why are Swarovski Riflescopes so expensive?

[ArmedBear]

Perhaps if i live in the land of the free i could buy a nice leupold scope

LOL

I'm not sure that most Americans would understand your real point, though.

(For the record, I use a Leupold for match shooting. I don't think that was Skoghund's essential meaning.)

 

[lykoris]

Todd1700
"The guys who own these scopes often unfairly seem to frame the choices we have in scopes as either a 2000 dollar Swarovski or a 60 dollar chinese made POS."

That is simply not true.

I have a bushnell 4200 elite and a Leup mk iv LR/T 8.5-25 with illum TMR ret - they are very nice scopes and I thoroughly enjoy using them. I also have lesser quality scopes like a Falcon menace/Walther scope.

I'm not bashing American scopes but in my opinion they are behind the curve when it comes to riflescope optics not through any fault of their own when you take into account the demands of the American market.

S&B/Zeiss/Swaro originally competed within the European market for the European hunter that hunted at night - so maximising light transmission was critical to competition between them.

I have never bought European reloading equipment and have spent thousands of euros on U.S. equipment, forster, dillon, redding etc.

Why ?

Because Europeans haven't got a clue about reloading equipment and everything is sub-standard, they are behind the curve versus the US. I will continue to buy U.S. for the simple reason that American reloading equipment is the best and it will last.

If you set-up a camera company in the morning, you'll be behind the learning curve/knowledge of the Japanese - Canon/Nikon etc.

Necessity is subjective to each and every individual no matter what you purchase in life.

 

[jerkface11]

Skoghund what kind of scope rings are those? They don't seem to go all the way around the scope.

 

[hogmanahoo.com]

you pay for what you get.a good scope makes a kill alot easier

 

[scythefwd]

hog, good scopes can't make the shot for you. In most cases in the US, a 2k scope will only be of benefit for 1 hour out of a hunting day (1/2 hour before sunrise, 1/2 hour past sunset). The rest of the time, a intermediate .4k scope will do out to 400y easily.

Jerkface,
I think they do go all the way around, just the bra is covering the top half. I could be wrong though.

 

[jerkface11]

LOL I see it now never mind!

 

[SquirrelNuts]

Of course, he apparently thinks Austrian is a language, but what the hell.

Austrian is a language, but it is only spoken in 55 out of 57 U.S. states.

 

[dullh]

I like Swaro's but I was not willing to spend over a grand on one. There'e a point of diminishing returns for me, and the point is right at the Nikon Monarch/Leupold VX-III level of scopes. Anything past that is either specialized or bragging rights, in my opinion.

I'd say the vast majority of hunters around here have cheap Simmons/Tasco/BSA scopes and are happy with them. Why? Because they don't shoot alot, or all the time. They shoot to check zero, hunt for a week or so, then don't touch their rifles again until next year. I, on the other hand, shoot alot more than that and I wouldn't be happy with a POS that fogged up or couldn't hold zero. Anything Nikon or Leupold (although I am not a fan of Leupold they do make one hell of a scope) will last forever and provide a quality view.

I guess it's the old "why would a guy buy a $3000 Blaser when a $500 Remington does the job just as good?" Same thing here - some want the $1000+ scopes, and if they can afford them, who cares. Me, I am fine with the fact that ~$500 will get me a quality optic that won't have to be replaced anytime ever.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I'd say the vast majority of hunters around here have cheap Simmons/Tasco/BSA scopes and are happy with them. Why? Because they don't shoot alot, or all the time.

I think there's also a large "ignorance is bliss" factor involved.

I too have used "budget" optics in the past, but since I got my first quality scope I've not since been able to tolerate the crap optics out of China on any of my rifles. You just cannot fathom how S&(@$Y cheap scopes are till you've used quality optics

Now will I spend a K on a Swarovski any time soon. NO

Will I gladly spend 2 to 5 hundred clams on a new or used Leupold, Sightron, Bushenll, Nikon ect ect. YES

At the opposite end will I put a low quality low priced Chinese optic on my rifle again HELL NO

 

[blackops]

I'm not bashing American scopes but in my opinion they are behind the curve when it comes to riflescope optics not through any fault of their own when you take into account the demands of the American market

.

Funny we don't make the top of the line scopes, but we just know how to use them more proficiently than everyone else.

if you get the opportunity take a swaro/zeiss/S&b out against bushnell/leupold/nightforce after sunset - you'll see the difference immediately.

With a top of the line Leupold and Nightforce I beg to differ. I've looked through S&B and Swaro. Like you said you get what you pay for and the top of the line Leupold and Nightforce are very simular. I have 20/15 vision though so the difference might be greater to those of you who’s vision isn’t as clear.

 

[browningguy]

A 2k scope is for those who can shoot more accurately than a 1k scope can see. They need the extra clarity, and the magnifications.

What load of codswallop.

I don't remember seeing any Swaro's listed on the winners guns in the F or F-TR matches. Is the Swaro a good scope, sure, is it worth the money, debatable. My eyes are so crappy I can't see any better with them than with my Weaver Grand Slams. And I've tried when pig hunting at night with the Grand Slam and a Swaro, no difference for me. If you have young eyes with good regular vision it's possible they will be better, but the improvement is so lsight it's hard for anyone to really see it.

As someone else mentioned, getting the last 1% of perfomance often costs 90% of the total. It's the same with almost everything.

 

[MCMXI]

My experience with Swarovski thus far has been less than ideal. I recently bought a Laser Guide range finder for $1000 based on the reviews that I'd read (some from members of this board). The first one arrived and the ranging button was broken i.e. stuck down. I sent it back and got a replacement about 10 days later. I was up at 11,000 feet last week ranging various objects with good but not amazing results, but on my way down the mountain, the ranging button got harder and harder to push. By the time I was at 7000 feet the button was stuck down again. This is obviously a major design flaw that Swarovski hasn't bothered to address. That range finder is now back at Swarovski USA but then it's on to Austria to get repaired. This is a brand new $1000 device with a $1 button. The only good news is that Swarovski is going to send me a loaner to use for the 3 months that it takes them to fix mine. I've tried to find out if the repaired unit will have a different/better button but at this point I'm still in the dark on that one.

So, based on my experience with Swarovski, I don't think I'll even consider buying a Swarovski scope. There are too many good scope makers out there with proven track records and I can send my Mark 4s back to Oregon for LIFE and get them back within a couple of weeks if need be. So far only one of six has had to go back, and that was to remove dust from the reticle and now it's perfect. I don't know what the turnaround would be on a US Optics, Nightforce or PR but I bet it's less than 3 months!! My Mark 4s have been and continue to be outstanding and my next "tactical" scope will be a US one for sure and maybe even another Leupold neener: Skoghund). As for legendary German/Austrian optics ... .... there's no difference in clarity across the whole field of view between the Swarovski, Zeiss or Mark 4s with all three having excellent glass. There is a difference in the way all three filter (attenuate/accentuate) the incoming light ... the Mark 4s are the most natural.

 

[taliv]

interesting 1858. sorry to hear about your experience. my swarovski rangefinder also had to go back to europe for repairs (electrical issue, wouldn't turn on) but the 99% of the time it has been working, it is FAR, FAR superior to any other range finder i've used.

i had a swaro scope as well. good, not great.

but i REALLY want one of the swaro z6i 1-6x scopes. super impressed with them.

 

[MCMXI]

taliv, thanks ... and I'm starting to get the feeling that ALL Swarovski range finders make their way back to Austria at some point or another ... they're like little homing pigeons with really good eyes ... well, one good eye!!

A lifetime, transferrable warranty from a company that can service/repair their product in THIS country is becoming a big deal for me. I don't know what Swarovski's policy is for their scopes, but I doubt they have a loaner program for those. At least the Zeiss Conquest line is "made" in the USA so I assume it can be serviced/repaired in the US.

 

[scythefwd]

browning guy, I was talking benchrest and heavy shooters, where it is as much about the equipments ability as it is the shooter. If I am wrong please correct me, but I think the F class shoots do not use a rest and rely just as much on the shooters skill as it does the hardware.

Anyone know what the record holding gun for 1000 y group had on it?

 

[MCMXI]

but I think the F class shoots do not use a rest and rely just as much on the shooters skill as it does the hardware

You can look up the F-Class records HERE but there's no mention as to the caliber, rifle, scope etc.

Here are some F-Class rules that you might find interesting. Both Open Rifle and Target Rifle allow the use of front AND rear rests.

3.4 F-Class Rifle -

(a) F-Class Open Rifle (F-O) - A rifle restricted to a bore diameter no larger than .35 caliber. (Attention is
directed to safety fan limitations of various ranges. Individual ranges may further restrict ammunition). “Rail
guns” and positive mechanical methods of returning to the precise point of aim for the prior shot are not
permitted. Any safe, manually operated trigger is permitted. Any sighting system is permitted, but it must be
including in the rifle’s overall weight.
The provisions of Rules 3.16 and 3.16.1 apply to this definition.
(1) The rifle’s overall weight, including all attachments such as sights and bipod, must not exceed 10
kilograms (approximately 22 pounds). An “attachment” also includes any external object, other that the
competitor and apparel, which recoils or partially recoils with the rifle, or which is clamped, held, or
joined in any way to the rifle for each shot, or which even slightly raises with the lifting of the rifle from its
rest(s).
(2) The width of the rifle’s forend shall not exceed 76mm (approximately 3 inches).
(3) The rifle must be fired in the prone position from the shoulder of the competitor using rifle rests as
defined in Rule 3.4.1(a).

(b) F-Class Target (F-T/R) - A rifle restricted to the chambers of unmodified .308 Winchester/7.62mm NATO or
unmodified .223 Remington/5/56mm x 45 NATO cartridge cases. The rifle must be fired off a bipod, rigidly
attached to the rifle’s forend, and/or a sling. Any bipod, meeting the definition of a bipod, may be used but its
weight must be included in the rifle’s overall weight. Any safe, manually operated trigger is permitted. Any
sighting system is permitted , but it must be included in the rifle’s overall weight.
The provisions of Rules 3.16 and 3.16.1 apply to the definition.
(1) The rifle’s overall weight, including all attachments such as sights, sling and bipod, must not exceed 8.25
kilograms (approximately 18.15 pounds). An “attachment” also includes any external object, other than
the competitor and apparel, which recoils or partially recoils with the rifle, or which is clamped, held, or
joined in any way to the rifle for each shot, or which even slightly raises with the lifting of the rifle from its
rest/firing point.
(2) The rifle must be fired in the prone position from the shoulder of the competitor using rifle rests as
defined 3.4.1(b).

3.4.1 Rifle Rests -

(a) F-Class Open Rifle (F-O) - The rifle may be supported by any means which provide no positive mechanical
method for returning it to its precise point of aim for the prior shot. Subject to:
(1) No more than two rests may be used. If two rests are employed, they may not be attached to each other.
43
(2) The use of any form of a table is prohibited. Separate flat boards or plates not exceeding the dimensions
of the individual rests by two inches are allowed to be placed under the front and/or rear rests. See Rule
3.4.1(a)(1).
No leveling screws or protrusions are allowed on these boards or plates. They must be flat on the top
and bottom.
This discipline is a modification of high power prone shooting, not a form of bench rest and should not be
construed as such
Disabled competitors may apply to the NRA Protest Committee for appropriate dispensation.
The intent of this rule is to prevent the use of a table type device.
(3) A front rest may be employed for either the rifle’s fore-end of for the forward hand. If attached, clamped,
or held to the rifle, the front rest must be included in the rifle’s overall weight (Rule 3.4(a)).
(4) No portion of the rifle’s butt or pistol grip shall rest directly on the ground or on any hard surface.
Furthermore, any rear rest employed shall not be attached, clamped, or held onto the rifle in any
manner. Mechanically adjustable rear rests are not allowed.
(5) As an alternative to (3) or (4), the rifle may be rested on a simple central support such as a rolled jacket,
towel, blanket, or groundsheet, or upon a sandbag or beanbag.
(6) Any number and type of objects may be placed beneath each rest to compensate for variations in the
height of slope of the firing point or to reduce its rolling.
(7) The front rest or base may have up to three spiked feet which may be pressed into the ground by no
more than 50mm (approximately 2 inches) provided this causes no significant harm to the firing point.
(8) Rests may be adjusted after any shot to compensate for rest movement or settling. A sling may be used
in conjunction with the rest(s), but its weight will be included in the rifle’s overall weight (Rule 3.4(a)).

(b) F-Class Target Rifle (F-T/R) Rests - A bipod and/or sling are the only allowed front supports for the F-T/R
rifle. The rifle may be supported by a bipod and/or sling and a rear support which provide no positive
mechanical method for returning it to its precise point of aim for the prior shot. Subject to:
(1) The bipod and/or sling and rear support may not be attached to each other.
(2) The use of any form of a table is prohibited. Separate flat boards or plates not exceeding the dimensions
of the individual rests by two inches are allowed to be placed under the front and/or rear rests. In the
case of a bipod, the board or plate may not exceed the width of the bipod by 2", nor be more than 12"
front to rear. See Rule 3.4.1(a)(1).
No leveling screws or protrusions are allowed on these boards or plates. They must be flat on the top
and bottom.
This discipline is a modification of high power prone shooting, not a form of bench rest and should not be
construed as such
Disabled competitors may apply to the NRA Protest Committee for appropriate dispensation.
The intent of this rule is to prevent the use of a table type device.
(3) A bipod is a device with no more than two legs that touch the firing point. It must be rigidly attached to
44
the forend of the rifle. The bipod may have rigid or folding legs, and may be adjustable to compensate
for the uneven surface of the firing point.
(4) No portion of the rifle’s butt or forend shall rest directly on the ground or any hard surface. A rear rabbit
eared bag, small sandbag or a gloved hand may be used to support the rifle’s butt. Any rear support
employed shall not be attached, clamped or held to the rifle in any manner. The rear support may not be
fixed to or protrude into the firing point. Mechanically adjustable rear support is not allowed.
(5) Any number or type of objects may be placed beneath the bipod or rear support, to compensate for
variations in height or slope of the firing point.
(6) The bipod and rear rest may be adjusted after any shot to compensate for rest movement or settling. A
sling may be used in conjunction with the rest(s), but its weight will be included in the rifle’s overall
weight (Rule 3.4.(b)).

 

[scythefwd]

I stand corrected, you can use rests. Thanks 1858

 

[Uncle Mike]

.... and that's why Swarovski scopes are so expensive? hehehe

 

[Cannonball888]

The lenses are made from large diamonds.

 

[lykoris]

Blackops,

thanks for your concern but my vision is 20/20 and nothing leupold makes is even in the same league as swaro/zeiss/s&b.

I don't think much of nightforce either and I've played with three of their models.

we'll just agree to disagree.

 

[MCMXI]

nothing leupold makes is even in the same league as swaro/zeiss/s&b.

As an owner of products from three of the four brands mentioned (in bold), I don"t agree with that statement at all!! Your comment re Nightforce puts it all in perspective though.

 

[ArmedBear]

I don't remember seeing any Swaro's listed on the winners guns in the F or F-TR matches.

It may well be that you don't. They might not be found in matches all that much.

The Swarovskis' best attributes (true color and efficiency in low light) wouldn't be worth much for any kind of match shooting. Therefore, with a Swarovski you'd be paying for what doesn't matter (and foregoing features that do).

Serious birdwatchers like Swaro glass, because they care about color in low light.

I've had an opportunity to use their glass in a hunting situation where I cared about color in low light, and what I saw through it was truly amazing.

It's perfectly rational to say that the cost/benefit isn't there for you (I don't own a Swarovski scope, for that reason). I would get one if I had a real use; that would, however, be a sizable chunk of my play money for a long, long time.

What isn't rational (nor does it play well in Europe when heard from Americans) is the "I don't care about the difference, therefore there IS no difference!" mentality.

The 870 is a great shotgun in its own right. But it's not a Purdey. One can own and enjoy an 870, while recognizing and appreciating what goes into a gun like a Purdey that he won't (and may not even care to) own.

 

[Reid73]

Part - not all - of what accounts for the high price is "because people are willing to pay it". There's nothing wrong with that: Swarovski is in a profit-making business, has invested lots of time, money and hard work in establishing an excellent reputation, and there is no reason why it should not charge whatever the market is willing to bear.

is it really necessary?

If you have to ask, the answer is "no". You will almost certainly be satisfied with a Leupold, Zeiss Conquest, Nikon, etc.

we don't make the top of the line scopes, but we just know how to use them more proficiently than everyone else.

Please elaborate.

What isn't rational (nor does it play well in Europe when heard from Americans) is the "I don't care about the difference, therefore there IS no difference!" mentality.

The 870 is a great shotgun in its own right. But it's not a Purdey. One can own and enjoy an 870, while recognizing and appreciating what goes into a gun like a Purdey that he won't (and may not even care to) own.

YES!

 

[lykoris]

leupold gold ringed scopes have their glass sourced from asia(korea/japan) & europe. S&B have vertically integrated their entire operation to control everything that goes into their scope and in particular their glass.

there is a world of difference between a Leup mk iv (their flagship model) and a Zeiss Diavari &/or S&B PMII.

and perhaps you would care to elaborate by your last comment vis-à-vis nightforce

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

ArmedBear, how about this for a marketing slogan:

"Swarovski Riflescopes: When you absolutely, positively, have to know whether the wing stripe on the tweety bird is charteuse or pistachio in dusk light, BEFORE you kill it (and are willing to pay an extra $1,000 for this benefit)!"