Steiner Combat Optics: M332 (3x) and M536 (5x)

[SomeOtherGuy]

You make some good points. I think the reason for the price difference between this and Burris is the Steiner name, Schott glass, and country of origin. Although nobody is sure how much weight that holds.

I suspect you're right. However, this smacks of "badge engineering" to me, the plague that caused GM to make mediocre, overpriced cars for several decades and then go bankrupt. For anyone too young too know, this was the practice where GM would design one basic platform, and then sell 3-4 versions of that car with different nameplates (Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac) at different prices. There were some differences in equipment and finish, but often trivial, while the pricing differences were often not trivial. Sometimes the Chevy and Pontiac versions were deliberately specified poorly to justify their lower prices. Honda, Toyota and Nissan at them for lunch when their quality and features became decent sometime in the 1980's. Ford and Chrysler were also guilty of badge engineering, most obviously with the Ford vs. Mercury on the various sedans.

Burris had OK products for a while and pretty good ones recently. Steiner has always had good products, but often at very high prices. I'm concerned that Beretta's ownership of both may be harmful to both.

[Pikey]

I suspect you're right. However, this smacks of "badge engineering" to me, the plague that caused GM to make mediocre, overpriced cars for several decades and then go bankrupt. For anyone too young too know, this was the practice where GM would design one basic platform, and then sell 3-4 versions of that car with different nameplates (Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac) at different prices. There were some differences in equipment and finish, but often trivial, while the pricing differences were often not trivial. Sometimes the Chevy and Pontiac versions were deliberately specified poorly to justify their lower prices. Honda, Toyota and Nissan at them for lunch when their quality and features became decent sometime in the 1980's. Ford and Chrysler were also guilty of badge engineering, most obviously with the Ford vs. Mercury on the various sedans.

Burris had OK products for a while and pretty good ones recently. Steiner has always had good products, but often at very high prices. I'm concerned that Beretta's ownership of both may be harmful to both.

If anything in the short term I think it will help Burris, the XTR II line has been a great success. But in the long run the Steiner name may not be worth as much. Everyone will ask themselves why buy a Steiner when I can get a Burris. Is the glass and made in Germany stamp worth the up charge?

ETA: Beretta's customer service will not help anyone.

[Qwikrex]

My M332 came in. Quality was good, glass was clear, and the overall construction was fairly stout. Overall a well built optic, but there were some drawbacks that ultimately led to me returning it. One was the mount. Once mounted on my Scar, I noticed that it would shift slightly fore/aft if i let the bolt carrier run home from bolt lock. There was no provision to adjust the mount tension, so that was a no-go for me. I had a Bobro acog mount on hand that I thought I'd use to remedy that since I'd heard that these style optics (burris, primary arms etc.) would take an acog mount. The Steiner fit perfectly in the channel of the Acog mount, but the mount holes didn't line up. Left me fairly disappointed since there were no aftermarket mounts that would fit the Steiner. The other thing I wasn't too crazy about was the reticle. The reticle, although clear and brightly illuminated, was just too small to me. With illumination off, I could barely make it out on some backgrounds. I really wanted to like this optic, but it just didn't work for my intended application. I ended up picking up a Vortex Viper PST 1-4x in an ADM recon-x mount instead, and so far I am pretty happy with it.

Here are some pics of the steiner:

l69PhYa.jpgqGMXBK7.jpgXtt7x3P.jpg

[SomeOtherGuy]

My M332 came in. Quality was good, glass was clear, and the overall construction was fairly stout. Overall a well built optic, but there were some drawbacks that ultimately led to me returning it.

Thanks for the review and early feedback.

One was the mount. Once mounted on my Scar, I noticed that it would shift slightly fore/aft if i let the bolt carrier run home from bolt lock. There was no provision to adjust the mount tension, so that was a no-go for me. I had a Bobro acog mount on hand that I thought I'd use to remedy that since I'd heard that these style optics (burris, primary arms etc.) would take an acog mount. The Steiner fit perfectly in the channel of the Acog mount, but the mount holes didn't line up. Left me fairly disappointed since there were no aftermarket mounts that would fit the Steiner.

The mount shown looks different than the PEPR QD setup, and I would have thought that's a good thing - but the PEPR setup is adjustable, and if the selected mount is not adjustable, that's a big drawback.

The other thing I wasn't too crazy about was the reticle. The reticle, although clear and brightly illuminated, was just too small to me. With illumination off, I could barely make it out on some backgrounds.

Judging from the red smear it looks like the reticle is illuminated in your third photo, but I can't make out anything. I've never loved the tiny reticles often used in prism scopes, but they are at least visible in the ACOG, Browe, and even Vortex Spitfire scopes, and the first two give options for crosshairs in some models, which are generally easy to see.

[glock24]

Thanks for the feedback on the M332. That model was on my short-list. The non-adjustable mount is a deal-breaker for me

What do we think of the Elcan Option? More expensive, but I like the reticle much better. And the 6 degree FOV works out to around 31.5 ft @ 100 yards
Anyone have experience with the Specter OS 3.0?

http://www.armament.com/specter-3x-optical-sight

[Run N Shoot]

Bumping this one to see if there is any additional feedback on the M332? I keep coming back to this one but reviews are still scarce.

[SamM]

Bumping this thread to see if anyone is using and liking this optic. I'd like to pick one up for my AUG but the quality seems to be an issue. Steiner makes some nice products but this thread indicates a problem with the M332 mount. Has this been fixed? Is another mount available yet? Does the M536 suffer with the same problem? Thanks for any help.

SamM

[Jewell]

I'm a little late to the party, but figured I'd add my 2 cents. I'll start with saying that I see no difference between the 7.62 version and the .556 version. The reticle appears to be the exact same.

Anyhow, I own Steiner binos, and have always been impressed with the glass which is what led me to the M332.

As others have mentioned, this thing is very similar to a few other Chinese made prisms scopes out there, so I asked Steiner where it was made. They say Germany.

They say the M332 uses German Schott glass. I don't really know for sure, and honestly don't care. What I can tell you is that the glass looks pretty damn good to me.

I could take or leave the rubberized coating, but it'll definitely help prevent dings and scratches if that kind of thing is important to you.

The mount is nothing to write home about, but it seems to do it's job and keep the optic secure.

I've been using the M332 for a little while now, and overall, I'm happy with it. It's good, but it's not perfect. Like someone said before, the reticle is very small, but it's something I've gotten used to.

[Slater]

I ordered a Steiner M536 last year but sent it back for a canted reticle (which seems to be a fairly common issue with this particular optic). It was a shame because the sight was otherwise great - built like a tank with rubber armor and outstanding glass. Burris makes a lower tier version (IIRC). There are some decent deals to be had online with the M536 but the first experience made me somewhat leery.

[jesuvuah]

I have been looking at these for an ar10 build I am working on. I have a couple acogs and love them. after reading reviews, I think I will either save up for another acog, or save some coin and get the primary arms if I want to cheap out.

Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk