This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  kens 1 year, 4 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #68549
     kens 
    Participant
    • Gold
    • ★★★
    • Posts: 56
    • Comments: 531
    • Overall: 587

    Has anyone done any side by side testing of the finer old scopes vs todays new scopes??

    I have the itch to create a tack driver ‘old school’ rifle just to spank some of the new (so-called) Gurus and their 6.5 Creedmoor, and their Ruger RPR to go with it.

    I recently got a old El Paso steel Weaver off fleabay and tried it. The optics was surprisingly clear. really surprising. Especially because everything you read tells you that “the newer scopes are better optically” with technology and coatings. I was looking at the chimney down the street, playing with the AO (parellax) and began seeing screws in the chimney rain flashing. The more I played with it, the more I was attempting to discern straight slot from phillips screws.

    Then I pulled out 1 year old Zeiss Terra scope. The Zeiss was now becoming the disappointment. In no way could I attempt to call out the heads of screws, let alone phillips nor straight. Here I had in my hands a 40 or 50 year old scope that beat the socks off a newer Zeiss.!!!! So, let me put to rest all the articles you read about the newer optics are better, the old scopes were “good in their day”, and ‘their day has passed’.

    I’m calling BS.

    I took the weaver out for a ‘box test’. I was disapponted in the box test, but impressed at trying to read the little print in the corner of the target. The weaver would stay on its zero all day, but repeatability was not quite there for me.

    I have not yet tried box test with the Zeiss.

    Does anyone else have experience testing the old school vs new school scopes??

    More specifically, has anyone taken ANY scope to the range and tested the adjustments on graph paper?

    I’m saying to take 1/4″ graph paper, and shoot at it with the scopes 1/4″ clicks, and actually print a pattern on the graph paper EXACTLY as you feed in the adjustments???

    Will the ‘much heard of’ Vortex do it? Will the Niteforce do it?

    Will an old Unertl do it?

  • #68551
     Rattlesnake Charlie 
    Participant
    • Gold
    • ★★★
    • Posts: 152
    • Comments: 679
    • Overall: 831

    I’ve wondered much the same if I should try to “upgrade” my Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14 I bought used a decade ago. The same with the Leupold 4x on my .308 I “inherited” because a friend needed money a decade and more ago. Both seem to do their task, but I wonder “can the new breed do enough better to justify the cost?”

  • #68553
     kens 
    Participant
    • Gold
    • ★★★
    • Posts: 56
    • Comments: 531
    • Overall: 587

    “can the new breed do enough better to justify the cost?”

    I can’t prove that, but I doubt it.

    After consulting with couple different scope repair facilities, I have come to the conclusion that all the scope manufacturers are getting their glass from a common glass factory somewhere in China. That thought alone levels out the quality across the board of great many different scope manufacturers.

    Then they indicate that the newer scopes are progressing over time towards more & more mass production parts inside the scope, hence there is not the old school fit & finish of the internals of days gone by.

    This is only what I been told, I have not torn apart a lot of scopes for personal inspection. But, on many of the research articles I been reading, the old school Weaver T-series scopes hold their respect rather well. More than one article has said the old Weaver T scopes track & repeat better than all the rest to this day.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 2017 Goodsteel Forum. Designed by Covalent Designs, LLC.