I'll preface here with I get some of what I'm about to ask , I will try to do so with an explanation of the questions basis .
I recently looked through my rusty trusty El Paso Weaver K4 and I was surprised by the assorted layers of focus . The rainbow swirls around the edges . It just looks and feels right where it sits on top of a 358 Win on a 70s vintage/styled Mauser . The brass , white steel and thinning blue .
Then I looked through that 70-early 80 Bushnell 3-9×32 TV screen on my oldest daughters 110L 308 . The gasoline swirls were gone along with the focus layers most probably hidden in the frame .
I took a look through the 9? 3-9×40 Tasco . Another leap in clarity , no edge fuzz , much brighter and compared to the K4 ........none actually .
I'd say the new 2016 3-9×40 Tasco has about the same edge over the 199? as it has over the old Weaver V9 .
All of the above will pass the box test whether you shoot 15 in 5/3s or 30 in in 6/5s and come back within 1 or 2 clicks . Considering potentially 60 yo scopes with 3,000 rounds on 3-5 rifles of 7×57 - 06' I'm happy .
What that says to me is that there's little to no changes in the adjustment and focus sections from 1950 to present . Coatings make a huge difference in everything related to what the glass does .
So this begs the question , is the difference between a base Lupold and a top notch model really worth $1000 ?
Is the $200 Vortex really $2-300 less scope than a comparable Lupold ?
If a variable power has more parts and more and more complex seals then why does a fixed 4 or 6 cost as much as a variable ?
It's no wonder I own so many vintage optics to get fixed power scopes ....