Are Arken scopes actually good?

Arken definitely punches above. The reason we're getting them for the bargain of $500 is because there's no middle man in the mix. Arken IS selling direct to us- same price they would be selling the scopes to dealers/wholesalers. Otherwise we would be seeing prices of $800-$900+.

When you go to your local LGS, Bass Pro, Cabela's etc or your favorite online vendors, you are paying the higher prices. Your supplier of choice sometimes deals factory direct , many times not & are buying from wholesale distributors.

Perfect example, my Trijicon Accupoint TR23-2G i retails for $1399.00!
My local LGS played only $880.00 for it. They don't deal direct with Trijicon, they get it through a wholesale distributor. What I DONT KNOW, is what price the wholesaler paid directly from Trijicon. To guess, probably approximately $550-$600?. Seeing my point yet?

The Arken is being sold straight to the consumer @ factory direct price. Factor in middle man & retailers stepping on the price like other brands & price would be at least double to the consumer.....us.

The fact is, a Chinese laborer is paid less than a German, Austrian, Japanese or American skilled laborer and that labor cost is baked into the price of every scope on the market. I think the Chinese are perfectly capable of making high quality precision equipment these days too. Chances are good that if you bought a cheap Chinese piece of junk that broke a week after you bought it, it wasn't because the Chinese didn't know what they were doing, it's because it was designed to fall apart from the get go so you would have to replace it over and over and over i.e. planned obsolescence. I no longer blame the Chinese for all of the made in China junk filling up our landfills. It isn't their fault.

Back to this scope, I'm very curious to see how this $500 scope ($350 scope when you include the $150 worth of free stuff that came with it) holds up. I have a lot of rifles and I like to put scopes on them. I can justify spending $1,000-$2,000 for one scope but not for every scope on every rifle that I want to scope. And when Arken is offering a scope with: FFP, illuminated reticle, zero stop, HD glass, premium lens coatings, fog proof, water proof, 50 BMG rating, lifetime warranty, 34 mm tubes, tank like construction, etc etc for $350, I'm willing to take a chance on it and I'm willing to accept a little less glass clarity if I have to. I'm fine with that to an extent.

I bought this scope to see if it lived up to the hype. If it does, I'll buy a couple more at this price because, like I said, I can't justify putting one to two thousand dollar scopes on every rifle that I own that I want to put a scope on.

redcon1 said:

The fact is, a Chinese laborer is paid less than a German, Austrian, Japanese or American skilled laborer and that labor cost is baked into the price of every scope on the market. I think the Chinese are perfectly capable of making high quality precision equipment these days too. Chances are good that if you bought a cheap Chinese piece of junk that broke a week after you bought it, it wasn't because the Chinese didn't know what they were doing, it's because it was designed to fall apart from the get go so you would have to replace it over and over and over i.e. planned obsolescence. I no longer blame the Chinese for all of the made in China junk filling up our landfills. It isn't their fault.

Back to this scope, I'm very curious to see how this $500 scope ($350 scope when you include the $150 worth of free stuff that came with it) holds up. I have a lot of rifles and I like to put scopes on them. I can justify spending $1,000-$2,000 for one scope but not for every scope on every rifle that I want to scope. And when Arken is offering a scope with: FFP, illuminated reticle, zero stop, HD glass, premium lens coatings, fog proof, water proof, 50 BMG rating, lifetime warranty, 34 mm tubes, tank like construction, etc etc for $350, I'm willing to take a chance on it and I'm willing to accept a little less glass clarity if I have to. I'm fine with that to an extent.

I bought this scope to see if it lived up to the hype. If it does, I'll buy a couple more at this price because, like I said, I can't justify putting one to two thousand dollar scopes on every rifle that I own that I want to put a scope on.

Click to expand...

I think Arken fills the void Nikon left in the market, a decent scope at a decent price. Only with technological advances over the past decade, they're giving a better value.

LonewolfMcquade said:

I think Arken fills the void Nikon left in the market, a decent scope at a decent price. Only with technological advances over the past decade, they're giving a better value.

Click to expand...

Right. It's kind of like Moore's law and big screen televisions. They were once very much a luxury item. 25 years ago, it was a big deal to have one and they were still CRT. Now most people have at least one of them and they're better, lighter, have way more features and they cost much much less. The Nikon that this Arken is replacing still works fine and is a well made scope but it was made around 17-18 years ago. It doesn't have a fourth of the features that the Arken has and I paid a grand for it back in 2007. By about 2015, I was buying a 6-24x Vortex Viper PST with an illuminated reticle, zero stop, and FFP for a thousand dollars. Now in 2022, for $500, I'm getting even more scope for better than half the price.
I'm sure it's not quite as clear as a top end ED scope that may cost 3-5x more (or only slightly more in the case of the Arken) . I think it's probably clear enough for my purposes though. My Nikon is slightly more clear but it's not a huge thousand dollar difference IMO. I really just need it to track accurately. If I come to the conclusion that it's unsuitable for my purposes (unlikely I think), I'll spend more next time.

redcon1 said:

Right. It's kind of like Moore's law and big screen televisions. They were once very much a luxury item. 25 years ago, it was a big deal to have one and they were still CRT. Now most people have at least one of them and they're better, lighter, have way more features and they cost much much less. The Nikon that this Arken is replacing still works fine and is a well made scope but it was made around 17-18 years ago. It doesn't have a fourth of the features that the Arken has and I paid a grand for it back in 2007. By about 2015, I was buying a 6-24x Vortex Viper PST with an illuminated reticle, zero stop, and FFP for a thousand dollars. Now in 2022, for $500, I'm getting even more scope for better than half the price.
I'm sure it's not quite as clear as a top end ED scope that may cost 3-5x more (or only slightly more in the case of the Arken) . I think it's probably clear enough for my purposes though. My Nikon is slightly more clear but it's not a huge thousand dollar difference IMO. I really just need it to track accurately. If I come to the conclusion that it's unsuitable for my purposes (unlikely I think), I'll spend more next time.

Click to expand...

I've got 5 nice Leupold VXIII scopes & a Trijicon , the rest , a Burris Signature, 4 or 5 Nikon Monarch, Nikon Prostaff , Bushnell Elite & who knows buried in the safe ive not touched in a while lol.
The Arken beats the Nikons. Seems close to the Burris in bright daylght, but blows the Burris away in low light.
4 of the 5 Leupold are 50mm-56mm 30mm main tube , the Trijicon is also a 50mm with 30mm main tube. The Arken is very close in brightness in low light , but not in the lens clarity/ quality. The 5th Leupold has a 40mm objective &30mm tube. During bright daylight it's as bright & clearer, but in low light the Arken is brighter & less grainy.

I can buy 4 Arken sh4's for What I paid for just 1 of the Leupold. Is it better, NO! Is the Arken more than good enough to do what it's called upon for, YES! If I were starting over from scratch today, I could outfit all my rifles with good scopes at a fraction of the cost. Hard sometimes to justify paying quadruple for that extra 5-10% extra you get buying the "top tier" optics. Just the opinion of a poor working class guy.......

Walkalong said:

Can folks give scope to scope comparisons with the Arken vs xyz? Scopes you used side by side?

Click to expand...

I really dont like to give a hard opinion on optics, as ive noticed my preferences in glass run counter to alot of folks. So the best i can do is offer a subjective comparison, which may or may not hold true for everyone....

Ill also only compare similar scopes ive had in the similar conditions.
Maunakea, same time of day, sometimes the same day.

Scopes im comfortable comparing in this situation are also going to have similar feature sets.

Sightron S-tac 3-16x42
Athlon Midas BTR 2.5-15x50
Athlon Ares BTR 2.5-15x50
Athlon Argos HMR 4-20x50 (some noticeable differences, but also similar)
Riton X5 Conquer 5-25x50. These sell/sold for more, but this is the only nearly direct comparison scope i have on hand. Feature sets are nearly identical.

Im also going to ignore focal plane and reticle, as my preferences are based on lack of experience with some of the options.

Comparatively the adjustments, besides the turrets, feel and work about the same on all of them, so nothing interesting to say.

The ones that HAVE illumination are all pretty much the same set up and function.

Focus ranges are accurate for ME on the Arken, and Athlons.
The Riton was way off, and the Sightrons just have a direction indicator no yrd marks.
This is a vague area for me as i often have to adjust focus range on scopes, and that dosent seem to be a problem for alot of folks. I sold my zeiss specifically because of this issue (and didnt want to risk breaking it trying to adjust it).

Turrets on the Arken are a noticeable differences. they are sharper, cleaner, and very precise feeling. The others all have good turrets in use, but none besides the X5 feel quite as crisp, tho the Argos HMR comes awful close.
The zero stop on the Arken also feels significantly more precise than the X5 which is the only other scope on the list that has one.

Optically the Arken on average isnt quite as bright, and dosent offer quite as good a resolution as the Athlons and Sightrons when run at the same power....but its really bloody close, so much so its more a feeling than a concert observation.

The difference in brightness is noticeable when all are set at max, but the Arkens 4x more magnification than the next most powerful scope.
At similar powers its not really noticeable untill it gets really dark, darker than most of us can/would be shooting.
Resolution loss dosent seem to increase on any of them as the light drops.
Also the Arken dosent show much chromatic aberration when changing lighting conditions or background contrast. I noticed that the S-tacs would show some when looking at sky backed foliage. The Athlons do also, with the Argos HMR being noticeable but not "bad"




When compared to the X5 the difference is more noticeable.
Ive shot both scopes on max at the same Target, at the same range, on the same day, and the splashes of bullet impacts on my 10-in gong were definable (not easily but you could call a location hit after the fact) with the X5, but not with the Arken.
At dusk/night the X5s noticeably better, with it being comparable to my Meopta in that regard.
Really the X5 is a VERY nice scope to look thru, so the Arken does compare pretty well.

Again just impressions, Ill likely buy another Arken optic at some point. Just as ill buy more Sightron, Riton, and Athlon optics...they are ALL very good scopes for the cost, it just depends on the specific features (or cost point) im looking at.


Speaking of specific features. IMO, The feature set, size and weight of the Arken make them a lesser choice for general hunting scopes.
They can do that job fine, but your carrying alot of stuff u dont need to.

Walkalong said:

I don't see anywhere on the Arken website where it says they cut out the middle man and sell directly to the consumer. I would think they would tout that if they did. Maybe they do, I don't know

Click to expand...

I believe it was stated on their site prior to the overhaul. I also recall hearing that touted during an interview (from shot show?) that was reposted on YouPuke. See if I can find it....

Walkalong said:

Nice write up @LoonWulf, very helpful. I love my Sightron SIII glass, and the S-Tacs when they dropped in price were an excellent value, Sightron just couldn't (can't?) seem to figure out what features buyers want.

Click to expand...

Thanks!
Sightron does seem to do some odd stuff with certain lines. I think the S-tacs are a great value in a crossover scope, but that strikes me as something alot of folks just arnt really looking for.....if i need a scope in the 300 range (a normal size one) thats what im likely to grab.
I have one of those little USO TS12s (or something like that) and thats another kinda odd scope just because of the form factor.....very neat little optic tho. Great glass, and ok turrets.

LonewolfMcquade said:

I believe it was stated on their site prior to the overhaul. I also recall hearing that touted during an interview (from shot show?) that was reposted on YouPuke. See if I can find it....

Click to expand...

Arken I believe used to make a point of that as did the aforementioned Tract.....
Speaking of Tract, Lemme just say a friend has a Toric 30mm something or other (i ordered it but cant remember the model off hand) and DAYUM! Thats a nice scope.
The hunting Toric was out of stock when i bought my last HTR or id have gotten one of those I think.

Walkalong said:

I want y'all to know, y'all are killing me, I wish I had ordered the Arken 4-16x50 when they were $100 off.

Click to expand...

Yeah yuh do.......


Helpful right?



Offer stands, if you wanna check out mine your welcome to.

Walkalong said:

I want y'all to know, y'all are killing me, I wish I had ordered the Arken 4-16x50 when they were $100 off.

Click to expand...

I've got a black hound genesis 4-14x44 that fell in my lap I'll make you a sweet deal on. Turns out I hate a ffp scope.

And keep in mind, that arken, it had a tight eyebox and image degraded above 16x. You did good avoiding it. Sleep well tonight.

Walkalong said:

it just bothers me, doesn't bother him,

Click to expand...

I get the feeling I'm one of those guys that doesn't even notice a tight eye box.....
I don't have much opportunity to test the theory though through actual use. Most of my shot I can adjust to a comfortableish position.

I'll see if I can figure out an easier way to test that.....

Now I have an Athlon Argos BTR Gen2 8-34X56 and have been able to compare it side X side with a number of Vortex Viper scopes and I personally find the Athlon clearer, brighter and a reticle more suitable to my liking. My only thought if I had to do over is that I would go with an MOA over the MRAD as the MOA has a slightly finer adjustment per click. Lastly I am considering putting an Athlon 6-24 on my next rifle as I rarely find myself using or shooting at 34X even while shooting at 1" targets at 300yds,.

Arken is owned by former Navy SEAL, Michael Reilly. I like to think that he's doing his patriotic duty by ensuring that American patriots have access to a high quality optic or two for their MSRs and I was happy to support him. The fact that he was a Navy SEAL was the single biggest determinant in my purchase. If Arken was not owned by a US veteran, I probably wouldn't have bought the scope and would have purchased another Vortex.

Had the Arken out yesterday along with a few others.
I didn't notice an unusually small eye box, even at 24x. I continue to feel the glass is on par or so with other similarly priced scopes, such as the STacs, but not fantastic. The Midas HMR smoked it in brightness when the clouds rolled in, and in resolution on the 200yd paper target.

Lighting was good untill the clouds rolled in and started blocking the Targets at 4 and 7.

The image darkened noticeably in the 10mins it took to cloud up, but still had no issues resolving the plates them selves or making hits....unless the clouds completely blocked the targets.

On the 200yrd target board i could make out
25 and 26 cal bullet hits pretty easily, but the edges of rhe holes wernt sharp, and the lines of rhe target stickers were soft. This didnt get any worse or better when the light dropped, and became more defuse.

Here is a thread I started on the Arken SH4 6-24 and the Swampfox Patriot 6-24 scopes.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/swampfox-vs-arken.911404/

I nitpick both scopes and have noticed what @LoonWulf and others have stated about clarity/brightness at 16X and above with the Arken. I can say that the more I use the Arken, the less I notice the little things.

The Arken is not going to compete with more expensive scopes. But I don't think it is intended to either. The SH4 is definitely a good scope for the price, especially at $289 for the 4-16 and $299 for the 6-24.

I gave the Swampfox Patriot the win between it and the Arken SH4, but it was close. And both scopes are better than the Nikon Prostaff scopes I own.

Megawatt maker said:

Most of the optic companies won't tell you.

Click to expand...

This is patently false.

Every company out there will openly answer, and even publish the origin of their glass and manufacturing. The only exceptions I might admit - because I don’t follow the dregs - would the fly by night contract start ups on consumer direct marketing schemes that are just getting overseas manufacturing, the Swampfox, BlackDog, Primary Arms etc types… but REAL optics companies are blatantly open about the sourcing of their glass.

Arken still working perfect for me

Varminterror said:

This is patently false.

Every company out there will openly answer, and even publish the origin of their glass and manufacturing. The only exceptions I might admit - because I don’t follow the dregs - would the fly by night contract start ups on consumer direct marketing schemes that are just getting overseas manufacturing, the Swampfox, BlackDog, Primary Arms etc types… but REAL optics companies are blatantly open about the sourcing of their glass.

Click to expand...

Oh ya? Try looking at Leupolds website. look long and deep. They tell you all about how the are the second largest consumer of Aluminum after Boeing, how they have a state of the art manufacturing facility, top notch quality control...Yada Yada yada...but they don't mention, clue in, even alude to...where the GLASS comes from.

Its because it comes from either CHINA or THE PHILIPPINES.

Same with Vortex...however, as I learned from talking to a Rep while getting a Vortex repaired, Vortex as least admits they get their glass from both China and PI. All of it. It took me actually talking with them to find this out. Its not admitted anywhere else. I give them credit for it.

The rest? They won't tell you. They don't want you to know.

The only ones that really tell you, are the top end players. Schmidt and Bender, Kahles, Swarovski, Volada..and sometimes...Zeiss, and Meopoa. They use Shott..its a selling point for them...so you know, the outragous price you are paying for their stuff is actually justified.

I love Leupold, but its a little ingenious of them to wave the Made in USA around..when in fact, the most important part is made in China.

I don't like it anymore than you...but with respect, you are just plain wrong when you say they freely admit where their glass comes from. THEY DO NOT!