Counter Sniper Scopes

[dksac2]

I am new to this site, so please don't blow me off. I am actve on other sites and was the Gunsmithing moderator on Savageshooters site for some years and a gunsmith for many more years.
I have a very good Gunsmith friend (I'm now retired) who builds some of the best long range rifles available.
He has sold quite a few Counter Sniper scopes lately.
The people who have bought them have been very impressed.
He sells only high dollar or high quality for the money scopes and many of his customers own more than one brand of quality scope.
He has yet to have a Counter Sniper scope come back and has got good feedback from the shooters who bought them.
I see all kinds of comments on this site as well as others putting the Counter Sniper scope down.
I have also seen some reviews written by Ex Snipers and excellent benchrest shooters who own Night Force as well as other scopes that are very impressed with the Counter Sniper.
I see comments about them being China junk.
In fact the lenses are made and ground in Germany and fully coated and the first focal plain retical works excellent as does the side focus.
I'm pretty sure but not positive the scopes are made in America (I could be wrong on this, but I'm not wrong on the lenses)
They are a very good scope for the money.
It just seems funny that just about every negitive comment comes from someone who does not own one, let alone looked through or used one.
People start rumors that something is junk and the next guy repeats the rumor, especially a new product.
Shooters are a funny bunch who will put down anything that they do not own. You see it all the time.
Bottom line is unless you have bought, tested and shot a Counter Sniper scope (or any other brand), you have no business being an armchair shooter who comments on something that you really know nothing about.
If you have bought one and are honest and have given the scope a good work out, then what you say holds water.
I'm not affiliated with the company in any way, don't sell them and am not even trying to advertise for my friend who is one of the few true Master Rifle Smiths left.
I'm just tired of seeing something that really is a very good scope put down without people having actually used one.
Everyone here and on AR-15 loves the Millet scopes on their Black Rifles. I have one on my rifle.
I like it a lot, but do I think it is as great as many make it out to be, NO.
It's a darn good scope, especially for the money and I have no plans of changing it out.
But I have to be honest, it's a great scope, but not the best. There are other scopes out there just as good or better and the Millet is made in China.

Bottom line, if you have used and tested and want to put an unbiased review on the net about the item that you yourself used, I'm all for it. Positive or Negitive. I will read it and give it crediable weight.
Just don't post about something you have not tested yourself.
It makes you look less than intellagent to those who have used the product that you are talking about.
Is the Counter Sniper the best scope on the market ? No, but it's a darn good scope that works and holds up (many are shot with the .338 Lapua).
For the money, it is an excellent deal.
Go ahead and flame away, but you know I'm right about the arm chair shooters and Gunsmiths. I delt with them all my life.
I was a darn good gunsmith for a lot of years. Not a Master gunsmith, but a darn good one. I know what I'm talking about.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. It applies to more than just the Counter Sniper scope. I wrote this with no intention of putting anyone down. I'm not that type of person. I just want people to think and post about what they really know and have experienced, not what they heard from Joe Schmoe.
My gunsmith friend asked me to check what people had written about the Counter Sniper scope.
He has been so busy that he has not had the chance to test the scope as much as he usually tests everything he does or sells.
He was concerned that he might be selling somrthing that was not worth the money or didn't work as advertised.
He has called and talked with many of the people who have bought them and so far they are very satisfied and as I said, not one has come back. He is the type of person who would take it back and refund the money if the shooter was not satisfied.
I did some more checking. The tube is made and all parts are made and assembled in the USA except the glass, which is ground and coated in Germany, the turrets are made in Japan. Japan makes the turrets for just about every scope that I know of because they make the best turrets. That is the only reason they cannot put "Made in the USA" on the scope. It's a great scope. It is about the best value for the money on the market today.
My best to all.

Best Regards, John K

[WC145]

Never tried a Counter Sniper scope but I did try a set of their "tactical" rings when I first mounted my Millett DMS-1 on my Bushmaster patrol rifle. The Counter Sniper rings are garbage, absolute crap that didn't last through shooting one full mag. I sent them back and got a set of Burris Extreme rings and have not had a bit of trouble.

Based on my personal experience, I will never waste my money on another Counter Sniper product.

[dksac2]

O K , Good, you actually used the rings, you are not just a talker.
What exactly went wrong with them or failed ? Would you please give a better explanation. I've never just bought the rings, how much do they cost?
The DMS-1 is a pretty nice optic. I have one on my Mini 14. The Mini is death to a lot of scopes, but the Millet has held up and I really like the retical.

Thanks, John K

[WC145]

$45 from Midway, the nuts on both bases stripped, could not hold the torque. Yes, they were torqued per manufacturer specs. Also, one or two of the screws holding the rings together stripped as well.
They looked good on paper and had decent reviews but on actual use they were junk.

Counter Sniper 30mm Tactical Picatinny-Style Rings Matte MediumProduct #: 140082| Manufacturer #: DOH316
http://media.midwayusa.com/ProductImages/Medium/140082.jpg

Bought these instead and never looked back, $59 they're a deal at that price -

Burris 30mm Xtreme Tactical Picatinny-Style Rings Matte Medium Package of 2Product #: 381092| Manufacturer #: 420162
http://media.midwayusa.com/ProductImages/Medium/381092.jpg

[dksac2]

Thanks for the reply. I know that my gunsmith friend has had zero problems with stripping of the hold down nuts or screws. I wonder if they have changed the bolts or studs. I know he uses a torque wrench when torquing anything to do with a scope mount or rings.
I'll pass that info onto him so that he is aware and see if he is having any reports of problems. The only thing that I can figure is that they changed the parts they were using because he has mounted a lot of the rings with no problems.
I checked almost all of the gun web sites to see what people were saying about the Counter Sniper products and the real shooters who actually have used their products have reported no problems at all, that's what makes me think they may have changed their rings.
I'm not trying to call anyone out, only trying to find out any problems people have had as my friend does not want to put anything on a rifle that will not hold up.
He has a very good reputation and does not want to loose it due to problems with any product he puts on a firearm. As the Counter Sniper products are newer on the market, reports such as yours help.
I have used the Counter Sniper scope and rings on my Savage in 338 Lapua and am very happy with the scope.
Thanks again for your input.

I did some more checking today. The Counter Sniper rings are made by Burris.
Nobody has anything bad to say about their rings. As far a stripping out the nut and screws, the nut gets torqued to 45 inch pounds, the screws to 25 inch pounds. My friend has put more than a few C.S. rings on with no problems, so it causes mw to wonder why you had problems.

Best Regards, John K

[KMO]

He was concerned that he might be selling somrthing that was not worth the money or didn't work as advertised.

Why would a guy feel this way about his own product? I don't get it.

[mikejonestkd]

Here's a few reviews/ comments:

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1301952

http://opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=11448&PN=1

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=410088

[WC145]

I'm thinking the Sniper's Hide thread pretty much says it all about Counter Sniper. Those guys don't pull any punches and if something works they'll give it it's due but if it's a POS trying to passed off as the real deal they'll let you know that in no uncertain terms.

[azredhawk44]

Sigh...

My dad went to the gun show a few months ago, dead-set on buying a "sniper" scope for his rifle.

Came across one of these fugly things and all the wheels in his head got wound-up in excitement at the $400 price tag with illumination, variable magnification, adjustable parallax and scope turrets along with the other bogus BS.

I looked through it and it was hazy in comparison to my Leupold FX-II 4x33 fixed power.

I tried my worst to get him to accept one of two Truths:
1. TANSTAAFL
2. YGWYPF

You don't get clear glass and robust adjustment mechanisms and reliable electronics in a $400 scope. Something ALWAYS gives. And it's never the same thing.

Oh, well. All his shooting is from a bench, anyways. He doesn't hunt, he doesn't "snipe", he doesn't engage in long distance shooting. 300 yards will probably be his maximum, ever. He changes ammo brands every time he goes out, so all he ever gets to do is chase his zero around for a range session.

Wish I had that Sniper's Hide article earlier this year.

[dksac2]

This guy is not making the scopes. He is a gunsmith and his customers are requesting the scopes. If they are having problems with the scopes, he doesn't want to sell them at all. He makes custom rifles.
Customer service, not letting the customer buy something they won't be happy with later.
He asked me to check people's thoughts on them as he is very besy. I told him that I would check and see what people were saying.
OK, I looked at the reviews. The scopes I have handled don't have the crappy adjustments talked about or the other problems.
That's why I just a little confused. The scopes he has received have been tight, quality has been fine.
A lot of people post about something that they have never used because they heard something from a friend or read a bad review.
I've just been trying to find the ligitimate people from the armchair nijas.
I'm not trying to defend the Counter Sniper. So far knobs have been good, the clicks are repeatable, the mounts have been good. I think the scopes could be a little brighter myself. I'm thinking about 90% light transmission.
Problem is, scopes with a very wide range of power are usually not quite as bright as a scope with a more limited range of power adjustment.
I'm hearing some people who are experienced shooters praise them and others who don't like them.
Somewhere in the middle is the truth. That's what I'm looking for.
No need to turn this into some kind of weein contest. I'm just looking at all opinions, not defending the scopes.
I've seen some reviews. Now, does anyone out there have one on their rifle and what do you think, that's all I'm looking for.
If they are junk, my friend will quit selling them and stear people in a different
direction. He sells many different brands of proven quality scopes. The C.S. scope is not proven yet.
So far I've seen one review from you guys and a bunch of opinions from people who don't have one or have not used one for any period of time.
Can you now understand why I'm a little frustrated.
It's kind of like the guy who has an AR-15 and says Mini 14's are junk. Guess what, the new Mini's are pretty darn nice for the price. So in the case just cited, I'm not getting anything of real value because the person making that type of comment is jaded in their thought. Myself, I would not own a AR-15 because of reliability problems if not kept clean. I still think they are good rifles. They just have a shortcoming that I don't like. It doesn't make the AR a bad rifle. That is an honest opinion.


John K

[KMO]

This guy is not making the scopes. He is a gunsmith and his customers are requesting the scopes. If they are having problems with the scopes, he doesn't want to sell them at all.

Well then...in light of the above posts, as well as the linked posts, I think it's safe to tell your gunsmith friend to find a better optic to sell to his customers.

[dksac2]

That's quite possible. And, you do get what you pay for. They are not getting $1000, $1200 or $1500 for them.
What I'm not getting is opinions from people who have bought and used one.
The one review appears very jaded as I have not seen the problems that the author of the review saw.
I think I'll let my friend know what I have found to be true, false and in between, suggest he takes one out and beats the crap out of it and see if it still works and give it a good work out. He can then put it side by side with a scope in the same price range and compare sharpness and light transmission.
I put one on my 338 Lapua and it worked great, held POI and did what a scope is supposed to do. I thought it could have been a little sharper and brighter, but it's not a $1000 scope.
I have left my opinion out up to this point becuse I wanted to here what others who really had one had to say.
Will I buy the scope and keep it on my 338. No, but thats me.
For the price, it's not a bad scope. There are better scopes, but nothing that much better when you put scopes of the same power range side by side in the same price range (Something I have not done, but a customer did and liked the C.S.).
As said earlier, no one has brought one back or complained. That means something.
The wholesale price on them is not all that high and I think their advertising is pretty bad. The advertising make it appear to those in the know that they should be suspicious of the scope. Really bad ad in my book.

I guess that I should add that I'm a retired gunsmith and at one time or another have had customers bad mouth every firearm, optic, ammo etc. ever made. That's why I'm a suspicious and believe only half of what I see and little about what I read. How many people here like Leapold scopes ? I think they are pretty good scopes. I've had more than a few people tell me they were all junk and the only good scope was a Nikon etc.
In the end, opinions are just like rear ends, everybody's got one:confused:;)
Thanks guys.

Best regards to all and thanks to all, John K

[WC145]

Super Sniper scopes seem to be one of the best deals going as far as cost vs quality. A gunsmith and rifle builder I deal with likes Swift scopes, he puts them on his own guns.

[dksac2]

When you compare brightness and sharpness to a high quality fixed power scope, the fixed power scope will always look better than a scope that has a wide magnification range, it's not a fair test.
If you want to compare, get two scopes with the same range of magnification, it will give you a true picture.
If both scopes have the same price range, puple exit size, glass and magnification range then you know that you are getting a true comparison.
Comparing a fixed power scope to one with a wide magnification range will tell you absolutly nothing.
If you have done the above, then you know for sure. Otherwise, you are just blowing smoke.
Am I a Rifleman ? I'm a decent shot, but would not put myself in the same class as person who shoots nothing but long range for pure accuracy or Camp Perry type shooters. I have always been a better handgun shooter. That's because I was a LEO for 15 years and practiced at least twice a week with handguns. I retired in 1993 and we only had handguns and shotguns available to use in our units. We had rifles at the station, but the training was not near as intense with the rifles and was more in the 100 yd on in range.
I have a bad back and am not near as steady as I would need to be to be truly competitive. I get opinions from people who have used rifles that I have built for them (I'm retired now) or rifles that have been built by my gunsmith friend who is a true Master Riflesmith.
I was a darn good smith, but not a Master. I pretty much only listen to the shooters who are no BS stone good shooters of different types long range shooting.
One of the Savage rifles just built by my friend just shot several 5 shot groups at no more than 1/2" at 250 yards. Now that is what I consider to be a good shooter. I know I could never shoot that good and neither could most of the people on this site.

Best Regards, John K

[Zak Smith]

We've run and shot about 10 field-style practical long-range matches per year since 2004 and nobody has shown up with a Counter Sniper. Most newbies are smart enough to show up with Leupolds and NFs, although many use scopes even better than those.

[dksac2]

Not surprised for two reasons. One is price, name recconition and brand name.
Most people don't want to put something on their rifle that others will make fun of or put down, and we all know that there are only several brands that you can buy that will not get you razzed by the other shooters.
Second reason, the C.S scopes have not been out for long. They are the new kid on the block.
Price is always a big consideration. Generally speaking the really high priced brand name optics are going to be the best and that's what most of the top shooters show up with, but what about the guy who can't afford a high priced piece of glass but still wants to compete ?.
I'm still not saying the C.S. is the best scope, but put two scopes with identical (or near as possible) specs, power range and price side by side and compare.
Try whichever looks to be the best, it just might be. Might be the C.S. or it might be the politically correct brand.
Many shooters (not all) can be real snobs when it come to equipment. Remember when you could bring nothing but a Remington in a bolt rifle shoot ?
Used to be you got laughed right off the range with a Savage, not anymore.

Best Regards, John K

[Zak Smith]

New kid on the block? Not really, they've been around since 2007 at least. The Premier Heritage has only been out for a fraction of that time but is already common at matches.

Match shooters will generally use what they can to give them an advantage, even if they think they might be laughed at-- however, if a scope is truly better, then the competitors will probably want to learn about it not laugh at it.

Also, it looks like the majority of the CS scopes have 1/8 MOA knobs which is too fine for practical use. Many of their scopes have a quoted 20-25 MOA adjustment range which is laughable too little (a few do quote 60 MOA, which is still on the low side).

[Zak Smith]

I noticed you edited your post and changed it quite a bit.

As for snobbery, I have found that practical shooters are just that, practical, and won't begrudge someone showing up and trying what he has, provided that person is safe. They are also very helpful regarding both technique and what equipment will allow the newbie to avoid whatever problems he's having.

[dksac2]

Point well taken, but 1/8th" adjustments can be a real advantage at very long ranges.
You are right about a lot of the shooters as to snobbery, but I have heard more than a few comments make behind someone's back. Most shooters are prettty darn good people, that's why I said some, not all.
Almost all shooters are willing to help a newbe which speaks very well about the shooting sport.
I'm not trying to push C.S. scopes on anyone. I don't use one myself.
It just bothers me that when something new comes out, it seems to get attacked until someone has some good results with it, then it gets accepted.
Originally, I was just trying to find out what people thought about the C.S. scopes.
Almost all of the answers that I got were from people who never owned or used one. The one review that was posted may have had some truths in it, but said the turrets were poorly made, not repeatable and junk.
I know that not to be true as I have examined a bunch of C.S. scopes and shot with one. The turrets have been great and were repeatable.
The scope held it's zero. Could have been a little brighter and clearer, but they do have a very long magnification range and a lot of features for the price.
It was the junk comments in the review that make me think it was a jaded review by someone who just didn't like the scope.
I will end this here, as I'm not trying to defend the C.S. scopes.
I was only trying to get real opinions, which I got very few of.
As to shooters, they are the best people in the world, but some are snobs as in any sport. Thank God that most arn't.
Thank you all for your responses. I hope that you see what I was getting at and why I was a little frustrated at many of the responses.
My final thoughts is that I would not use one in a match, but it might not be a bad scope for the casual shooter who wants the features offered by the C.S. scope at a lower price than other scopes with the same basic features.
I only wanted the truth.

Best regards, John K

[Zak Smith]

The problem with 1/8 adjustments is you need so many of them to get to those long ranges where they would allegedly help.

1/4 MOA clicks are sufficient for 1000-yard practical or F-class shooting-- to win any of those matches.

I've at 1500-2000 yards using 0.1 mrad (0.34 MOA) clicks and smaller clicks would not provide any advantage.

[dksac2]

You are correct. But I 'm talking about shooters who are not match shooting, only trying for the best shots they can make. One guy I know likes shooting at 3000 yards. He does not use a C.S. scope, he had to have a scope specially made as any regular scope would not adjust as needed for that range, even with a base with a lot of built in MOA.
It was just an observation or thought that a finer adjustment could be an advantage for the shots at 2000 yds plus.

JK

[Zak Smith]

By your own logic the circumstances where the 1/8 MOA clicks of the CS would be appropriate (not that I agree), the scope is not appropriate anyway; thus, that argument does not help the legitimacy of 1/8 MOA clicks on the CS.

By the way, if we use a .338 LM at 2100 yards as an example, you'd have to be able to judge wind better than 1/6th of one mph to make a 1/8th MOA click meaningful. Likewise for elevation, a 1/4 MOA click could get you to within 2.75" vertical at 2100 yards, while a 1/8 MOA click could get you to within 1.4". In my opinion, this effectively refutes the argument for 1/8 MOA clicks using extreme long range as the application.

But a scope with even 60 MOA usable elevation isn't sufficient for extreme range shooting.

-z

[dksac2]

I cannot disagree with your logic, especially if the scope does not have the MOA range that would allow for longer shots. Short of having a base with a lot of extra MOA built in, the 1/8" clicks would be more time consuming than they would be worth. As I have stated, I do not shoot long range compitition.
You appear to have a lot of experience in that type of shooting, so I will defer to your experience.
Thank You for your replies. I hate to have a day go by without learning something.

Best Regards, John K

[dksac2]

A final word and opinion of the Counter Sniper scopes
Two Marine Scout Snipers were in the shop today. Both of these guys the real deal with a lot of combat experience.
Both shoot at nothing less than 1000 yards when range shooting.
Their opinion on the C.S. scope, which they have both used.
1. Are there better long range scopes, yes. Are there better long range scopes for the same money that the C.S. scopes sell for, No.
2. The turrets are very well made, repeatable and as good as anything on the market.
3. They are as bright and clear as any scope that has the same magnification range, puple exit etc, in other words, scopes that are the same mechanically the same and in the same price range.
4 They have (except for the cheapest) a front focal plane retical. If you don't
know the advantage of that, you don't know much about target scopes.
5. They are mechanically well made, hold up to rough use and hard shooting weapons.

These guys have been there, done that. I trust their opinions and know that they not only talk the talk, but walk the walk.
For the price, if you can't afford the best, the Counter Sniper scope is a very good deal and will hold up and do what it is supposed to do. There is not a better long range scope in the same price range.
That is the bottom line that I got from two of America's best.
I trust their opinions. If I was looking for a good long range target scope and had less than $1000. to spend, I would now buy a C.S scope with no hesitation.

Best regards, John K

[Rob228]

That is interesting, all of the USMC snipers that I work with say the exact opposite.

You said you don't use one, then you said you had one on your .338 Lapua.

Can I see a picture of your .338?

[Morgoroth]

They have (except for the cheapest) a front focal plane retical. If you don't
know the advantage of that, you don't know much about target scopes.

That's me. Actually I don't know much about any type of scope.
I searched around and found out the difference between a front and rear plane reticule, but I could not really find anything about why one would be better than the other.

So what is the practical difference there?

[Zak Smith]

Full explanation

http://demigodllc.com/photo/AI-AWSM/icon/A100_1910_img.jpg
article | Practical Long-Range Rifle Shooting, Part II - Optics http://demigodllc.com/icon/extwh3.png (http://demigodllc.com/articles/practical-long-range-rifle-shooting-optics/)