IOR Scopes, your thoughts?

[David will]

I can only coment on what I own and use regularly often four or five times a week and to date I have no issues with my IORs.

Tracking on all three has always been without drama.

[ds1]

I have owned an IOR Crusader (sold it to Del). I have also been fortunate to own or at least use and compare many of the top brands except Tangent Theta, Steiner and exotics like Tracking Point. Much is personal preference and how it fits your application. FWIW I tested the IOR out to 800m on paper- tracked fine. I tested it throughout its elevation and windage range on an USO collimator - tracked fine. I compared its depth of field against my Kahles 624i (side by side)  - the IOR had more (better depth of field). At the magnification range of the IOR it’s hard to find another scope with that amount of internal elevation. Nightforce ATACR comes close with 100 moa  at 35x mag. More elevation and you are into a March Genesis or USO sn9 or Ivy mounts or a Charlie Tarac unit. Glass colour - IOR is brown, Khales is blue - personal preference. IOR has more edge distortion.

At the moment I use S&B, NF and Kahles. It will change - It always does.

Hate what the pros use argument. It ties you into their decision making process and procurement requirements which will have very little to do with the individual shooter - for example one U.K. police unit went down the process 10 years or so ago - ended up with Sako TRG 22 rifles and Leupold mil dot reticle scopes with moa turrets. At that time AI was in receivership so that would otherwise have been the logical choice. At the time Leupold  had a good LE rep. The mildot reticule was still newish tech and the predominantly middle age of the shooters - they were happier with 1/4 moa adjustments as it was more ( feet and inches) than metric crap - not how it works we all know but that was the perception and that fed into training time. So just looking at the kit does not give an insight into why (nor would many LR  308 target shooters choose to use their mandated 165 grain Nosler Accubond ammunition). There are similar stories in Czech LE procurements also.

[GT3_richy]

3 hours ago, MarinePMI said:

Here's an interesting read on scopes and their reliability...

Scope testing results

So they've had a total one IOR scope through their classes since starting recorded, am I reading that correct?

Shame it doesn't list the specific scope models.

[Popsbengo]

16 minutes ago, ds1 said:

I have owned an IOR Crusader (sold it to Del). ....

Hate what the pros use argument. It ties you into their decision making process and procurement requirements which will have very little to do with the individual shooter - for example one U.K. police unit went down the process 10 years or so ago - ended up with Sako TRG 22 rifles and Leupold mil dot reticle scopes with moa turrets. At that time AI was in receivership so that would otherwise have been the logical choice. At the time Leupold  had a good LE rep. The mildot reticule was still newish tech and the predominantly middle age of the shooters - they were happier with 1/4 moa adjustments as it was more ( feet and inches) than metric crap - not how it works we all know but that was the perception and that fed into training time. So just looking at the kit does not give an insight into why. There are similar stories in Czech LE procurements also.

You make a good point,  I was really thinking about the 'professional' end-user rather than the procurement service bureaucracy choices.  I guess on reflection the end-user doesn't get much choice in the military or police.   Sloppy use of 'professional' on my part.

I'll get my coat...

[ds1]

8 minutes ago, Popsbengo said:

You make a good point,  I was really thinking about the 'professional' end-user rather than the procurement service bureaucracy choices.  I guess on reflection the end-user doesn't get much choice in the military or police.   Sloppy use of 'professional' on my part.

I think that you have a very valid point though If it was say looking at what competitors use (excluding sponsorship). For example PRS blogs are data driven and you can save a lot of time copying what the best competitors are using. Some things are just supply driven too - would you really want a Brux barrel when Sassen are made in the U.K.?

[OSOK]

ds1 , I agree ... Elevation was king to me until I went down the Ivey route  ... Never got hung up on which had the best glass as everything I shot using an Atacr or IOR..... I'm convinced I could have done the same with the swfa . If glass is some peoples first requirement then to my eyes the only scope I've used that is on a par with the IOR would be a competition Nightforce with the Atacr edging the S&B.. BUT we all have different eyes . I only ever comment on gear I've owned or do own as anything else is hearsay or best guess .

Popsbengo , I don't get defensive over scope choice that's just a persons preference but trashing a brand when you don't own one and never have sticks in my throat . I had an 8-32 NXS many years ago and it had tracking Issues but I sent it back and Nightforce and they fixed the problem ... Does that make a scope brand poor , does it hell ... these things happen . If Steelcore hadn't sent me a PM2 I would never buy one as it doesn't tick the boxes I need in a scope ( 62 moa from a 34mm tube is really poor  ) even though I have to use them but that doesn't make it a poor scope.... just not my first choice . I have to disagree with you on opinions ... An opinion is worth more to me if it's from someone who's had one and used it .

OSOK

[Popsbengo]

14 minutes ago, OSOK said:

ds1 , I agree ... Elevation was king to me until I went down the Ivey route  ... Never got hung up on which had the best glass as everything I shot using an Atacr or IOR..... I'm convinced I could have done the same with the swfa . If glass is some peoples first requirement then to my eyes the only scope I've used that is on a par with the IOR would be a competition Nightforce with the Atacr edging the S&B.. BUT we all have different eyes . I only ever comment on gear I've owned or do own as anything else is hearsay or best guess .

Popsbengo , I don't get defensive over scope choice that's just a persons preference but trashing a brand when you don't own one and never have sticks in my throat . I had an 8-32 NXS many years ago and it had tracking Issues but I sent it back and Nightforce and they fixed the problem ... Does that make a scope brand poor , does it hell ... these things happen . If Steelcore hadn't sent me a PM2 I would never buy one as it doesn't tick the boxes I need in a scope ( 62 moa from a 34mm tube is really poor  ) even though I have to use them but that doesn't make it a poor scope.... just not my first choice . I have to disagree with you on opinions ... An opinion is worth more to me if it's from someone who's had one and used it .

OSOK

👍👍

[MarinePMI]

5 hours ago, GT3_richy said:

So they've had a total one IOR scope through their classes since starting recorded, am I reading that correct?

Shame it doesn't list the specific scope models.

Yep.  Just one...out of 150 students.  Kind of tells you something just by that.

As to bashing the brand, I don't think that's what I was doing.  I was just pointing out that there are better, proven, reliable options.  If that hurts someone's feelings because I don't own one, well...those are someone's feelings.  I don't need to own a Hipoint pistol to know they're not a top of the line pistol either.

To say you have to own something to know something's deficiencies is just utter crap.  But again, just my opinion...

 

[Horse Guy]

I have a bunch of scopes on various rifles including Nightforce, Schmidt and Bender and Swarovski.  All of which are great scopes and I am really happy with all of them.  I have just completed a new rifle build that is mostly intended for PRS, but I also intend to shoot a bit of F - Class with it too.  I was originally intending putting a Kahles K525 on it, but while I was looking I got the offer of an IOR Crusader and Spuhr mount both barely used at a silly price.  The extra mag would be useful for F - Class and the scope had very good reviews from people that I respect - so I bought it.

I have now had it a year and it has been on my FTR .308 and 6 Creedmoor PRS rifle.  I have shot with it out to 1200 yards.  While I prefer the reticule on my Nightforce, the glass on the IOR is excellent and easily as good as my Swarovski.  I am not a massive fan of the parallax adjustment, but it is somethng you get used to and I understand why IOR put it there.  The Crusader 2.0 has side parallax, but I have it on good authority that it is not quite as good optically as the original.

I never have had any particular reason to question the tracking, but had seen some stuff online about IOR's and poor tracking.  The only thing I did find to back this up was the Snipers Hide scope tracking tests.  However that test only covered one IOR Valdada that looked like it did pretty badly, but the fact that there was only one tested meant that the results were far from conclusive as far as IORs were concerned.  There were a few instances of individual scopes being well off.  For me it did look like those particular scopes probably had been damaged in some way prior to the test.  My main conclusion was that Kahles looked really good, but I was surprised at the variation found in some other brands.

Nevertheless I decided to find out for myself and have now tested my IOR for tracking over 15 mils (enough for 1400m with the Creedmoor).  The first test was carried out at 10 m indoors with the scope clamped to a bench. The second test was shot on a tall target outdoors at 100m.  The indoor test was probably more precise and it was easier to check the full range of scope travel multiple times to ensure the scope returned to the same place every time.  I am happy to say that in my indoor test the tracking was absolutely flawless and this was confirmed in the shooting test.  

I obvioulsy cannot comment on the performance of other IOR scopes, but my one works as it should.  In Europe at least they pretty well regarded and havent heard a lot of negative comments from anyone that has a decent amount experience with them.  Anyway I hope this is of some help.

 

 

 

 

[Squidliam]

6x24x56 ior vulcan suffers with tunneling at 6-10 mag

However eye box is largwr at higher mag

Have one side by side with a vortex viper pst gen2 5x25x50 at the moment.

Other than the weight and turrets i genuinely prefer every part of the IOR.

All down to personal prefrence and by no means bashing the vortex. Its lovely.

[David will]

Good glass, reliable dialing, faultess operation on all my IORs . If I need another quality scope and prices are still competitive I will get another.

I like to think that my choise of purchases are based on function and value and certainly not on brand snobbery. If my eyes and wallet find a beter product then Things may be different but name and popularity wont get my custom.