Bringing this back up because I am still interested in the question.

I just ordered a ZeroTech 1X prism scope to give it a whirl.

I called up the shop to find out where it's made. The response was "the glass is Chinese but everything is assembled in the U.S.A.".

I guess I must be willing to go along with Chinese components as long as the bulk of the profits wind up staying in the US. Having said that, most of the optics I've got that aren't 100% "made in the USA" are either Japanese or Phillipino and I wound up voting "no".

I have an arken 6x25 on an ar10 that I've shot out to 600 yards.

It is far better then any budget or mid range Vortex of which I own three.

Still no.

Out of curiosity. Do any of the no votes own european cars, televisions, radios, computers, speakers, clothes, sneakers, tires on your cars? I dont know exact stats but I would wager the majority of that stuff is Chinese or foreign.

In the eighties everyone hated toyota, datsun\nissan and honda but it turns out they made better products at a lower cost.

I am not saying we should support chinese manufacturing, but if they make a comperable product if not a better one at significant saving, then I will support my wallet first and foremost. I wasn't raised in afluence, I know what it means to sleep hungry, and that makes it hard to part with my money for no good reason other than chinamen bad.

If you choose to support China and communism with your wallet for elective purchases, well, that's your choice.

It sure as hell isn't mine.

I would not knowingly buy a Chinese scope.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Since I use Vortex (China, Philippines, Japan) I voted yes. But I dont want to. I would love to see reasonably priced, good quality optics that are US made.
Rant: Am I the only person who thinks that optics pricing borders on insanity? 4K+ scopes? On a $1200 rifle. Nope!

You and I are in the same boat. I'd love to have a decent US made scope but I'm not going to pay boutique prices for it. My skill level is such that it'd be a waste of money.

My main comp rifle is sitting right at $5700, so it wouldn't be an absurd waste of money, but when I can't tell the difference on target between the $800 scope and the $2000 one I can't justify it.

I've had Arken (kinda regret it), Vortex (don't regret them) and Cabela's (which I'm told are low-end Bushnell, and I did regret the first one because it rattled itself to pieces).

I miss Nikon.

I try to avoid anything Chinese made. I know in our modern society that is all but impossible. I have always been a buy once, cry once type of guy. I try to buy quality so I usually end up with less quantity wise. All my current scopes/red dots are Trijicon, Aimpoint, Eotech, Leupold or Nightforce. I had a cheap red dot with Sig markings that came on a 556 years ago but gave it away.

As usual, this discussion is drifting away from its original intent, but since it’s my thread I’ll help push it along that path as well.

First, for anyone who is ignorant enough to believe otherwise, there are countless non-Chinese riflescopes that cost much, much less than $4000. If you question that, a brief online search will confirm what I’m saying.

Second, it’s no doubt true that most of the “no” voters purchase other products made in foreign countries. My most recent major purchase was of tires made by a Finnish company. So, yes, there’s that. It’s also true, however, that Finland does not use slave labor in its factories, and without citing a litany of other examples, China is a unique threat to this country. Anyone who believes that any other country is the same in that regard is just as ignorant—if not more so—as someone who believes that all non-Chinese riflescopes cost $4K or more.

The original purpose of this poll was just what it asked: Would you buy a Chinese scope? I was not looking for a basis to judge anyone, and I appreciate understanding the reasons for the yes or no answers.

But despite my trying to avoid political discussions here, the argument that China’s policies, practices, and threat to not only the US but the rest of the world are no different than those of countries like Finland or Germany or Taiwan or any other nation, is utter nonsense that I cannot ignore. If we need something that’s not available elsewhere, so be it, but trying to justify it by saying, “You buy foreign products too,” is just self-delusion.

Yes, but I don't get any value out of expensive optics with my eyeglasses in between.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
As usual, this discussion is drifting away from its original intent, but since it’s my thread I’ll help push it along that path as well.

First, for anyone who is ignorant enough to believe otherwise, there are countless non-Chinese riflescopes that cost much, much less than $4000. If you question that, a brief online search will confirm what I’m saying.

Second, it’s no doubt true that most of the “no” voters purchase other products made in foreign countries. My most recent major purchase was of tires made by a Finnish company. So, yes, there’s that. It’s also true, however, that Finland does not use slave labor in its factories, and without citing a litany of other examples, China is a unique threat to this country. Anyone who believes that any other country is the same in that regard is just as ignorant—if not more so—as someone who believes that all non-Chinese riflescopes cost $4K or more.

The original purpose of this poll was just what it asked: Would you buy a Chinese scope? I was not looking for a basis to judge anyone, and I appreciate understanding the reasons for the yes or no answers.

But despite my trying to avoid political discussions here, the argument that China’s policies, practices, and threat to not only the US but the rest of the world are no different than those of countries like Finland or Germany or Taiwan or any other nation, is utter nonsense that I cannot ignore. If we need something that’s not available elsewhere, so be it, but trying to justify it by saying, “You buy foreign products too,” is just self-delusion.

Okay, let me rephrase my answer. I have bought Chinese-made scopes in the past. Would I again? No. I'd get a Filipino scope or something in the same price range.

I go out of my way to buy New Balance 990's because they're made in USA and they're comfortable and durable as hell. I want that for my scopes, too, but I can't afford to buy US-made scopes because all that's left for "made in USA" are boutique-level options.

Finally got around to putting a scope on a Marlin 336 30-30 lever rifle. I went with a Leupold VX-Freedom 1.5-4 scope.
Made in USA and $300. Used Talley scope rings. Made in South Carolina, $50.
I feel like $350 is a decent price for that setup and no commies got any of my money.

The original poll question was whether one would purchase a Chinese scope if it was good enough for the intended purpose. “Good enough,” though, can be a very low bar. The first scope I bought in the early 1970s to mount on a Ruger model 77 rifle in 270 Winchester was a Lyman fixed 6-power “All American.” As was most common at the time it had a simple crosshair reticle, 1 inch maintube, and capped adjustment knobs along with a ~40mm objective lens. What was unusual about my choice was its higher than common magnification; most hunting scopes were sold in 4 power. Although variable power scopes were available they weren’t nearly as popular because of their prices and reputation for being less reliable.

Despite how primitive that Lyman was in comparison to even very inexpensive scopes today, I used it to take first place in my division of a metallic silhouette match that involved engaging targets to 500 meters (~550 yards) shooting offhand (standing unsupported). I also used it to get the only semilarge game animal I ever shot, an Arizona javelina. If needed, it could be used on a similar rifle today.

The point of all that is that most shooters don’t need much in the way of sophistication or quality in their riflescopes. As the very knowledgeable reviewer who calls himself the Dark Lord of Optics pointed out, the most important feature of a scope sight is whether we can see the target. I’m always a little bemused when a user says their scope has “clear” glass. Well … yes, we do expect that a scope’s glass be clear enough to see through it to the target, just as we expect camera and spectacle lenses to be clear. How “clear” a scope’s lenses are, though, is usually not described because few users have the ability or interest in conducting valid side by side comparisons, and even fewer would know what to look for in such a comparison.

In addition to being able to see the target with a scope sight, what other features are considered important by some users and reviewers today?

Regarding glass quality, something that any reviewer will mention is if the sight exhibits chromatic aberration (color fringing) at the sharp edges of objects seen through the scope, and whether the image has any lack of clarity at the edges of the view. Very high quality (read: very expensive) glass is reputed to help see through heat wave distortion (so-called “mirage”) and it certainly helps when trying to find small, difficult-to-see targets at very long ranges under challenging conditions and on the clock. Large objective lenses of 50mm (and up) help in low light conditions.

Another critical feature of scopes used for precision rifle competition is accurate and repeatable tracking; e.g., twenty 0.1 milliradian elevation clicks raises the bullet point of impact an exact 2.0 mils each time, every time, time after time after time. Furthermore those adjustments must be available with large exposed turrets rather than small, capped adjustments that are usually approximate at best. In addition to precise and accurate tracking, scopes used for long range shooting need lots of room inside for large elevation changes; that’s the reason 1 inch scope maintubes are virtually unknown in the sport these days. Parallax adjustment can be important for closer distance shots, and I chose three of my scopes in part because they will focus as closely as 10 yards as well as being useful for long distances.

But how important are all those criteria for the average shooter and hunter? And if the answer is, “Not for me,” then much of what makes some scopes so expensive is immediately taken off the menu.

I’m not sure what a “boutique” scope is, but I’m reasonably confident it doesn’t apply to something like the American Leupold line. I looked at the EuroOptic site just now and as an example of what’s available, a new 4-12×40mm VX-Freedom scope sells for $350. Even with tax if necessary and shipping, that’s less than a tenth of what our $4000 bogyman costs. It would be perfectly suitable for most shooters’ purposes while being a far superior scope to my ancient Lyman. At that price it also costs less than what I probably paid for the Lyman in 1970s’ dollars and which would be about $500 today.

At the moment Athlon and Arken* scopes are enjoying great popularity among YouTube reviewers. It’s to the point that I can’t help but wonder if that’s due to the Chinese companies’ marketing practices that include lavish incentives to influencers as well as dumping certain products at unrealistic low prices to gain market share. And what about other reasons as well—could there be any possible advantage to an enemy in a future military conflict if all domestic manufacturers of optical weapon sights had been driven out of business like the manufacturers of other critical products have been?

I of course don’t know anything about others’ financial situations. If someone must absolutely have a scope-sighted rifle to put food on his family’s table and must reduce the expenses to do that to a minimum, then of course it makes sense that he would want the least costly, yet adequate options. No other considerations would take precedence over preventing starvation.

But none of that is actually relevant to the original purpose of this thread which was to just get an idea of how likely forum members are to purchase a Chinese riflescope.

* One non-US YouTuber who isn’t a scope reviewer has made very critical comments about his Arken scope. I have seen a few other somewhat cryptic comments about poor customer service for Chinese scopes, so my reference to generally favorable reviews shouldn’t be understood as being what every user’s experience has been.

There should be virtually no debate that a modern Chinese scope of moderate cost has significantly better glass than the average scope that American rifleman used decades ago. I look back at the 2-7x and 3-9x scopes my Dad used, and they really had less-than-optimal glass. But those old scopes were almost burly enough to double as a hammer in a pinch. Optical glass making has come a long way.

As sigfreund states above, not every shooter needs or wants a state-of-the-art Hubble-telescope-like optic. An 8-times zoom and a 40x magnification isn't optimal for hunting in heavy foliage out to 100 yards, nor is it usable for close quarters self defense. It's not necessary for casual plinking. For these same shooters, minor color errors and minor distortion around the edges of the sight picture shouldn't be an issue. And they won't be dialing or holding over for targets beyond 1,000 yards, so a simple reticle and limited elevation adjustments work just fine. Assuming there's good enough light transmission for the expected shooting conditions and that the optic holds its zero, then a value-line optic works just fine.

But value-line optics don't need to be manufactured in China, nor distributed by Chinese companies. We have options. We should make wise choices.