S&B PMII, USO sn9, USO T.Pal

[ds1]

Thought I would pass a few comments on these three scopes I had on hand at the same time (USO sn9 10-42x58, USO T.Pal 5-25x58 and S&B PMII 5-5x56). This is not anything more than a few thoughts. Also the scopes at the time were not mounted on rifles. So the read is about worth what you paid for it.

 

I have used S&B PMII`s in one form or another for about may be 12 years – since the 4-16x50 was new out anyway and later several 5-25x56 PMII`s. So I feel I know this scope well.

 

The USO`s are new territory to me other than using a ST10 for a week or so about 10 years ago – I was quite impressed comparing it to my S&B. Now I have decided to make the “move” to USO scopes.

 

The first pic shows a size comparison of the scopes minus sunshades – if you add the 4” shade to the T.Pal it`s not that far short of the sn9.

 

 

Glass……well what do you really expect, all are excellent….the sn9 has an extra “wow” factor though, hard to explain, more of a feeling …….I focused on objects that I have used as test stuff before from 50m to +400m (eg a threaded bolt on a telegraph pole at 124m), a very slight edge TO MY EYES with the sn9 – sort of an impression of how distinct the threads on the bolt are. Sorry no resolution chart. Between the T.Pal and S&B I would say they were the same.

 

Parallax – from 90m all 3 scopes were parallax free and in clear focus (not had that experience with several NXS scopes). Advantage goes to S&B as they focus down to 10m.

 

Turrets – Between the T.Pal and S&B there are plus/minus to each – go for which “feature set” suits you – both the T.Pal and USO have 0.1 milrad on the scopes I have – I prefer the line spacing on the EREK of the USO – much easier to read, that also goes for the sn9. The zero stop is easier to set up on the S&B than the T.Pal and the S&B has a bit more elevation. The sn9 has no zero stop (but I will make up some delrin washers) adjustment increments – can be set to what your picatinny rail allows between about 1/20th moa to ½ moa adjustments, a very nice touch. Elevation – loads of it. Now my gripe with S&B turrets, (other than line spacing), the two grub screw system of holding the double turn turret on the elevation spindle sucks, it might have been ok on the smaller single turn turret, but I have had it slip on the double turn turret. The USO design of a single centre screw and plate is a better mouse trap. A gripe with the EREK turret – the knob keeps turning after the erector reaches it`s full travel (you can turn the knob but no erector movement).

 

S&B turrets also turn the opposite direction to nearly all (not including USMC ones) other turrets, so if going S&B I would only go S&B.

 

Reticle - second pics shows the T pal with Mil Scale Gap metric reticle and sn9 euro MOA ret both lit. The S&B has a P4 Fine reticle (no pic), though I have used P3 and P4 reticles also. The T.Pal reticle is about as thick as a P3 mildot and the Euro MOA on the sn9 about the same as the P4 Fine – may be a bit thinner at the same magnification. I prefer the USO reticles – they are more usable at low mag, in particular the T.Pal. I shoot movers at about 8x mag and can use the holdovers easier than the S&B P4 fine for that. If fact the Gap reticle is usable as a ranging reticle at any power – the S&B P4 Fine is little more than a cross up to 8x.

 

 

It is nice feature on the Euro MOA reticle to have both a MOA and Mil scale, especially since the turret adjustments can be set to either MOA or metric.

 

Lit Reticule – personal choice – USO have full lit reticles, S&B just the centre. Pro`s and cons with each. I prefer the feel and being able to dial in both directions with the USO lit reticle knob.

 

Of the three scopes I am warming to the sn9 the most, I like the system – I prefer the ERGO focus – targets are usually rise / fall type with no time to fine tune any parallax system – side or ergo, just to roughly set it before the targets pop-up. The sn9 needs to be set up with a long picatinny rail. Also as an external adjustment scope, depending on barrel profile and objective size 58mm or 80mm the picatinny rail may need to be quite heigh to gain max elevation from the system before the scope objective touches the barrel. I hope the sn9 will allow me to do away with the spotting scope. The only thing I would wish for on a sn-9 would be a rubber boot or gator that covers the external adjustment cell – to keep dust and crap off the micrometer threads.

 

Construction – well both have been torture tested on the hide so I`m not going to go there – other than to say that the USO scopes seem like baseball bats – a quality I like very much.

 

It also must be said that USO customer service is excellent – excellent and very helpful people when deciding on options etc. Rather than quote a company policy, they were willing to try and help as best they could to meet my needs – that is my experience.

 

David.

[Ronin]

Cheers for the write up David.

 

You don't realise how large the USO scopes are untill you compare them with the big Schmidt.

 

Reticules- like the dual MOA / Mil scale in the SN9, but if your not switched on, I guess it would be easy to get confused.

 

GAP ret is sweet.

 

Interesting point about lack of protection of the mike threads on the SN9, are they exposed for easy cleaning or just a design oversight - hell of a scope though.

 

Would you give update on impressions after you've mounted and used the USO's for a while - look forwards to that.

[Streeker59]

Thanks for the write up david.. That SN9 is a big mother.. Judging by the pics, it looks like it has a 1" tube, is that right?

[ds1]

Hi Ronin, for F Class stuff the fine cross may be better, The Euro MOA has the Mil Scale in the bottom right hand corner (see pic). It does look a bit fat at 42x - but really it`s proportional.

 

I will let you know if I prefer the 58mm version or 80mm version - at the moment I`m having some picatinny rails machined up for the AI rifles.

 

Streeker, tuube diameter is 30mm.

[Ronin]

How does the T-Pal and SN 9 compare weight wise with the PM11?

[ds1]

Both Uso`s are much heavier than the S&B.

 

I dont know the exact weight - but you can feel it when you pick them up.

 

The micrometer threads on the sn9 are substantial so I dont think there wouls be a problem with them, other than fine sand - may get a bit gritty.

[nemasis243]

Thats a great write up there mate , your a bit spoilt for choice with those bits of very impressive and very expensive toys on the table .

I picked up a USO scope some years ago but didnt not have an oppotunity to inspect it real detail .

You have a good advantage in the fact that you can compare one to another,theres nothing worse than looking though a scope and trying to compare it to another from memory.

Thanks that was interesting ,Andy

[eldon]

Nice write up, cheers for a good bit of info and well presented.

 

How do they compare on price?

[silentsoulsleave308holes]

I sure wish you hated the sn9 and fancied donated it to a good charity..............me

[ds1]

Eldon, the USO scopes were direct swaps for S&B PMII scopes, sdo no changed hands, except when I upgraded two sn9`s to 80mm objectives.

 

Silent, not a chance with the sn9`s mate - it`s strange how much I like the sn9`s over the TPal - the TPal is more tacticool but does not quite do it for me like the sn9`s.

 

A bit of a self reality here though, over the last 10 years or so I`ve been very happy with the S&B scopes. I did change on some what of a whim (or rather as the oportunity presented itself). I will know if it was really a good idea, I guess in a year or two, when I`ve had some experience with the USO scopes.

 

At the moment all I can say is they seem impressive - but then again I did not change from S&B with the expectation they would be worse scopes. Time will tell.

 

David.