So I received my Falcon Menace 1.5-5x 30mm SIR scope today.
Quick review by an everyday consumer with pretty much no brand loyalty
and no pretentions of being an expert. This review is free so take it for what it's worth.
The package arrived in my mail box. Yes Canada post just left it on my front door
(They didn't ring the doorbell or even knock). Oh well it's a good thing I was home.
Scope specifics: Falcon Menace 1.5-5x 30mm about 11.5 inches in length, 502 grams in weight, with an illuminated reticle. The glass is rated at 94 percent light transmission. This is the same light transmission as the 4-14x 44mm. The rest of the specs can be found on CyberK's web page, or the Falcon Menace homepage (where I shamlessly copied these pictures from).
Initial observation:
-The scope came well packaged in the now famous "black" box. The model number was on the outside of the box and that's about it. I actually liked the packaging. Inside the black box was the scope in a sealed plastic bag along with an allen key, lens cloth, spare battery and my receipt. There were some marks on the outside of the black box due to Canada Posts carefull handling (no doubt used as a hackey sack during break time). The scope was in perfect condition. The packaging held up perfectly.
There wasn't an instruction manual, warranty card etc. I know others have complained about this. I'm not. It took two seconds to figure out how this scope worked. Even how to change the battery was obvious. If there was an instruction manual I wouldn't have bothered reading it anyways. As for the warranty, it's 5 years and if you read the rest of the review, I'm not really worried about it.
The scope:
It was bigger and heavier than I expected. Part of this is the fact that most of my scopes are 1 inch in diameter. The 30mm is thicker than I'm used to. That being said it looked well made and definately seemed to be a quality instrument. There were the usual yellow flip up lens caps that we've all read suck. Yup not my taste and look prone to breaking but..... they keep the crud out of the scope lens during transport and while I mess around with it before mounting the scope on a rifle. So no complaints.
Glass quality:
So I tested the scope outside on a fairly bright day. The glass seemed very good. This is subjective but I would put the glass ahead of the Elite 4200 and slightly below the 6500. It's slightly below the expensive top brand big name scopes.
Here's how I tested. I needed a 30mm objective to make the glass test comparable. It's not fair to test a 30mm versus a 40 or bigger objective and then be surprised that one gathers more light. So I pulled out my Swarovski Laser ranger finder. It has a 8x 30mm monocul lens.
Comparison:
The Swarovski lens was slightly brighter and the image was a bit crisper. Contrast/crispness was the main advantage. However it was also at 8x while the Menace only went to 5x. Yes the Swarovski is better glass. But the Falcon menace was very good.
I tested in low light and very low light (almost completely dark). Again I used the excellent lens on the Swarovski for a comparison. The Swarovski was slightly better as expected. However the Falcon did extremely well. It was only slightly behind the Swarovski. Very slightly. Obviously it's decent glass. It works very well in low light conditions.
The glass won't be replacing the Swarovski, Zeiss, NF etc glass. Even the Zeiss Conquest I think is a very tiny bit ahead (Not by much though). You pay the big bucks for that last bit of extra. Still very acceptable and a nice surprise.
If you were to do a contrast/crispness comparison then the Swarovski would win. IE put up shapes numbers, letters etc of different sizes and check which scope could distinguish the smallest shapes. Still the Falcon was pretty good. I used a neighbours licence plate, and a road sign with different sized lettering for a quick comparison. I'll do a more detailed check later after it's mounted on a rifle and when I'm positive that I've set the focus up perfectly.
About the only complaint is that you can see a lot of the scope housing when getting your sight picture. Also the scope is fairly sensitive to eye position for a good sight picture. Leupold seems to be the standard for having your picture being as much of the optic as possible with the least amount of black scope housing. I prefer this.
Keep in mind I'm being very critical. In all fairness I compared a sub $300 scope against what is known to be some of the best glass available. The range finder that I used to compare the glass also has an edge since it's a fixed 8x, not a zoom and retails for $1100 in Canada. Not particularly fair, but it's what I had around.
It's pretty impressive that you can look through the top end glass, then the Falcon and not be disapointed with the Falcon. That alone is high praise.
The illuminated reticle:
I really like the reticle on this scope. It has the target style centre dot with a space around the dot and the cross around it. It's actually almost identical to the target reticle I used back when I was a kid playing Quake World. So I was instantly familiar with it. Yes from a video game of all places. Considering I picked that particular reticle out of a fair number of other choices in a fast paced video game, well I guess I can't argue with Falcon's choice.
The illumination knob worked perfectly. At the max number 5 the target dot was perfectly illuminated on a sunny day. Green or red, both worked. I personally prefer red. The dial was stiff but smooth and clicked perfectly on each setting. The tactile click was also very obvious and would be felt if wearing gloves. The set up for the reticle colour/illumination is also very good. There are two spots where the illumination is off between the red and the green settings. Setting number 1 worked well in very low light. The top setting 5 and lower setting 1 were perfect for their intented uses. I could see this feature being used for low light, and on low magnification for quick target acquisition. The red dot instantly draws your attention to the reticle. Works well.
The windage and elevation dials. I know we've all read how they click but have a mushy feel? The audible click was excellent. I have to agree that the feel of the actual click was where it could be hard to differentiate if you can't hear it. However for my purposes it really doesn't matter. I was happy with the adjustments.
I'm not sure if this will be mounted on an AR or the Type 97 in December. I'll have to see. Until it's mounted I can't really finish reviewing this.
If you didn't read the whole review:
-This scope lives up to the hype and other reviews you've read. I'm not disapointed.
-Very good glass, well built, good price especially when you factor in the features of this scope (illuminated reticle, build and glass quality).
-Under $300 including taxes and shipping.
Special thanks to CyberK aka Mike for the great service/product.
I have a few Falcon Menace 4-14x 44mm scopes with the MP20 reticle on the way. Any doubts about them being good are now gone. I'm looking forward to when they get here.
Quick review by an everyday consumer with pretty much no brand loyalty
and no pretentions of being an expert. This review is free so take it for what it's worth. The package arrived in my mail box. Yes Canada post just left it on my front door
(They didn't ring the doorbell or even knock). Oh well it's a good thing I was home. Scope specifics: Falcon Menace 1.5-5x 30mm about 11.5 inches in length, 502 grams in weight, with an illuminated reticle. The glass is rated at 94 percent light transmission. This is the same light transmission as the 4-14x 44mm. The rest of the specs can be found on CyberK's web page, or the Falcon Menace homepage (where I shamlessly copied these pictures from).
Initial observation:
-The scope came well packaged in the now famous "black" box. The model number was on the outside of the box and that's about it. I actually liked the packaging. Inside the black box was the scope in a sealed plastic bag along with an allen key, lens cloth, spare battery and my receipt. There were some marks on the outside of the black box due to Canada Posts carefull handling (no doubt used as a hackey sack during break time). The scope was in perfect condition. The packaging held up perfectly.
There wasn't an instruction manual, warranty card etc. I know others have complained about this. I'm not. It took two seconds to figure out how this scope worked. Even how to change the battery was obvious. If there was an instruction manual I wouldn't have bothered reading it anyways. As for the warranty, it's 5 years and if you read the rest of the review, I'm not really worried about it.
The scope:
It was bigger and heavier than I expected. Part of this is the fact that most of my scopes are 1 inch in diameter. The 30mm is thicker than I'm used to. That being said it looked well made and definately seemed to be a quality instrument. There were the usual yellow flip up lens caps that we've all read suck. Yup not my taste and look prone to breaking but..... they keep the crud out of the scope lens during transport and while I mess around with it before mounting the scope on a rifle. So no complaints.
Glass quality:
So I tested the scope outside on a fairly bright day. The glass seemed very good. This is subjective but I would put the glass ahead of the Elite 4200 and slightly below the 6500. It's slightly below the expensive top brand big name scopes.
Here's how I tested. I needed a 30mm objective to make the glass test comparable. It's not fair to test a 30mm versus a 40 or bigger objective and then be surprised that one gathers more light. So I pulled out my Swarovski Laser ranger finder. It has a 8x 30mm monocul lens.
Comparison:
The Swarovski lens was slightly brighter and the image was a bit crisper. Contrast/crispness was the main advantage. However it was also at 8x while the Menace only went to 5x. Yes the Swarovski is better glass. But the Falcon menace was very good.
I tested in low light and very low light (almost completely dark). Again I used the excellent lens on the Swarovski for a comparison. The Swarovski was slightly better as expected. However the Falcon did extremely well. It was only slightly behind the Swarovski. Very slightly. Obviously it's decent glass. It works very well in low light conditions.
The glass won't be replacing the Swarovski, Zeiss, NF etc glass. Even the Zeiss Conquest I think is a very tiny bit ahead (Not by much though). You pay the big bucks for that last bit of extra. Still very acceptable and a nice surprise.
If you were to do a contrast/crispness comparison then the Swarovski would win. IE put up shapes numbers, letters etc of different sizes and check which scope could distinguish the smallest shapes. Still the Falcon was pretty good. I used a neighbours licence plate, and a road sign with different sized lettering for a quick comparison. I'll do a more detailed check later after it's mounted on a rifle and when I'm positive that I've set the focus up perfectly.
About the only complaint is that you can see a lot of the scope housing when getting your sight picture. Also the scope is fairly sensitive to eye position for a good sight picture. Leupold seems to be the standard for having your picture being as much of the optic as possible with the least amount of black scope housing. I prefer this.
Keep in mind I'm being very critical. In all fairness I compared a sub $300 scope against what is known to be some of the best glass available. The range finder that I used to compare the glass also has an edge since it's a fixed 8x, not a zoom and retails for $1100 in Canada. Not particularly fair, but it's what I had around.
It's pretty impressive that you can look through the top end glass, then the Falcon and not be disapointed with the Falcon. That alone is high praise.
The illuminated reticle:
I really like the reticle on this scope. It has the target style centre dot with a space around the dot and the cross around it. It's actually almost identical to the target reticle I used back when I was a kid playing Quake World. So I was instantly familiar with it. Yes from a video game of all places. Considering I picked that particular reticle out of a fair number of other choices in a fast paced video game, well I guess I can't argue with Falcon's choice
.
The illumination knob worked perfectly. At the max number 5 the target dot was perfectly illuminated on a sunny day. Green or red, both worked. I personally prefer red. The dial was stiff but smooth and clicked perfectly on each setting. The tactile click was also very obvious and would be felt if wearing gloves. The set up for the reticle colour/illumination is also very good. There are two spots where the illumination is off between the red and the green settings. Setting number 1 worked well in very low light. The top setting 5 and lower setting 1 were perfect for their intented uses. I could see this feature being used for low light, and on low magnification for quick target acquisition. The red dot instantly draws your attention to the reticle. Works well.
The windage and elevation dials. I know we've all read how they click but have a mushy feel? The audible click was excellent. I have to agree that the feel of the actual click was where it could be hard to differentiate if you can't hear it. However for my purposes it really doesn't matter. I was happy with the adjustments.
I'm not sure if this will be mounted on an AR or the Type 97 in December. I'll have to see. Until it's mounted I can't really finish reviewing this.
If you didn't read the whole review:
-This scope lives up to the hype and other reviews you've read. I'm not disapointed.
-Very good glass, well built, good price especially when you factor in the features of this scope (illuminated reticle, build and glass quality).
-Under $300 including taxes and shipping.
Special thanks to CyberK aka Mike for the great service/product.
I have a few Falcon Menace 4-14x 44mm scopes with the MP20 reticle on the way. Any doubts about them being good are now gone. I'm looking forward to when they get here.
Last edited:
