a Swarovski scope. But when rifles now cost $1,500, and scopes cost $3,000, and your pay wage is still basically the same...It's hard to justify that old adage. Not to mention, like I said before, technology has surpassed price-points. Good scopes no longer have to cost $2,000-$3,000. You can get a really good scope for under $1,000, like the Zeiss V4's.

 

[DJ Fergus]

I used to hear salesmen in gun shops say this all the time " you need to spend twice as much on your scope as you do on your rifle". It must have been a universal statement among gun shop salesmen. So a guy I worked with done just that. He bought a $1200 Browning eclipse & $2400 nightforce (nothing against night force, I think they are great). It bearly managed 1.5 moa. It was almost hillarious cause it was like he thought the nightforce should have made his gun shoot 1/2 moa. I had a $800 rifle shooting 1/2 moa with a $700 Leupold. Granted, he had a heck of a lot better scope than I did but I hooked up at greater distances than he did on game. This was 15-20 years ago or so. And I really was never impressed with the glass on that Leupold I had. Just a funny story I had to tell.

I think it was a Zeiss instead of a nightforce he bought, but never the less, he couldn't figure out why he only got 1.5 moa after following the salemans advice.

 

[Aoudad shooter1975]

I own 2 S&B a 10x and a 3x20 PM II... while nice I would have to say I enjoy my Bushnell Tactical elites better (4 LRHS's and 2 DRMs, 1 HDMR). I do have two IORs that I might have to say are every bit as good as my S&B...I'llput it this way--I will not buy another S&B--but don't know if I'll sell mine either...

 

[FEENIX]

I used to hear salesmen in gun shops say this all the time " you need to spend twice as much on your scope as you do on your rifle". It must have been a universal statement among gun shop salesmen. So a guy I worked with done just that. He bought a $1200 Browning eclipse & $2400 nightforce (nothing against night force, I think they are great). It bearly managed 1.5 moa. It was almost hillarious cause it was like he thought the nightforce should have made his gun shoot 1/2 moa. I had a $800 rifle shooting 1/2 moa with a $700 Leupold. Granted, he had a heck of a lot better scope than I did but I hooked up at greater distances than he did on game. This was 15-20 years ago or so. And I really was never impressed with the glass on that Leupold I had. Just a funny story I had to tell.

That's why they are called salesperson.

 

[DJ Fergus]

Im think I'm gonna hang one of my fx1000's on this next gun just to work up loads cause I know it will track & hold zero and if everything with the gun goes good, I will probably end up putting a Japanese scope on it.

 

[Aoudad shooter1975]

Like I said, You can get a really good scope for under $1,000 like the Zeiss V4's.

So true,

I have been really impressed with a Monarch 7 scope on my kids rifle--great glass, decent dial..I think it was $700

For 900 to 1500 the scope matches some of the best scopes from just a few years ago...zeiss V4s,nightforce NSX and SVH, Leupold VX5, wish they would not have discontinued the bushnell LRHS..great scope...all good..and 1200-2000less than thePMII.

 

[DJ Fergus]

I think I can squeak by with a lowly $1200 scope, lol. 20+ years ago I thought my $150 Simmons was top of the line, lol.

 

[Greyfox]

I own a S&B PMII along with several other high end, and, not so high end scopes. To my eyes, it's the best glass I've looked through. Can't say I can detect any yellow cast at all. As a matter of fact, I can't see any color tinting, which, along with the clarity, is why I personally rank it's glass so high. The overall workmanship and quality is superb. Turret tracking is very exact, indicating "no" measurable variance with a tall test. IMO, having used mine and knowing of the experience of others owned by buddies, it's reputation for being one of the best scopes is well deserved.

 

[SnowbirdUT]

I have 3 kids that hunt and I've built them all long range rifles. I started using S&B PM 2 scopes around 2000. I have;

1 5-25X56
2 3-20X50
2 3-27X56
1 12-50X56
1 Precision Hunter

I've owned Swarovski and Vortex scopes but sold them. I don't really use the Precision Hunter and will likely sell it.

The last S&B scopes I purchased was a few years ago. All the reticles are P4 fine. I've never seen any yellow tint and yet purchased these scopes over an 18 year timespan. The glass is the same for all the scopes.

As another person said above, the turrets are the most important feature on a long range first focal plane scope. I tested the tracking on all the scopes at the same time. I used a vertical ruler that was 15+ feet tall and placed it exactly 100 yards down range (used a surveyors tape). The scopes all tracked the same. The margin of error was within my ability to see the difference (around the width of the reticle).

All my scopes are mounted using badger rings. The scopes and rings are heavy but I am always certain of my zeros even after carrying them in packs over long distances over mountains through rain and snow. I've only had 2 problems with these scopes in almost 20 years and service was excellent. I sent the scopes in for repair and they came back within a week. The only cost was the postage.

I am assembling some rifles (1 300 RUM and 2 338 LMs) for a shoot in a month in Price Utah (the Milk Jug Challenge). The longest shots will be 1 mile at a 1 gallon milk jug. I will top one of the 338's with the 5-25X56 that is almost 20 years old now. For this application, it works just as well as the newer 3-27X56. Point is that while the S&B is expensive, you buy once and cry once. My next project will likely be a 416 Barrett build for really long range (I would like to try the King of 2 mile). I will likely move the 5-25X56 to that rifle.

I believe that the next leap in technology will be electronic reticles and turrets. This should reduce cost because the mechanical turrets are so precise and have to take a beating. The reticles will also probably interface via blue tooth with a range finder and ballistic computer. That feature will likely be expensive and I don't think will be worth it. I don't know which manufacturer will lead the way. I bet that it won't be S&B. Germans aren't known for their electronics.

 

[FIGJAM]

I have some nice high-end expensive scopes (Zeiss, Kahles, etc...) on my hunting rifles, but I'll tell you right now, for targets and rifles that rarely-to-never see any hunting condition, I love Vortex HST and SWFA SS scopes. For the money, they're -----hard to beat. They track true, the glass is exceptional for the price-point, they're tough (the SWFA is literally built like an M1 Abrams), they have good turrets, smooth and clear magnification with increase and decrease, side-adjustable parallax, excellent reticle options in both MRAD and MOA, the list goes on...

+1 on the HS-Ts. You can also find the gen 1 6-24x50 PSTs for a killer deal. I've had them on hunting rifles - they are still pretty tough scopes that can take a beating and hold up well in the field.

I know you don't like Nikon Mud, but I think they are some of the best values out there with excellent glass. My son has two monarchs - one on his 6.5 and another on his 223. The 6.5 took a beating on our deer hunt last year. Just a really tough stalk for an 11 year old and a tough pack out. Gun and scope got knocked around...held zero. Plus with their recent no fault policy, I think they are awesome.

 

[FEENIX]

I think I can squeak by with a lowly $1200 scope, lol. 20+ years ago I thought my $150 Simmons was top of the line, lol.

Of course you can, I don't think anyone is saying you can't. At that price range, my SWFA 5-20 HD FFP is a lot of scope for the money. BTW, I have a Bushnell 4-14 with stadia lines that I purchased in 1990 and was on one of my .300 WMs until 2003. It is now on my .22 LR rifle.

 

[FIGJAM]

The last S&B scopes I purchased was a few years ago. All the reticles are P4 fine. I've never seen any yellow tint and yet purchased these scopes over an 18 year timespan. The glass is the same for all the scopes.

I think this is the point some folks are making - S&B's glass hasn't changed over the last 18 years, while other companies have upped their game and improved the quality of their scopes. Some could argue S&B has gotten lazy and been coasting on their reputation. Leupold did the same thing for a while and then woke up and came out with the VXHD lines - which are awesome in my opinion.

 

[Mach 1]

I didn't really ask the initial question to try to compare any thing that I have owned to an S&B because I don't think anything I've had is a good comparison to an S&B. But just trying to figure out what I would be getting over a L.O.W. made scope. I figured the S&B would be a gold standard in tracking. Should be top notch glass as well. My guess is that your paying for undisputed tracking under harsh duty & hopefully some or the best glass available. For the price it should be good for a lifetime or two of flawless tracking & reliability. For my purposes as of now, I think that I can go a different route.

If you want the gold standard in tracking you should buy a khales.

 

[DJ Fergus]

+1 on the HS-Ts. You can also find the gen 1 6-24x50 PSTs for a killer deal. I've had them on hunting rifles - they are still pretty tough scopes that can take a beating and hold up well in the field.

I know you don't like Nikon Mud, but I think they are some of the best values out there with excellent glass. My son has two monarchs - one on his 6.5 and another on his 223. The 6.5 took a beating on our deer hunt last year. Just a really tough stalk for an 11 year old and a tough pack out. Gun and scope got knocked around...held zero. Plus with their recent no fault policy, I think they are awesome.

I used to hate Nikon myself. I really don't know why cause I never even owned one. I'm sure the have made some junk like other scope companies have in the past. I now have two 6-24x50 fx1000s. I really like them. They track great, glass is good enough for the price. I ended up with around & $700 in one and a little less in the other after using my rewards points. I figure they are probably made in the same factory as the PST gen 2. I could be wrong though. I bought two Zeiss 4.5-14x50s with target knobs about 15 years ago and the glass had the best resolution that I have personally owned. For some reason, I was never confident in the tracking and that could have been unfounded cause I really wasn't on the same page as I am now. I understand that the newer Zeiss Scopes have a reputation for tracking well.