Tactzone Scopes

[ehntr]

What i have read on the Zeiss, they be great optics. Someone did a review on them on CT. Said that you ended up at high end magnafication usin t on real fast crossbows 380 fps on up

I'd like to see the new Zeiss Xbow scope too. I've got a Zeiss Conquest on a rifle and a Leupold VX3 on another rifle. Both same objective and tube size. Zeiss is noticeably clearer and brighter.

[Kegbelly]

I'm ok with the tact zone. I'm still shooting the one that came with my 380, and I thought it was a decent enough scope that I bought another one from a forum member to have as a backup. Of course there is better glass out there, but let's be realistic here... I'm shooting at a MAX 50 yards at a game animal, and I don't need $1000 glass to do that, or even $500 glass. If my target is within rock-throwing distance, I don't see a need for real expensive glass. For hunting, I don't need it. It would be nice but I think it's overkill. My TZ has held dead zero since day one and I can stick arrows in a dime size dot out to 40 yards all day long, so it does what I need a scope to do. If I were target shooting at 100+ yards I might have a different opinion but the TZ works for what I do with a crossbow.
We could get into the whole light-gathering argument, but IMHO if I need that much extra light gathering capability to shoot in low light, I'm past legal light anyhow. I fell into that trap with rifle scopes, plunked down a bunch of $$ to set my favorite rifles up with new VX3 50mm's, ya know what? The 40mm looks just as good to my eye, the human eye can only take in so much light, anything beyond that is just wasted $$ and the wow factor. The extra clarity and sharpness that comes with better glass is great, the clearer the better, but again, considering the maximum range I'll take a shot at, I don't see a need for it, I'm trying to hit a deer or a hog in that sweet spot right behind the shoulder, not count hairs at 300 yards. My .02.

[ehntr]

I'm ok with the tact zone. I'm still shooting the one that came with my 380, and I thought it was a decent enough scope that I bought another one from a forum member to have as a backup. Of course there is better glass out there, but let's be realistic here... I'm shooting at a MAX 50 yards at a game animal, and I don't need $1000 glass to do that, or even $500 glass. If my target is within rock-throwing distance, I don't see a need for real expensive glass. For hunting, I don't need it. It would be nice but I think it's overkill. My TZ has held dead zero since day one and I can stick arrows in a dime size dot out to 40 yards all day long, so it does what I need a scope to do. If I were target shooting at 100+ yards I might have a different opinion but the TZ works for what I do with a crossbow.
We could get into the whole light-gathering argument, but IMHO if I need that much extra light gathering capability to shoot in low light, I'm past legal light anyhow. I fell into that trap with rifle scopes, plunked down a bunch of $$ to set my favorite rifles up with new VX3 50mm's, ya know what? The 40mm looks just as good to my eye, the human eye can only take in so much light, anything beyond that is just wasted $$ and the wow factor. The extra clarity and sharpness that comes with better glass is great, the clearer the better, but again, considering the maximum range I'll take a shot at, I don't see a need for it, I'm trying to hit a deer or a hog in that sweet spot right behind the shoulder, not count hairs at 300 yards. My .02.

I'm with ya Keg.......the distances we shoot at, the best German glass is not necessary. TactZone has never let me down. A dependable scope is needed, not necessarily the best glass. Maybe I have a horseshoe strategically placed, but no scope has ever let me down. Never owned a Redfield though..........sorry Mike

[DaveShooter]

I'm ok with the tact zone. I'm still shooting the one that came with my 380, and I thought it was a decent enough scope that I bought another one from a forum member to have as a backup. Of course there is better glass out there, but let's be realistic here... I'm shooting at a MAX 50 yards at a game animal, and I don't need $1000 glass to do that, or even $500 glass. If my target is within rock-throwing distance, I don't see a need for real expensive glass. For hunting, I don't need it. It would be nice but I think it's overkill. My TZ has held dead zero since day one and I can stick arrows in a dime size dot out to 40 yards all day long, so it does what I need a scope to do. If I were target shooting at 100+ yards I might have a different opinion but the TZ works for what I do with a crossbow.
We could get into the whole light-gathering argument, but IMHO if I need that much extra light gathering capability to shoot in low light, I'm past legal light anyhow. I fell into that trap with rifle scopes, plunked down a bunch of $$ to set my favorite rifles up with new VX3 50mm's, ya know what? The 40mm looks just as good to my eye, the human eye can only take in so much light, anything beyond that is just wasted $$ and the wow factor. The extra clarity and sharpness that comes with better glass is great, the clearer the better, but again, considering the maximum range I'll take a shot at, I don't see a need for it, I'm trying to hit a deer or a hog in that sweet spot right behind the shoulder, not count hairs at 300 yards. My .02.

I'm with ya on this one ole buddy for sure.- As I too am not shooting a Sniper Rifle or scope at more than 20 to 40 yds tops with an x-bow....

[bubba]

Crossbow scopes, rifle scopes... The subject can get intense. Everyone has there opinions, and that's fine. It really comes down to personal preference, If the Excalibur line of scopes works for you, then by all means... No problem.. Your right they should work most of the time, and at ranges of 60 yards or less they work fine...To each his own.. But for me, and a few others out there, even though the ranges are shorter, better glass is preferred, and can be achieved at about the same cost. I'm not talking about U.S. optics, or German, or high end Japanese, but just better glass than what is in Excalibur out sourced optics.. And that is there in a number of options for the same money or close, Leupold, Nikon, Hawke to name a few.. Again to each there own..

[ehntr]

Magnification is overrated

[racking up points]

I'm ok with the tact zone. I'm still shooting the one that came with my 380, and I thought it was a decent enough scope that I bought another one from a forum member to have as a backup. Of course there is better glass out there, but let's be realistic here... I'm shooting at a MAX 50 yards at a game animal, and I don't need $1000 glass to do that, or even $500 glass. If my target is within rock-throwing distance, I don't see a need for real expensive glass. For hunting, I don't need it. It would be nice but I think it's overkill. My TZ has held dead zero since day one and I can stick arrows in a dime size dot out to 40 yards all day long, so it does what I need a scope to do. If I were target shooting at 100+ yards I might have a different opinion but the TZ works for what I do with a crossbow.
We could get into the whole light-gathering argument, but IMHO if I need that much extra light gathering capability to shoot in low light, I'm past legal light anyhow. I fell into that trap with rifle scopes, plunked down a bunch of $$ to set my favorite rifles up with new VX3 50mm's, ya know what? The 40mm looks just as good to my eye, the human eye can only take in so much light, anything beyond that is just wasted $$ and the wow factor. The extra clarity and sharpness that comes with better glass is great, the clearer the better, but again, considering the maximum range I'll take a shot at, I don't see a need for it, I'm trying to hit a deer or a hog in that sweet spot right behind the shoulder, not count hairs at 300 yards. My .02.

A $1000 bow is only as good as the $50 scope that you look through IMO. But everybody has their own opinions, preferences and applications when it comes to selecting the scope that suits the shooter.

I'm happy that your TZ has held up, Keg. My dad and my brother both use them and they have had good luck with them too. You have a backup and that's a solid plan. The fact is though that this line of scopes in particular was plagued with issues and many of those came to light on this forum from reliable, long-standing members: not holding zero, inconsistent windage and elevation adjustments, fogging, lenses falling out (etc)... It's reliability and quality is poor, even by Excalibur scope standards. I would never be 100% confident in my setup using that equipment and confidence in your equipment breeds success.

So when I plunk down good money for a crossbow scope it's not so I can count a deer's whiskers at 200y, it's so I know it WILL work every single time I need it to. And yes, I do believe the extra $ spent on a scope brings that element of dependability and reliability and that is most important to me. The improved clarity and light transmission are just added bonuses.

But as I stated, to each his own.

[newbie]

I Had good louck with my first Tact, second failed mid season last year within a week of being mounted from new out of the box. I liked the Tactt but lost faith hense the Luepold sitting on my Micro.

[Kegbelly]

I'm ok with the tact zone. I'm still shooting the one that came with my 380, and I thought it was a decent enough scope that I bought another one from a forum member to have as a backup. Of course there is better glass out there, but let's be realistic here... I'm shooting at a MAX 50 yards at a game animal, and I don't need $1000 glass to do that, or even $500 glass. If my target is within rock-throwing distance, I don't see a need for real expensive glass. For hunting, I don't need it. It would be nice but I think it's overkill. My TZ has held dead zero since day one and I can stick arrows in a dime size dot out to 40 yards all day long, so it does what I need a scope to do. If I were target shooting at 100+ yards I might have a different opinion but the TZ works for what I do with a crossbow.
We could get into the whole light-gathering argument, but IMHO if I need that much extra light gathering capability to shoot in low light, I'm past legal light anyhow. I fell into that trap with rifle scopes, plunked down a bunch of $$ to set my favorite rifles up with new VX3 50mm's, ya know what? The 40mm looks just as good to my eye, the human eye can only take in so much light, anything beyond that is just wasted $$ and the wow factor. The extra clarity and sharpness that comes with better glass is great, the clearer the better, but again, considering the maximum range I'll take a shot at, I don't see a need for it, I'm trying to hit a deer or a hog in that sweet spot right behind the shoulder, not count hairs at 300 yards. My .02.

A $1000 bow is only as good as the $50 scope that you look through IMO. But everybody has their own opinions, preferences and applications when it comes to selecting the scope that suits the shooter.

I'm happy that your TZ has held up, Keg. My dad and my brother both use them and they have had good luck with them too. You have a backup and that's a solid plan. The fact is though that this line of scopes in particular was plagued with issues and many of those came to light on this forum from reliable, long-standing members: not holding zero, inconsistent windage and elevation adjustments, fogging, lenses falling out (etc)... It's reliability and quality is poor, even by Excalibur scope standards. I would never be 100% confident in my setup using that equipment and confidence in your equipment breeds success.

So when I plunk down good money for a crossbow scope it's not so I can count a deer's whiskers at 200y, it's so I know it WILL work every single time I need it to. And yes, I do believe the extra $ spent on a scope brings that element of dependability and reliability and that is most important to me. The improved clarity and light transmission are just added bonuses.

But as I stated, to each his own.

I totally understand and agree with the sentiment. Maybe I got lucky and got one of the few good TZ's lol but I've not had a failure with it, therefore I do trust it. I've put many hundreds of shots on mine and it's held up. I'm not the guy who shoots something a few times and heads into the woods with it, I put my stuff to the test so I know without a doubt it's going to work when I need it to. I'm of the opinion that if it was going to break, it would have. If or when it fails I may sing a different tune.
Also agree that a bow (or rifle too) is only as good as the optics you put on it... to a point. Then the diminishing returns thing comes in and after a point it's just more money for more bling, JMHO. All this is said in context, whereas I'm shooting 50 yards tops with a crossbow, and so far the TZ has worked just fine for my needs.

[yooper_man]

I put the one on Kong that Steve sent to me. I can see the outside edge halo thru glass, but it is usuable scope. I suppose if'en you relied on the very edge of the scope glass to see what head gear a deer had it would be lackin in very good detail. In reality jus wait a second n the deer will entered the better glass area.Now i haven't sighted Kong in yet wid it. Unless it its the pits on yardage chevrons, i think it will be an ok scope. Naw it it ain't Nikon or Leupold nor Redfield but its not bad. Speakin of Redfield i returned mine fer repairs. $13.95 to ship it wid $200 in Ins. Won't take too many returns to Redfield before the shippin will cost more than than gettin it repaired. I reckon it left a real bad taste in my mouth fer the Redfield Revenge crossbow scopes. This i can tell ya, i won't buy anudder one in my lifetime of any model fer anything i have

I'm not sure what issue you had with the Redfield scope, but after you get it back I would suggest selling it. Once I lose confidence in an optic, I can never trust them again. I most certainly will not hunt with an inferior optic

I can't say I liked my Tact-Zone scope that came with my Matrix 355 package. I sold it brand new unused with the factory Excalibur rings.

My Leupold VX-I 2-7x33mm shotgun/muzzleloader scope is perfect for my Excalibur matrix 355 crossbow with Leupold rifleman detachable low rings. Leupold's deliver clear crisp low light gathering characteristics which is crucial in every hunting situation.

Andrew

[vixenmaster]

I put the one on Kong that Steve sent to me. I can see the outside edge halo thru glass, but it is usuable scope. I suppose if'en you relied on the very edge of the scope glass to see what head gear a deer had it would be lackin in very good detail. In reality jus wait a second n the deer will entered the better glass area.Now i haven't sighted Kong in yet wid it. Unless it its the pits on yardage chevrons, i think it will be an ok scope. Naw it it ain't Nikon or Leupold nor Redfield but its not bad. Speakin of Redfield i returned mine fer repairs. $13.95 to ship it wid $200 in Ins. Won't take too many returns to Redfield before the shippin will cost more than than gettin it repaired. I reckon it left a real bad taste in my mouth fer the Redfield Revenge crossbow scopes. This i can tell ya, i won't buy anudder one in my lifetime of any model fer anything i have

I'm not sure what issue you had with the Redfield scope, but after you get it back I would suggest selling it. Once I lose confidence in an optic, I can never trust them again. I most certainly will not hunt with an inferior optic

I can't say I liked my Tact-Zone scope that came with my Matrix 355 package. I sold it brand new unused with the factory Excalibur rings.

My Leupold VX-I 2-7x33mm shotgun/muzzleloader scope is perfect for my Excalibur matrix 355 crossbow with Leupold rifleman detachable low rings. Leupold's deliver clear crisp low light gathering characteristics which is crucial in every hunting situation.

Andrew

Its good that the Leupold has done well fer you. I haven't tried one as of yet. Like you say maybe wid the Redfield not holdin up as brand new i need to put it down the road. Of corse Redfield is made by Leupold so there fore i would have to say the Leupold would be the same in boat wid Redfield. Meanin i got screwed on the Redfield n i knowed its same Company i would be screwed buyin a new Leupold! Best thing i can do is save up my money fer a quality scope to go on my 405. Or if'en my 405 is a scope killer send it down the road fer sumpin else. I jus don't see any other Excal i want to purchase. Micro's seem to be great models but its not as fast as my 355, so thats not an option.

[bubba]

Vixenmaster, I am right on board with what you are saying, About your Redfield, I would send it down the road for sure.. And then there is the Leupold crossbones, They are both made side by side each other. I have looked down through a crossbones and they seem to be a good, fairly clear glass. Better than any Excalibur scope, at least to me. And you have all the Leupold fans here. I know Leupold makes some very good rifle scopes in fact I have three on various rifles I own.. Love them never had a problem.. I just don't feel the crossbones compares to there quality.. And I just cant justify buying a 600.00 vx1, or other high dollar scope to put on my crossbow, I know you have been around the block a few times. With that said. Give the Hawke XB-1 SR and the top of there line XB-30 Pro SR a look at.. They are both crossbow specific scopes with 100 yard lighted reticles and good to very good glass. And for me the most resonally priced.. Just my two nickels........

[vixenmaster]

Actually i have been readin all i can find on the Zeiss crossbow scope. I much rather spend my money on a decent scope, than play repair tag wid a poorly made scope from what was a very good optic's Company. I say what was because once you make n sell poor scopes you go down hill real fast in my book

[8ptbuk]

Leupold owns Redfield

[bubba]

The Zeiss crossbow scope does look like a good prospect for the 400.00 dollar price tag. But the retical is none lighted, I hear the optics or glass is very good, and the mechanics are very good. But a little out of my comfort range on price. There is a few out there.. For me I am going with the best that my pocket book can afford....