Gloss finish scopes gone for good ?
- Thread starter Francois_
- Start date
Going out on a limb here, but could it be that coatings have gotten better over the years and thus gloss is no longer required to get a durable finish? Its been a long time since I worked in a paint store, but IIRC gloss has more solids in the paint, which makes it more durable compared to the same paint in a satin or flat.
I think most scopes are matte black because they are anodized instead of painted. It's far more durable and permanent then paint.
https://www.lorin.com/what-is-anodized-aluminum/
Although it's certainly possible to do a glossy anodized aluminum, companies don't bother with it anymore because many people want the "tacticool" look anyway.
I tried finding 30mm Stainless steel rings and I just gave up for now, they're also hard to find.
Cheers
https://www.lorin.com/what-is-anodized-aluminum/
Although it's certainly possible to do a glossy anodized aluminum, companies don't bother with it anymore because many people want the "tacticool" look anyway.
I tried finding 30mm Stainless steel rings and I just gave up for now, they're also hard to find.
Cheers
Could always get a used scope...
Lots of older Leupold gloss, Bushnell elite 3200's gloss 3-9x40 were $200 new when Tradex was still operating, older Japanese Tasco came in gloss, even Bushnell Banner made in japan came in gloss, older S&B and Kahles came in gloss.
Not real sure what cheap or outdated means in your post when it comes to optics?
Good glass is good glass, what exactly are you after? FFP AO zero stop G2 reticle etc...yeah, not likely going to find that stuff made today in gloss.
I have a pile.of them on period correct shiny polished blued rifles, work great, looks proper, so I'm not sure exactly what you are after?
You might also just as easily ask the same question about high-gloss finishes on rifles. Very few of those are available as well. But if you have an older high-gloss-blued rifle, IMHO it just doesn't look right with a modern matte-finished scoped on it. I have a nice little collection of gloss Leupolds and B&L's on such rifles and I guard them jealously.
Same thing goes for actual steel-tubed scopes like the old Weavers and some of the Euros; they are even scarcer, but they look terrific on an old gloss-blued rifle.
As someone stated earlier, getting matching finish rings adds another layer of difficulty if you are concerned about cosmetics.
And regardless of the ridiculous excuses made by marketing departments...less glare and reflection to spook game, greater friction in the rings to maintain stability, lots of other stupid claims...we all know the real reason. Polishing costs money. The same scope or rifle can be a few cents cheaper to make with a skanky matte finish than with even the cheapest gloss.
Far more important...to manufacturers...to build a scope with a ton of supposedly-tactical features that half of their customer base doesn't even understand or know how to use, rather than actually make a product with a nice finish. After all, the marketing spin doctors can find a work-around; they always do.
Same thing goes for actual steel-tubed scopes like the old Weavers and some of the Euros; they are even scarcer, but they look terrific on an old gloss-blued rifle.
As someone stated earlier, getting matching finish rings adds another layer of difficulty if you are concerned about cosmetics.
And regardless of the ridiculous excuses made by marketing departments...less glare and reflection to spook game, greater friction in the rings to maintain stability, lots of other stupid claims...we all know the real reason. Polishing costs money. The same scope or rifle can be a few cents cheaper to make with a skanky matte finish than with even the cheapest gloss.
Far more important...to manufacturers...to build a scope with a ton of supposedly-tactical features that half of their customer base doesn't even understand or know how to use, rather than actually make a product with a nice finish. After all, the marketing spin doctors can find a work-around; they always do.
I have some thoughts on this as I have several highly-polished rifles. First the suggestion to find an older gloss scope does make sense aesthetically, but these older Leupolds, etc., do not have the quality of glass/coatings of newer scopes that aren't available in a gloss finish. There's just no getting around the fact that lenses are better today--at least in the mid- to top-line products from a manufacturer. So using a vintage (1980s, for example) scope will cost you somewhat in quality of optical performance. One option for us here in Canada with respect to Leupold is to have Korth change out the lenses of a gloss scope with newer and better lenses. I've done that with a Leupold 8.5-25 scope to improve optical quality, although the scope has a matte finish.
Second, I'm not sure about jjohnwm's comments above regarding the relative costs of polished vs matte finishing. This may be true for scopes, I just don't know, but it is not true for scope mounts, at least not for Talley rings. Talley rings cost exactly the same for a polished gloss finish as they do for a 'satin' (less polished), or matte finish. I tend to think that the disappearance of gloss-finished scopes is due almost entirely to the current preference for matte finished rifles, or the "tacticool" look as grassforbreakfast notes. And I think aesthetics is pretty low in the list of priorities with most younger current buyers. For me, aesthetics are very important, but that may just be the traditionalist in me!
For my more recent highly-polished rifles, I use gloss rings, and try to find a recent-manufacture scope for which the matte finish is not too coarse. The non-gloss finishes on some scopes are softer and more subtle. My Swarovski scopes, for example, look OK with a polished rifle and polished scope rings. This has been about the best I've been able to do towards maximizing aesthetics at the same time as having high-quality optical performance.
Second, I'm not sure about jjohnwm's comments above regarding the relative costs of polished vs matte finishing. This may be true for scopes, I just don't know, but it is not true for scope mounts, at least not for Talley rings. Talley rings cost exactly the same for a polished gloss finish as they do for a 'satin' (less polished), or matte finish. I tend to think that the disappearance of gloss-finished scopes is due almost entirely to the current preference for matte finished rifles, or the "tacticool" look as grassforbreakfast notes. And I think aesthetics is pretty low in the list of priorities with most younger current buyers. For me, aesthetics are very important, but that may just be the traditionalist in me!
For my more recent highly-polished rifles, I use gloss rings, and try to find a recent-manufacture scope for which the matte finish is not too coarse. The non-gloss finishes on some scopes are softer and more subtle. My Swarovski scopes, for example, look OK with a polished rifle and polished scope rings. This has been about the best I've been able to do towards maximizing aesthetics at the same time as having high-quality optical performance.
You really think that scope manufacturers are intentionally adding features they know people don't want/like? You don't think it's maybe because that's what the majority of people DO want, and maybe your opinion is a bit outdated? Like I have ZERO interest in a gloss scope, I think they're tacky. If I was presented with the same scope in 2 finish options, and the matte was more expensive, I'd pay more for matte. Demand drives the market; if there were more demand for gloss scopes, there would be more gloss scopes.
I agree that current demand does explain the preponderance of matte-finished scopes, but not that the preference for a gloss finish is outdated. The vast majority of current scope buyers opt for the matte finish (partly because that is all that is available) and are unconcerned about aesthetics, but lots of up-to-date shooters for whom aesthetics are important do prefer a gloss finish. Just as you consider the gloss finish "tacky," so too do many modern gun owners consider the matte finish as tacky and too utilitarian/military-looking for their tastes on a fine rifle.
I mean, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. If the majority of people wanted gloss finish scopes, there would be more gloss finish scopes. There aren't, so that leads me to believe that they just don't. Aesthetics are important to many (Myself included) and they're choosing matte. Same reason nobody wants floral print couches anymore. People DO care, and they don't want them because they're dated. Is a black leather couch more utilitarian? Absolutely. Is that the only reason people buy them over white and floral? Absolutely not.
