Mueller Optics

[ArtP]

You guys like to keep using the car-into-a-pole analogy.

If paint is chipping off the hood of my 1 week old car and perhaps I later backed into a pole, should Ford deny responsigbility for faulty paint on my hood? Further, should Ford ridicule me in public? Should diehard Ford lovers jump on the wagon and further question me?

 

[MCMXI]

Really? It's that far-fetched to believe a thin aluminum tube can be crushed in a steel clamp?

The American Defense mount used by the OP is ALUMINUM 6061-T6!!

So if you fully close the gap on any quality scope mount, it's gonna damage the aluminum scope tube. It's relatively easy with a four screw steel ring but would be especially easy with a heavy duty six screw mount like the one in question. Regardless of its marketing claims.

What makes you think that the rings were touching at the top of the scope tube? If you've ever used an AD or LaRue QD mount, you'd realize that the bottom screws do next to nothing until the top screws are tightened. In other words, once the scope is inserted, the bottom screws are merely hand tightened such that the scope will still move freely. It's only when you tighten the top screws down that the rings start to make full contact with the scope tube and the bottom screws are now in tension. Once the top screws are tightened to spec, the bottom screws can be tightened (if necessary) to the same torque value. As Mags has said and as I have reiterated, he used 15 in-lb to tighten the screws. There is no way the tube would be damaged using this approach.

 

[Gary Curran]

Gary, did you bother to read the thread started by Mags almost a month ago where he describes a "foreign object or imperfection" in the field of view. He was open and honest about the scope long before this $hitstorm happened!! If I were Mueller, I would replace his scope based on that thread alone ... it gives him credibility.

Until someone can prove to me that the photographs that MOC put up did not come from them, even though someone claims that they are from a text book, the point is that the scope was crushed. MOC even said that had it been returned just for a flake or some imperfection inside of the scope, then there would never have been an issue, and a warranty replacement would have been issued.

However, clearly, given the available data, the scope WAS crushed and pinched, and therefore voided the warranty. Why didn't the OP send it back when he found the speck, before he mounted it? Maybe it wasn't there before he mounted it, and it flaked off the tube from when it was pinched? Maybe he didn't even realize that it had been pinched until he wanted to send it back to be replaced. That would make it all the harder to swallow, knowing you had screwed it up a month ago, and there was nothing really you could do about it.

What it comes down to is that the product returned to Mueller, by their photographs, was damaged, and it appears to have been from the mount it was installed in. That voided the warranty.

By the way, I would have to say that the reason that this manufacturer does not specify torque settings (and I've never seen ANY torque settings on any of my scopes, including two Nikons) is that torque will vary on the design of the mounts, and you can't come out and say use X amount of inch pounds, because depending on the design, it might be too much for one, but not enough for another. Instead of generalizing, or making statements that in one case would be false, it's better not to say anything. Granted, they might want to put something to that effect in the boxes, so people know to be careful, but not being there is also a warning that you need to proceed carefully.

Mueller, according to MOC, did offer to replace the scope, a DAMAGED scope that voided the warranty, at a discounted price. I think that's pretty good on their part, because they could have said 'Tough, you broke it, go buy a new one at Retail.' They didn't, they took the, pardon the pun, the High Road.

Gary

 

[kmcintosh78]

The fact that Mueller came on and became involved with the online forum thread is where the pig in the mud analogy comes into play.

They (MOC/Mueller) should have left it alone here, it would have never gotten to the amount of views and/or responses as it has and we would all be onto other endeavors.

The argument as to if Mueller should replace, repair or told MAGS to pound sand really is the decision of Mueller, and I respect it either way.
But, hearing that fact that they would not repair/replace, when other scope brands will, I will never buy their product.
And, the fact that they came on here and continued to argument shows either ignorance and/or immaturity of the REP to think it would do anything except hurt their image.

 

[Maverick223]

I don't believe that it is a bad idea for manufacturers and other firearm related companies to join and post here (in fact I would like to see more of it, especially WRT new products). OTOH I don't feel that this was a good thread to come into, unless they had resolved to settle the claim and honor their warranty (right or wrong); it looks to me like a failed attempt at damage control.

 

[Mags]

Gary, exactly what does Mueller's photograph prove? The picture has shadows and is pretty bad, when I get the scope I will take pictures. Maybe I did crush the tube and never realized it, but from Mueller's photo you can't tell anything.

Also Gary it seems you have not reviewed all my evidence presented. The scope had a defect when I got it, and reported it as such when I reviewed the scope on MidwayUSA the day the scope arrived before mounting.

Please Gary understand I really liked the Mueller scope and just wanted whatever was in the scope removed. I could care less as to whether the scope was crushed or not and did not want Mueller to replace the tube for the following reasons.

1. The only thing wrong with the scope was a foreign object inside the scope, before mounting.
2. The scope shot pretty well when mounted.

All Mueller had to do was remove the foreign object in the tube, and then I would be on here praising Mueller because that is what I do I buy firearms and related gear and like to review the items on this site.

 

[kwelz]

Companies post on M4C and AR15.com all the time and no one has a problem with it.

 

[Mags]

I have no problem with MOC posting on here either. But, what I normally see when companies post on AR15.com is "send it in and we will fix it". Mueller did what they thought they had to do, I don't think it worked out for them but they did what they thought they had to do.

 

[raz-0]

I can speak to the AD mount. You can indeed mess things up with it, especially if you do not fully tighten the bottom screws before tightening the top screws. It really wants to grab a hunk of the scope tube. If you are used to standard horizontal tubes, or even warne vertical split rings, you really aren't expecting it.

However, with a normal allen key, you can feel that something is not right well before you tighten it enough to matter. I've never used the mentioned torque driver. However, if it is like a click type torque wrench, just because it told you you are breaking something doesn't mean it STOPS you from breaking something if you don't know hot to use it properly.

But Mags has pictures, I'm sure they are much larger in the original files than the sizes posted here. You should be able to see if he screwed the pooch on the install. Also, if he bothered to ever set the date on hsi camera, the EXIF info on the originals should show the date.

As for TK caliming the Mueller pics are form a manual because someone gave them a name that is descriptive after editing them in something to add text? You are out of your mind.

Mags could be right, Mueller could be right, heck, Midway might have restocked something it shouldn't have, and they would both be right.

 

[Mags]

However, if it is like a click type torque wrench, just because it told you you are breaking something doesn't mean it STOPS you from breaking something if you don't know hot to use it properly.

I am an Air Force 7 level Weapons technician, and I am PMEL certified I know what I am doing with a torque wrench.

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Was gonna be done with this thread---but just had to keep reading.

Now I see multiple posters saying their experience with Meuller customer service has been positive----funny thing is most my scopes are old Redfield--Leupold---US Burris and Zeiss and have NEVER had to to deal with CS--EVER--------that should tell you something right there.

 

[hometheaterman]

Yeah, it's not a good thing imo when so many people are having to deal with their customer service. The only scope I've ever had fail on me was a Leupold VX-I, actually had one fail and one I bought broken. Leupold took care of them right away. However, I've owned several other scopes some I kept, some I sold later on, and I've never had to deal with customer service on any of them even the cheap ones.

 

[JFrame]

Given that this thread has already advanced 8 pages, I would have to opine that Mueller has lost the war for public opinion.

Bad news travels much quicker than good news.

Bad move on your part, Mueller -- please let this be a lesson learned...

.

 

[benzy2]

I am an Air Force 7 level Weapons technician, and I am PMEL certified I know what I am doing with a torque wrench

Yep and pilots crash and quarterbacks throw interceptions and doctors operate on the wrong body parts. Just because you know what you're doing doesn't mean you can't make a mistake. I'm not going to say you torqued the things wrong, but lets be honest, we are all human and we are all capable of mistakes. Just as it's possible that Mueller mixed up your scope or that Midway did.

Yeah, it's not a good thing imo when so many people are having to deal with their customer service. The only scope I've ever had fail on me was a Leupold VX-I, actually had one fail and one I bought broken. Leupold took care of them right away. However, I've owned several other scopes some I kept, some I sold later on, and I've never had to deal with customer service on any of them even the cheap ones.

Oh no, half a dozen people have experience with Mueller CS so they all must be defective. Lets not look at the many good review out there, just the half dozen with experience with CS in this thread. Heck, you have sent two scopes back to Leupold, that alone is covers a huge percent of the guys here claiming to have dealt with Mueller. Must mean all Leupold scopes are junk. Right?



Lets be honest with ourselves. Every company has lemons. The Mueller scopes use an aluminum tube and are built to a budget. They should take less abuse and die sooner than many of the others they have been compared to in this thread as they are often at most half the cost than those being compared to. I'm not saying they should crush when properly mounted using 15in-lb of torque, but certainly not out of the range of reality that if placed incorrectly in that mount that it would pinch.

I think it's fair to say that Mags probably didn't intentionally mount the scope wrong. It's fair to say Mueller probably didn't intentionally switch his scope out or use fake pictures from some other scope. I just don't see either side trying to do something intentionally dirty. It is possible the scope was mounted wrong and it is possible that the scope either came that way to Mags or that it was mixed up at Mueller. We clearly aren't going to know exactly what happened. Now if the scope comes back to Mags and is perfectly round, well then there will be some questions to be answered.

After that, we have the question of if Mueller should or shouldn't repair a scope that was determined damaged by the user. This comes down to two crowds. Those that think even though it is outside the letter of the warranty, that it should be taken care of anyways and then those who think if it doesn't fit the text of the warranty it shouldn't be covered.

Oh and then the way Mueller replied in this thread. I think it could have been handled more appropriately and maybe no response would have been better. But I do appreciate a company that makes a stance on their decisions and doesn't give in to threats as well.

Is there really anything else to get into from here? At this point we are just going round and round about the same things and questioning car repairs.

 

[Gary Curran]

Oh, TurnKey, had you bothered to actually READ the photo title, it was CrunchedTube1, not CrushedTube1. I doubt that many textbooks would use the term 'crunched.'

Mags, I rather suspect that actual repair is impossible on the scope. As we all know the scopes are made in China for Mueller. I seriously doubt, although I have no information either way, that theydo not have the ability to repair the scope here. It would have to be sent back to China to have the work done. That would cost them more than the scope was worth.

As to the worth and value of Mueller scopes, they aren't Leupolds, they aren't even Weavers or Nikons. But, they're better than a lot of other scopes in the same price range. Anyone who has recently contemplated a purchase, and has done any amount of research, knows the scopes are made overseas.

In a sense, I feel for you, I really do. There's nothing worse than being turned down for warranty work. I wish you would have just sent it back when you first noticed it, before mounting it, and then all would be well and good.

My personal opinion, and my personal experience, is that Mueller has very good, value priced optics, their customer service is excellent, at least for me, and I will buy from them again.

Gary

 

[MCMXI]

Is there really anything else to get into from here? At this point we are just going round and round about the same things and questioning car repairs.

I agree .... just lock this thread and let's wait for Mags to take his own photos.

By the way, I would have to say that the reason that this manufacturer does not specify torque settings (and I've never seen ANY torque settings on any of my scopes, including two Nikons) is that torque will vary on the design of the mounts, and you can't come out and say use X amount of inch pounds, because depending on the design, it might be too much for one, but not enough for another.

Find a single mount or ring manufacturer who recommends LESS than 15 lb-in torque on the ring screws. Leupold lists torque values on their site for their rings and bases. This isn't rocket science. Any quality ring, base or mount manufacturer provides torque specifications that are independent of the scope being used. If the rings are out of alignment, then obviously, all bets are off.

 

[McKinneyMike]

I see the following from reading this thread:

1) The scope tube was crushed.
2) The manufacturer, as do a great many, sent documented photos of the damage.
3) They offered an option for the customer, given the defect was abuse, which was declined. The flakes that were present inside of the optic can happen to even the best. Go to the Sniper's Hide forum and look at the Leupold Mark 4 threads about this issue. These are $1500+ optics!
4) Threats to push this to an internet forum has never been a good way to win friends and influence people. Blackmail is a polite name for this IMO. Tells me about the character of the person that I am dealing with more than anything.
5) I see nothing wrong with anything that MOC stated in his attempt to give their side of the issue. Everyone wants something for free and no one wants to be responsible for their own actions these days.
6) Mob mentality and conspiracy theories abound without proof or witness. Amazing editorial.

 

[X-Rap]

Single digit posters comming to the rescue I think 1858 is right, this needs to be shut down until some new info is available.

 

[Mags]

Wow, McKinney Mike did you even read through this thread? Also you have been a member here for 2 years and this the thread that you make your first post in? A little weird.

You also left out in your rundown of the "facts" that the scope arrived with a defect, a very important point.

And this:

4) Threats to push this to an internet forum has never been a good way to win friends and influence people. Blackmail is a polite name for this IMO. Tells me about the character of the person that I am dealing with more than anything

Depite all the crap from MOC and Craig I have been trying to keep positive, you attacking my character is not very High Road. Also for your information since you apparently didn't take time to read through this thread before adding yor 2 cents, I just posted my review of Mueller's CS in this thread after they exauhested all means to attempt to resolve the issue. There was no intention of black mail as you accuse me of. This thread was to warn others about Mueller period.

 

[jerkface11]

Maybe you shouldn't buy cheap scopes. You spent over $200 on a scope that isn't as nice as a Bushnell Banner.

 

[Mags]

Yup, I guess that was my fault...

 

[Sam1911]

Closed at user request.