Kahles 318 or zcomp

Iggles2017

New Hide Member
#1
Guys, I already preordered a k318, but I'm wondering if I should have preordered a zcomp instead. For those of you that looked at both at shot, could you compare the two and/or tell me which you would choose?
 
#2
I did not attend SHOT so I can't comment directly; however, viewing scopes at SHOT is not a good indicator of how the scope will perform. For one thing lighting is really bad at these venues so you're not going to get a true idea of what the glass is like until you get it out into real world conditions and while you can spin turrets that doesn't tell you anything about how they perform. Also, these were pre-production models which will still go through some fine tuning before they go to market. I expect both scopes to be outstanding, take a look at the specs and determine which one best fits your needs. The ZC420 is just over 2oz heavier but 1/2" longer, the ZC has a 36mm tube vs 34mm, both are going to have rheostat style illumination, almost the same mils per rev and even thought the K318i goes down to 3.5x the ZCO actually has greater FOV. If they both are good fits then do you prefer one reticle over the other?

1517764540508.png
 
#3
And Kahles is a proven entity and ZCO is not, at least not yet. And ZCO hasn't set pricing and from what I'm gathering it's going to be more than the Kahles.
 

Iggles2017

New Hide Member
#4
I did not attend SHOT so I can't comment directly; however, viewing scopes at SHOT is not a good indicator of how the scope will perform. For one thing lighting is really bad at these venues so you're not going to get a true idea of what the glass is like until you get it out into real world conditions and while you can spin turrets that doesn't tell you anything about how they perform. Also, these were pre-production models which will still go through some fine tuning before they go to market. I expect both scopes to be outstanding, take a look at the specs and determine which one best fits your needs. The ZC420 is just over 2oz heavier but 1/2" longer, the ZC has a 36mm tube vs 34mm, both are going to have rheostat style illumination, almost the same mils per rev and even thought the K318i goes down to 3.5x the ZCO actually has greater FOV. If they both are good fits then do you prefer one reticle over the other?

View attachment 6871115
Yeah that makes sense. Thanks. I really like the skmr 3. I'm sure both r great. I appreciate the spec comparison. Much obliged.
 
#7
You preordered an optic, which in and of itself isn’t something I’d ever do.

Preorder nothing, wait for real end user reviews.
Pre-order doesn't necessarily mean committed. With some of these scopes, if you don't get in on the pre-order quick you may not see the scope for more than a year, at least this was the case with the AMG. Competent reviews should be out by June if not earlier, but unless you pre-ordered last week you probably won't see them until later this year if not into next year already.
 
#8
I like the specs better on the ZCO, but the final release date and price have yet to be set. I really want to try their higher mag scope, but what the final price is will make the determination on if I give it a try
 
#9
Initial impressions and Spec's the ZCO all the way not even close to me, but we need to see the final products from both.

i think the Kahles would of been a better hit with a 30mm tube coming in lighter and going after the hunting market, with the zco and schmidt in 20x out there i dont see where this scope fits in the market.
 
#10
Initial impressions and Spec's the ZCO all the way not even close to me, but we need to see the final products from both.

i think the Kahles would of been a better hit with a 30mm tube coming in lighter and going after the hunting market, with the zco and schmidt in 20x out there i dont see where this scope fits in the market.
I agree with you, that it would have been better if Kahles went "lighter" or offered a 56mm objective - something to differentiate it a bit more from what is already available; however, when they sought out designing this scope (I'm assuming they started at least 2 years ago if not longer) the competition in this category was pretty sparse. There was S&B Ultra Shorts, Leupold's Mark 6 3-18 and Bushnell's ET DMR and that was pretty much it for scopes with greater than 16x magnification and at or under 13". Little did Kahles know that the year they introduced their K318i there would be 3 other scopes also announced in direct competition. If the ZCO had not been introduced, the Leupold Mark 5HD not introduced and the EOTech 5-25 not introduced I think it would almost be a no brainer, the Kahles would be at the top of most shooters list's to take a look at. Spec wise the ZC420 is better than the K318i and the Leupold almost matches specs but is close to 7oz lighter; however, specs aren't everything and I'd like to wait to see more on the scopes. Also, if you are already a Kahles owner with the K624i and SKMR3 I can see an advantage to the K318i using the exact same reticle. What would really make things interesting is if next year Kahles announces a K525i with improved optical formula over the K624i.

Three years ago I asked Kahles to come out with an ultra short, two years ago I asked Vortex to make an AMG ultra short and I've also asked US Optics (who desperately needs a "short" scope). It is nice to see companies now offering this unique design, but other than Leupold none of them went for "light" or "lighter" and I think that we'll start seeing more of this trending. The AMG has been a huge success for Vortex and I think one of the biggest factors to its success is the fact that it is lighter than all other scopes in its class. For the same reason, I think the Leupold Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 will also become very popular given its weight and price point.
 

Iggles2017

New Hide Member
#11
Valid points. I just know that kahles tracks very well. Leup old has been suspect. I love the specs of zco, just not sure I want to go all in with a new unproven company. Having Huber involved I realize decreases the risk.
 
#12
Leup old has been suspect.
Not sure if that was a typo, but that is pretty funny - Leup "old" :D You know it's interesting, my nephew wants a new scope for his rifle and I've tried to convince him of the many "other" scopes on the market that are cheaper and better and he sent me a note the other day saying he was back looking and was probably going to get the Leupold, granted he is military and can get the scopes at a much better price than most civvies. For some reason Leupold has captured the souls of the American public and sold them a bill of goods, granted I think the Mark 5HD represents their first "good deal" in the tactical market but that is only if it is able to match up optically and mechanically to other scopes in its price range. Other manufacturers dream of having the brand loyalty that Leupold appears to command.
 
#13
I agree with you, that it would have been better if Kahles went "lighter" or offered a 56mm objective - something to differentiate it a bit more from what is already available; however, when they sought out designing this scope (I'm assuming they started at least 2 years ago if not longer) the competition in this category was pretty sparse. There was S&B Ultra Shorts, Leupold's Mark 6 3-18 and Bushnell's ET DMR and that was pretty much it for scopes with greater than 16x magnification and at or under 13". Little did Kahles know that the year they introduced their K318i there would be 3 other scopes also announced in direct competition. If the ZCO had not been introduced, the Leupold Mark 5HD not introduced and the EOTech 5-25 not introduced I think it would almost be a no brainer, the Kahles would be at the top of most shooters list's to take a look at. Spec wise the ZC420 is better than the K318i and the Leupold almost matches specs but is close to 7oz lighter; however, specs aren't everything and I'd like to wait to see more on the scopes. Also, if you are already a Kahles owner with the K624i and SKMR3 I can see an advantage to the K318i using the exact same reticle. What would really make things interesting is if next year Kahles announces a K525i with improved optical formula over the K624i.

Three years ago I asked Kahles to come out with an ultra short, two years ago I asked Vortex to make an AMG ultra short and I've also asked US Optics (who desperately needs a "short" scope). It is nice to see companies now offering this unique design, but other than Leupold none of them went for "light" or "lighter" and I think that we'll start seeing more of this trending. The AMG has been a huge success for Vortex and I think one of the biggest factors to its success is the fact that it is lighter than all other scopes in its class. For the same reason, I think the Leupold Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 will also become very popular given its weight and price point.

yeah i am sure its not by chance that the ZCO is better than the Kahles considering who is at ZCO, but you did make a valid point if you are a Kahles optic owner then yes i would be excited about this scope but agree as i said i would have loved for this to be a 30mm 24-26 ounce scope that would have gotten me all excited, its a great addition to their line up. just sucks its nearly as heavy and more money than the 6-24 but i expect to see a new higher magnification kahles out soon.
 

longshot2000

Artillery Major
#16
... barging in late...

I don't know ZCO. I have only heard of it here, and I see at at least one member firm who represents them. I also did not see them at SHOTSHOW. It was a big place, so easy to miss. So, I cannot compare. But, I will comment anyway. :oops:

I did pick-up the Kahles, and loved it. Kahles is, as one member mentioned, a proven firm, and a great scope maker. I like the 3-18 better than the previous generation of Kahles scopes, while very respectful of the 1-6x and the 6-24x, the 3-18x is just of another generation. First, the SKMR3 reticle is first class. It is clean, and very "Hourus-like" or Hourus-lite. In my opinion, the SKMR3 is one of the top scaled reticles that is not from Hourus. I felt the AMR was an early attempt, and either you love the AMR, or you don't. I don't. Also, the K318 has newer architecture, like the S&B Ultra Short.

I don't know price, and price could weigh-in, in a big way.

When I think of new scopes, I think of Athlon. Now, I might insult half of the audience here, but, the only "place" that I see so many accolades about Athlon are here, in the 'Hide. Many people, for whom I respect, tell me that the Athlon Chronos is as good as ______ . It probably is very good. And, their product is priced much less than _____ . I can tell you that I tried and used a lesser Athlon than Chronos, I think it was the Ares, and was very disappointed. I know, I know. Vortex makes junk and they make world class, and I guess Athlon does the same. I do not understand that about Vortex either, because, my first encounter with Vortex was the Sparc red-dot. It took some time to get me to buy a Razor HD, and I have one, and it is great.

So, I suppose, back to the topic brought to us by OP, how do you compare? I don't think you do. You need to ask yourself, what type of person are you? Do you want some new and cool and neat from a respectable name, or do you want to take an adventure and be an early adopter? And, what role does price play in this? Hey, you could become a ZCO evangelist. Take a car analogy: Do you want to buy a new mid-sized Audi luxury car, or the new car that nobody else has? It depends. Will the new car be a Tesla? Maybe.
 

Iggles2017

New Hide Member
#17
... barging in late...

I don't know ZCO. I have only heard of it here, and I see at at least one member firm who represents them. I also did not see them at SHOTSHOW. It was a big place, so easy to miss. So, I cannot compare. But, I will comment anyway. :oops:

I did pick-up the Kahles, and loved it. Kahles is, as one member mentioned, a proven firm, and a great scope maker. I like the 3-18 better than the previous generation of Kahles scopes, while very respectful of the 1-6x and the 6-24x, the 3-18x is just of another generation. First, the SKMR3 reticle is first class. It is clean, and very "Hourus-like" or Hourus-lite. In my opinion, the SKMR3 is one of the top scaled reticles that is not from Hourus. I felt the AMR was an early attempt, and either you love the AMR, or you don't. I don't. Also, the K318 has newer architecture, like the S&B Ultra Short.

I don't know price, and price could weigh-in, in a big way.

When I think of new scopes, I think of Athlon. Now, I might insult half of the audience here, but, the only "place" that I see so many accolades about Athlon are here, in the 'Hide. Many people, for whom I respect, tell me that the Athlon Chronos is as good as ______ . It probably is very good. And, their product is priced much less than _____ . I can tell you that I tried and used a lesser Athlon than Chronos, I think it was the Ares, and was very disappointed. I know, I know. Vortex makes junk and they make world class, and I guess Athlon does the same. I do not understand that about Vortex either, because, my first encounter with Vortex was the Sparc red-dot. It took some time to get me to buy a Razor HD, and I have one, and it is great.

So, I suppose, back to the topic brought to us by OP, how do you compare? I don't think you do. You need to ask yourself, what type of person are you? Do you want some new and cool and neat from a respectable name, or do you want to take an adventure and be an early adopter? And, what role does price play in this? Hey, you could become a ZCO evangelist. Take a car analogy: Do you want to buy a new mid-sized Audi luxury car, or the new car that nobody else has? It depends. Will the new car be a Tesla? Maybe.
Excellent points. That's why I'm sticking with kahles.
 
#18
... barging in late...

I don't know ZCO. I have only heard of it here, and I see at at least one member firm who represents them. I also did not see them at SHOTSHOW. It was a big place, so easy to miss. So, I cannot compare. But, I will comment anyway. :oops:

I did pick-up the Kahles, and loved it. Kahles is, as one member mentioned, a proven firm, and a great scope maker. I like the 3-18 better than the previous generation of Kahles scopes, while very respectful of the 1-6x and the 6-24x, the 3-18x is just of another generation. First, the SKMR3 reticle is first class. It is clean, and very "Hourus-like" or Hourus-lite. In my opinion, the SKMR3 is one of the top scaled reticles that is not from Hourus. I felt the AMR was an early attempt, and either you love the AMR, or you don't. I don't. Also, the K318 has newer architecture, like the S&B Ultra Short.

I don't know price, and price could weigh-in, in a big way.

When I think of new scopes, I think of Athlon. Now, I might insult half of the audience here, but, the only "place" that I see so many accolades about Athlon are here, in the 'Hide. Many people, for whom I respect, tell me that the Athlon Chronos is as good as ______ . It probably is very good. And, their product is priced much less than _____ . I can tell you that I tried and used a lesser Athlon than Chronos, I think it was the Ares, and was very disappointed. I know, I know. Vortex makes junk and they make world class, and I guess Athlon does the same. I do not understand that about Vortex either, because, my first encounter with Vortex was the Sparc red-dot. It took some time to get me to buy a Razor HD, and I have one, and it is great.

So, I suppose, back to the topic brought to us by OP, how do you compare? I don't think you do. You need to ask yourself, what type of person are you? Do you want some new and cool and neat from a respectable name, or do you want to take an adventure and be an early adopter? And, what role does price play in this? Hey, you could become a ZCO evangelist. Take a car analogy: Do you want to buy a new mid-sized Audi luxury car, or the new car that nobody else has? It depends. Will the new car be a Tesla? Maybe.
I think part of what you are talking about is the "first try syndrome" even with higher end scopes.
Take Kahles Gen1, then the forthcoming generations as an example. A friends G1 broke right away, he sold it after it came back from repair.
Next the Cronus(now discontinued) which had lackluster turrets and now the newer Cronus BTR which has very nice turrets and is upgraded in other ways. My friends Ares BTR 4.5-27x50 turning out very good whereas my 2.5-15/first shipment, had light turret action.
How about Minox and the second rev indicator dragging and vastly different turret feel scope to scope. Mostly corrected now.
The Steiner T5xi debacle when they were first released. More than a few problems.
Burris glass... Behind the curve a bit, maybe next year???
March - 6400 mil instead of 6283 and the glass in my early one wasn't the best.
Even S&B screwed up, they didn't plug the MTC locking turrets set screw when they first came out, "one" of three allen screws which wasn't supposed to be adjusted, of course people would loosen it causing havoc. Now it's plugged.
I had a early USO that had crap glass and funky turrets, the newer ones have decent glass and good turrets.
The early Bushnell DMR's had CA problems, the XRS had a complicated ZS setting, etc.
A bud had to send two early G1 Razors back for tracking being off. Now look at the G2 Razor, it's a standby.
IOR, how many Gen's are they at now??? I think the front AO parallax was their greatest attempt at solving IOR problems.
Premier, !?!?! TT, pretty much improved product and there is a lineage.

Often the 1st Gen of whatever Co could have turned out better. Sometimes the 1st Gen is pretty good to begin with.
As time goes by most optics Co's make the needed improvements...

ZCO...we'll see how they did on the G1, won't we.
 
Last edited:

CSTactical

Sniper's Hide Vendor
#20
There is a lot of great info on this post. I'm very exited about both of these optics.

I will be running a Kahles K318x and the ZCO 4-20x myself. A question I ask myself is "Are you going to really notice 2x difference?" I do not think so but we will find out.

Mike @ CSTACTICAL
 
#23
I will be running a Kahles K318x and the ZCO 4-20x myself. A question I ask myself is "Are you going to really notice 2x difference?" I do not think so but we will find out.

Mike @ CSTACTICAL
You make me sick Mike! :sick:

I hear you on the 2x, doubtful it will make much of a real world difference, especially if glass is comparable between the two, I think that is the biggest question outside of mechanics - accuracy, tracking and reliability.
 

TheMammoth

Online Training Member
#24
There is a lot of great info on this post. I'm very exited about both of these optics.

I will be running a Kahles K318x and the ZCO 4-20x myself. A question I ask myself is "Are you going to really notice 2x difference?" I do not think so but we will find out.

Mike @ CSTACTICAL
The deciding factor for me, as I only have room for one more scope in this price category, was the reticle. I'm very used to the SKMR 3 on three different Kahles units I've owned and I know it like the back of my hand. My shooting with it is intuitive and fast, and that settled the argument for me. Of course, it took 20 minutes on the phone discussing the finer points of the decision with CStactical for me to get there but whatever haha.
 

CSTactical

Sniper's Hide Vendor
#25
The deciding factor for me, as I only have room for one more scope in this price category, was the reticle. I'm very used to the SKMR 3 on three different Kahles units I've owned and I know it like the back of my hand. My shooting with it is intuitive and fast, and that settled the argument for me. Of course, it took 20 minutes on the phone discussing the finer points of the decision with CStactical for me to get there but whatever haha.

That's what we are here for :)
 

JFComfort

Las Vegas Long Range OG
#29
I’m familiar with Jeff Huber at ZCO from when his company HPS Optic was the US distributor for Kahles. I had an issue with “image jump” and a change in POI when moving my magnification ring. He took very good care of me and got a 4-5 week turn around done for the repairs (scope went back to Austria)!

After repair I’ve been very happy with my K624i and like the direction they are going with the 3-18x. I know over the years Jeff has worked for many companies in the optics industry and have spent a lot of time talking to him. He is very knowledgeable and I’m excited to see what ZCO brings to the table but might hold off and see what the feedback looks like from those who get them “in-hand” first.
 
#30
This is a great discussion and very valid points being made. I just want to chime in and let people know that we are doing everything we can, checking everything, and will fully test everything prior to sending scopes out. We absolutely do not want the "early adopters" to be surprised in a negative way.

I personally followed many of the other brands go through their first gen issues and the problems created, especially lack of trust. I was actually on the Steiner shooting team prior to the T series being introduced but had left the team for work reasons. I didn't like seeing what followed with the launch of the Steiner T series and tracking issues. That was personally painful to see happen.

The whole team at ZCO has seen these issues multiple times over many years. Thus our total commitment to getting it right the first time.
 

CSTactical

Sniper's Hide Vendor
#31
This is a great discussion and very valid points being made. I just want to chime in and let people know that we are doing everything we can, checking everything, and will fully test everything prior to sending scopes out. We absolutely do not want the "early adopters" to be surprised in a negative way.

I personally followed many of the other brands go through their first gen issues and the problems created, especially lack of trust. I was actually on the Steiner shooting team prior to the T series being introduced but had left the team for work reasons. I didn't like seeing what followed with the launch of the Steiner T series and tracking issues. That was personally painful to see happen.

The whole team at ZCO has seen these issues multiple times over many years. Thus our total commitment to getting it right the first time.
That is great to read! :cool:
 
#32
How do you figure on two scopes that haven’t made it out of preproduction?
Not trying to degrade anyone's brand. Based on my own test results conducted half hour after sunset in heavy timber. 624i vs S&B US. aka swaro vs schott. The difference was unmistakable. I'm no pro just like optics that do well in that environment. Mike at CS Tactical helped me with this decision. Sure glad I went with Kahles. But something kept gnawing at me, six months later I got a deal to good to let slip away from euro optic on the US. Love that scope for my trips to the range. That's all brother. Firm believer the learning process never stops.
 

koshkin

Dark Lord Of Optics
#34
Not trying to degrade anyone's brand. Based on my own test results conducted half hour after sunset in heavy timber. 624i vs S&B US. aka swaro vs schott. The difference was unmistakable. I'm no pro just like optics that do well in that environment. Mike at CS Tactical helped me with this decision. Sure glad I went with Kahles. But something kept gnawing at me, six months later I got a deal to good to let slip away from euro optic on the US. Love that scope for my trips to the range. That's all brother. Firm believer the learning process never stops.
Not sure what "swaro vs schott" is supposed to mean (Swarovski procures optical elements from Schott, while S&B generally doesn't and it is not important anyway), but since K624i has a 56mm objective and S&B UltraShort scopes have 50mm objectives, once magnificaton is high enough, a 56mm objective offers a significant advantage over a 50mm one. From that alone, there is about 25% more light coming through a 56mm objective and that is before some other factors come into play.

ILya
 
#38
There is a lot of great info on this post. I'm very exited about both of these optics.

I will be running a Kahles K318x and the ZCO 4-20x myself. A question I ask myself is "Are you going to really notice 2x difference?" I do not think so but we will find out.

Mike @ CSTACTICAL
That's always the question, isn't it? I've found over the years that as you approach the top end of the market for any product that I can think of, you reach a point of diminishing returns where each dollar (or hundred) spent doesn't buy you as much as the last one did.

Let's take something like the Gen II Razor 4.5-27, and assume a street price of, call it, $2300 new. Now, is the Razor a nice optic? Certainly. Is it as nice as, say, a Tangent Theta (say a street price of $4k)? No, it isn't... but how far off is it? In terms of the overall package, is the Razor 90% of the TT? 95%? 98%? How much are those last few percentage points worth to you? Looking at the dollars and cents of it, the Razor costs about 58% of what the TT costs... does the TT really give you 42% more optic? By any objective measure, I can't see how anyone could say that it does.

So, the question that we all have to ask ourselves as consumers is, what compromises (if you'll pardon the use of this term in a discussion that includes ZCO) am I willing to make in regard to this purchase? For a very lucky (relative) few, the only compromises to be considered are in the product (reticle, tracking, control feel/performance, optical quality, weight, size, etc...); however, for the vast majority of us, we also have to add another parameter - cost. It is in the addition of this last parameter where we introduce the concept of "value". To me, the word "value" is not a euphemism for cheap/inexpensive (as in the "value menu" at fast food joints), but rather refers to what you get (product/quality/features/etc...) in exchange for what you give (most of the time, money). As such, the value proposition for something like the TT used in my above example quite frankly sucks by comparison to the Gen II; you have to give nearly twice as much for the TT as you do for the Gen II Razor, and what you get in return doesn't (by any objective measure that I can think of) reflect that price delta. Does that mean that the TT is not a superior optic? No. Does that mean that the TT is overpriced? This could be debated until we're all blue in the face, but I would argue that no, the TT is not overpriced... for the simple reason that the Gen II, as a product, has already picked all the low-hanging fruit, as it were... good glass, good controls, etc..., so that in order to offer more (in terms of the product) the folks at TT have to go a step beyond... they have to offer glass that's better than good, they have to offer controls that are better than good, etc...

I guess it all comes down to that old phrase from the hot rod world - Speed costs money... how fast can you afford to go?
 
#39
Very well said! Value is even more important depending on your personal situation. Some people may have the cash for the TT, but the amount they would utilize the scope just doesn’t justify the cost delta over the Vortex.
 
#40
That's always the question, isn't it? I've found over the years that as you approach the top end of the market for any product that I can think of, you reach a point of diminishing returns where each dollar (or hundred) spent doesn't buy you as much as the last one did.

Let's take something like the Gen II Razor 4.5-27, and assume a street price of, call it, $2300 new. Now, is the Razor a nice optic? Certainly. Is it as nice as, say, a Tangent Theta (say a street price of $4k)? No, it isn't... but how far off is it? In terms of the overall package, is the Razor 90% of the TT? 95%? 98%? How much are those last few percentage points worth to you? Looking at the dollars and cents of it, the Razor costs about 58% of what the TT costs... does the TT really give you 42% more optic? By any objective measure, I can't see how anyone could say that it does.

So, the question that we all have to ask ourselves as consumers is, what compromises (if you'll pardon the use of this term in a discussion that includes ZCO) am I willing to make in regard to this purchase? For a very lucky (relative) few, the only compromises to be considered are in the product (reticle, tracking, control feel/performance, optical quality, weight, size, etc...); however, for the vast majority of us, we also have to add another parameter - cost. It is in the addition of this last parameter where we introduce the concept of "value". To me, the word "value" is not a euphemism for cheap/inexpensive (as in the "value menu" at fast food joints), but rather refers to what you get (product/quality/features/etc...) in exchange for what you give (most of the time, money). As such, the value proposition for something like the TT used in my above example quite frankly sucks by comparison to the Gen II; you have to give nearly twice as much for the TT as you do for the Gen II Razor, and what you get in return doesn't (by any objective measure that I can think of) reflect that price delta. Does that mean that the TT is not a superior optic? No. Does that mean that the TT is overpriced? This could be debated until we're all blue in the face, but I would argue that no, the TT is not overpriced... for the simple reason that the Gen II, as a product, has already picked all the low-hanging fruit, as it were... good glass, good controls, etc..., so that in order to offer more (in terms of the product) the folks at TT have to go a step beyond... they have to offer glass that's better than good, they have to offer controls that are better than good, etc...

I guess it all comes down to that old phrase from the hot rod world - Speed costs money... how fast can you afford to go?
BurnOut, I get what you're saying, there is definitely a factor of cost and value involved and I think most of us (as consumers) are always looking to pay less for more value, why wouldn't we if we're savvy in the marketplace. That is definitely the appeal of lower cost optics and the argument always seems to end up being in one of three categories, glass, mechanics and reticle - in the end we purchase what we think offers the best "value" while checking off all the boxes of what kind of optic we're looking for.
 
#41
Finally got to handle one of the 318i's at a show. Wow what a nice scope. Liked pretty much everything about it. The only thing not perfect is the same problem all of these scopes have. Like my S&B i personally think they jam way to many mils into a single turn. I wish they all used the older 12 to 13 mil turrets, or maybe im just to heavy handed. Either way its a supper nice scope.