A friend mentioned to me that he's been very pleased with a couple of Kahles rifle scopes he has. And have found them to be just as good as his Swarovski, S&B, and Zeiss scopes (he has quite a few guns and scopes...).

I've never tried a Kahles scope myself though.

Have any of you? And if so, what is your opinion of them when it comes to quality etc.

I've been thinking of a new scope in 1.1-4x24 range.

I also liked the look of this illuminated reticle for quick shots:

Kahles makes a very good scope but it isn't the same quality as Schmidt and Bender. On a dollar for dollar basis I'd take the Kahles/

They are on the same quality level like Kaps or Doctor but not Zeiss, S&B and Swaro.

Burkhard

Kahles would probably be the best value for money out of all the Europrean scopes. But if you are going to spend a little more you then get the top line S & B, Swarvo'S or Zeiss.

Like Burkhard said, they aren't the same quality as Zeiss, S&B, Swarovski. They are good though.

They are kind of short on eye releif, I wouldn't put one on a 458. It would be a wonderful scope for a 9.3x62 though.

Erik,

My experience is like DB's. I'd also like to make some $0.02 comments on some of the other opinions as well.

I currently own three Kahles scopes. A 1.5-6x42 (currently mounted on a .375H&H) and this scope has been around the world a time or two; and 2 6x42's.

Sadly, three other Kahle's I owned have since departed when the rifles they were mounted on were sold. These were a 3-12x56 (a super scope), another 1.5-6x42 & a 6x42. I have found them all to be excellent optics and extrodinary value. I would unhestitatingly recommend them to anyone.

Kahles is a subsidiary of the Swarovski company. Kalhle's optics lineup fits Swarovski's marketing plan and there is also certainly shared technology - all good enough for me.

Burkard's opinion doesn't surprise me either, as I've also experienced less than positive comments on Kahles scopes from other Germans (at the bench of course, they failed to note the three-shot clover-leafs on the targets). Why, I cannot explain; Kahles scopes provided admirable quality optic performance for me.

Kahles, like any other company; specifies their product range for a broad market. Similar to stock dimensions for rifles sold gloablly. Europeans tend to shoot with a more erect head position and Americans tend to be noted as stock crawlers. I personally find the current "Eye Relief" rage (or outrage) to be just that, so much hyperbole - scope mounting depends on how and with what system the scope is mounted and the shooter's overall position. For countless years 3"-3.5" was fine for eye relief and suddenly that's just not good enough anyomore - go figure.

In my experience, I've currently found some current US (specific) scopes to have to be mounted so far forward to accomodate "Eye Relief" that the scope turrets are jammed into the front mounting ring. Net, too long IMO; others find it well, just enough.

PS - Seth, hey pal! No knock!

I have a Kahles 1.5x6 Compact with an illuminated reticle and it is a very good scope. It´s mounted on my 9.3x62 and eyerelief is just fine for that caliber -I´d have second thoughts putting it on a .375H&H though.

ErikD,
take it from me, they are equally as good as the top European scope makers. My 3x12x56x30mm tube was the exact copy of the Swaro, Being the sister company this is only to be expected.
There chassis are identical, the only difference is between the way the erector tube is kept in place, one is coil springs the other is leaf springs. Otheriwse identical...

regards
griff

I have one Kahles/Helia a 3-9x42 1" tube and find it very good. In riflescopes I find it difficult to see much if any difference between Zeiss, S&B, Swarovski and Helia.
But in Bino´s the thing is another then I only want Zeiss, after having had two Swaros which I didn´t like at all (8x30 and 8x56).

quote:

Originally posted by jmk:
In riflescopes I find it difficult to see much if any difference between Zeiss, S&B, Swarovski and Helia.
But in Bino´s the thing is another then I only want Zeiss, after having had two Swaros which I didn´t like at all (8x30 and 8x56).

I tend to agree. You spend much more time looking through a pair of binocs, than you do looking through a scope.

What must be 1st class in a rifle scope is ability to function in adverse conditions (no fogging), ruggedness (no POI change due to recoil or after taking a fall), repeatability and predictability of POI adjustment, and having a reticle suited to the type of huting you do (e.g. hunting in falling light, may well require a different reticle than daytime hunting). Only after these criteria are met, does optical quality come into the picture.

Fortunately, most of the top scopes meet all the above requirements, so we can then make our final selection based on (less important) criteria such as optical quality.

- mike