Author Topic: Kahles vs. Elite3200/4200 (Read 1521 times)

jamie · « **on:** January 28, 2003, 09:24:09 AM »

Friend is looking for a new scope for his 270. Which is better between the Elites and Kahles? Not beeter for the money just plain better.

Graybeard · « **Reply #1 on:** January 28, 2003, 12:20:37 PM »

If your friend hunts in Europe or anywhere else where night hunting is the norm then I'd say the Kahles might be. If he is an American hunter and hunts only during legal shooting hours here then I'd say the Elite 4200 is. Why? Well the Kahles and other Eurpoean scopes all have excellent optics but I question if they are truly superior to the top American branded scopes. Their claim to fame is the 30mm tube and huge objectives. For night hunting as they do there no doubt these are real assets and are the reason scopes there evolved the way they have. But they are hulking huge and heavy and have to be mounted way high on the rifle thereby slowing down your ability to throw the rifle to shoulder and make a quick shot when needed.

They also have the reticle in the wrong plane. This alone is reason enough why I'd not take one for my personal use if it cost half what a American branded scope cost.

GB

Zachary · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2003, 03:51:38 AM »

Some of the Kahles scopes are "Americanized" meaning that they have 1" tubes. These scopes are less expensive than their 30mm offerings, but, in my opinion, offer the same clarity and resolution as the Elite 4200s.

In fact, I read one article on the internet that used a special machine of sorts to objectively measure resolution and/or brightness. It was measured by SOAs or SOS, or some acronym like that. In any event, higher is better, and of all of the 1" tubed scopes tested, the Elite 4200 and Zeiss Conquest had the highest SOA at 3.3. I don't remember what the Kahles had (again, the 1" version) but it was lower than the Elite 4200 and Conquest.

Unfortunately, I don't have any personal knowledge about this type of testing, nor its accuracy, but I'm just passing it along for what it's worth.

Zachary

jamie · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2003, 08:16:03 AM »

Thanks Zachery and GB. He will be hunting in S.C. I am in Germany and even here they Kahles,Swavorski's, Zeiss's are still expensive as hell.

John (Rojo) · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2003, 02:05:10 PM »

Zachary,

I read the same article sometime back. The Elite tested was the 4-16x40. The Zeiss had a 50mm. Objective. It was quite a while ago so I don't remember what the Kahles was. The 4200 Elite tied for first in the brightness and resolution dept. I don't remember where the Leupold and Redfield ranked among the group, but I do remember it (Leupold) did quite well.
John (Rojo)

Zachary · « **Reply #5 on:** January 30, 2003, 03:29:23 AM »

John, I don't think that the Zeiss was a 50mm because it was a Conquest series, and they only go up to 44mm. Do they make the Conquest with 50mm objectives?

Zachary

John (Rojo) · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2003, 02:01:16 PM »

Zachary,
My apologies, I stand corrected. I believe the Zeiss was a 44 mm. I don't think Zeiss makes a 50 in that tube until they get to 6.5-20......I think. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I like to think I'm better versed than that.

John (Rojo)