• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leupold Gold Ring HD 8x32 versus SV 8x32 (1 Viewer)

From a business viewpoint it would be hard to justify spending the millions required to produce no more units of binoculars than they were producing. If they were mfg binos in the USA they were losing a shoebox full of money on every unit they sold.

From the past I believe I have read from people who took plant tours they machine all the scope tubes here in the US and assemble with sourced glass(as most big names do).

Who grinds their own glass now?
That's saying a lot if they machine their own optical tubes. Too me that is very impressive. Leupold really makes some fine American made scopes.
 
The rules for designating "Made in USA" are generally .... the item has to have been substantially transformed in the US or the US manufacturing costs must comprise more than 75% of the total manufacturing.This is a loose definition but still applies to the best of my knowledge. "Assembled in the US" means that it doesn't meet the above definition so probably has more than 75% of non-US sourced components but simply put together in the US. Again, this is a very general definition and it is a very complex calculation that manufacturers have to do if they want to be able to defend their "Made in USA" designation. ...gwen
It sounds like the stipulations for made in the US are pretty complicated like most things associated with the Federal Government.
 
As to the question posed by Gwen several posts ago. If you were to take the rubber armor off a McKinley and a Gold Ring HD I doubt ANYBODY would be able to tell the difference. I think most people will prefer the newer McKinley to the original. There is HUGE ergonomic difference. The optics are the same, but most people will swear the new one is better. People really should pay less attention to spec sheets. The ONLY people who complain about the weight of the Gold Ring are overwhelmingly those who have never used one. Not to pick on Brock here, but he's the poster boy example of this. ;) I can not explain this, but while the Gold Ring pulls the scale down more than the McKinley, the Gold Ring in one hand and the McKinley in the other, the Gold Ring feels lighter. I should add that I'm not the only person who thinks so either.

My Gold Ring HD 8x42 is my main gun these days. However I also use the Mojave 8x32 a LOT as well. What the Allbinos review says about the 8x32 Gold Ring works for my 8x42. All one would have to do is go through and replace all the x32 with an x42. Wile I happen to think the Swarovski SLC-HD is Swarovski's best offering, I would turn down a straight across trade. For me the GR HD fits like a custom designed perfect fit for me binocular. You will go cross eyed trying to nit pick optical differences. They are there, but not enough to matter at all...to me anyway.

As to Bruce's reference to the McKinley vs SV in relationship to his Pinto vs Grand Prix analogy...come are you KIDDING...;). The Swarovski is the better instrument to be sure...IF you don't have rolling ball issues (no I'm not trying to be Brock's replacement here) ;). However the McKinley is just a little behind, the difference is not as great to most people as you infer. Bruce you need to keep in mind that (if I remember your posts correctly) that you have less than perfect eye sight. I have always felt that vision on either end of the optical spectrum...either poor or very good, is where one benefits the most from good optics. Also keep in mind that just because either one of us likes or dislikes a certain binocular...neither one of us are the final arbiter. I am however glad you have a binocular that has said...KEEPER...to you in no uncertain terms and that you enjoy it like you seem to do. That you enjoy it is no surprise either...aside from my rolling ball issues, it is a great optic.

I'm working on a Leupold centered review comparing the Gold Ring HD, the two McKinley versions, the ZEN Prime, and for kicks the Mojave 8x32.
 
Last edited:
Dennis, are you saying that it is ugly as sin? Garish, tasteless, gawdy and LOUD ?! Lacking in style and class? Overweight, big and fat? Is it dripping in lashings of superfluous chrome and redundant tailfins? |8.| ........ ;)

Or is it built like a tank? Bigger than Texas?! Crying out for a *subtle*! Stars and Stripes paintjob and wheelie bars! :hippy:

America did some very nice stuff back in the 50's with futuristic concept cars that never got built, but by and large if you want style and class, you go to the Italians and Europeans (Hyundai's excellent Cally Design Studio, and the Marlboro Man's awesome Sheepskin Jacket notwithstanding! :) :-O

Don't tell me that it *Trumps* your SV as a thing of style and beauty ?! ..... or is it just the quasi - made in the good ol' US of A that compels you to stand and salute everytime you lay eyes on it, could swear you can hear the Star Spangled Banner being butchered by some tone-deaf college girl (though nowhere near as bad as Roseanne Barr ! :eek!:), and get all misty eyed, so that it just looks that way? :cat:

More importantly is it a keeper, or is this the famous pump and dump to make way for the rather nice looking Zeiss SF?

Relax, I'm just funnin' ya !! 3:)

And yes, we really do have kangaroos hopping down the 'Mayne' St. :t:



Chosun :gh:
Funny, Chosun. Good to hear from the "Down Under" perspective. The GR kind of looks like an old Cadillac if you know what I mean. No, just kidding. It just seems really built well and almost over built which is why it is heavy for a 32mm. The machining on say the hinges are really done well. I have NEVER seen a Chinese binocular with machining like the GR and the armour is really quality and laid down tightly. Swaro QA has nothing on the GR's although the Swaro's might be a little more elegant. If I had to go through a war with both though I think the GR would more likely emerge unscathed than the Swaro. Interesting about the Roo's. I have never been to Australia but I have been to your eastern cousin across the Tasman Sea New Zealand and I enjoyed that country immensely. The trout fishing was fantastic and the thermal activity was extraordinary. The only place I have seen more was in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming.
 
Last edited:
Yeah cool! :-O as long as they don't decide to commit suicide on the bonnet of your car (The famous Bathurst 1000 at Mt. Panorama the other weekend had to be stopped with safety car, after a 'roo hopped onto the circuit! definitely not what you want at 300 k's /hr !! :eek!:)
The big buck males (6ft+) also have the undesireable trait of wanting to kick the living sh*p out of anyone and everyone around spring mating time of year --- lock up your grandma's !!! :eek!::eek!:

I like the brown colour too! Also the "Switch Power's"

I also like the Brunton Icon's with their stylish copper trim - very earthy! :t:



Chosun :gh:
Really the GR's are not overly large compared to my Swaro's they are just shorter and fatter. Dense for their size though.
 
As to the question posed by Gwen several posts ago. If you were to take the rubber armor off a McKinley and a Gold Ring HD I doubt ANYBODY would be able to tell the difference. I think most people will prefer the newer McKinley to the original. There is HUGE ergonomic difference. The optics are the same, but most people will swear the new one is better. People really should pay less attention to spec sheets. The ONLY people who complain about the weight of the Gold Ring are overwhelmingly those who have never used one. Not to pick on Brock here, but he's the poster boy example of this. ;) I can not explain this, but while the Gold Ring pulls the scale down more than the McKinley, the Gold Ring in one hand and the McKinley in the other, the Gold Ring feels lighter. I should add that I'm not the only person who thinks so either.

My Gold Ring HD 8x42 is my main gun these days. However I also use the Mojave 8x32 a LOT as well. What the Allbinos review says about the 8x32 Gold Ring works for my 8x42. All one would have to do is go through and replace all the x32 with an x42. Wile I happen to think the Swarovski SLC-HD is Swarovski's best offering, I would turn down a straight across trade. For me the GR HD fits like a custom designed perfect fit for me binocular. You will go cross eyed trying to nit pick optical differences. They are there, but not enough to matter at all...to me anyway.

As to Bruce's reference to the McKinley vs SV in relationship to his Pinto vs Grand Prix analogy...come are you KIDDING...;). The Swarovski is the better instrument to be sure...IF you don't have rolling ball issues (no I'm not trying to be Brock's replacement here) ;). However the McKinley is just a little behind, the difference is not as great to most people as you infer. Bruce you need to keep in mind that (if I remember your posts correctly) that you have less than perfect eye sight. I have always felt that vision on either end of the optical spectrum...either poor or very good, is where one benefits the most from good optics. Also keep in mind that just because either one of us likes or dislikes a certain binocular...neither one of us are the final arbiter. I am however glad you have a binocular that has said...KEEPER...to you in no uncertain terms and that you enjoy it like you seem to do. That you enjoy it is no surprise either...aside from my rolling ball issues, it is a great optic.

I'm working on a Leupold centered review comparing the Gold Ring HD, the two McKinley versions, the ZEN Prime, and for kicks the Mojave 8x32.
Good to hear from you Steve. I am not surprised that you like the GR so much. It is a fine binocular. Would really like to read your review on those four Leupold's. That would be interesting. I had the original Mckinley and it didn't work for me very good but I think it had some good glass in it. Maybe I should check out the newer model.
 
I hope that this will settle the issue. The Leupold Gold Ring was a joint venture between the Japanese firm Kamakura and Leupold. Leupold did ASSEMBLE some of the first ones in Beaverton, Oregon. But that is ALL they did...ASSEMBLE, using the pieces Kamakura sent them. Early on, Leupold probably did make some things in Oregon, but the meat and potatoes of the binocular are Kamakua. While Leupold engineers had significant input into the design, it is, or developed into a Kamakura binocular that Leupold helped design. When Leupold first hit the market at then alpha level prices, people went nuts and Leupold had to back off the USA assembly to keep the costs down. Misguided complaints about too much weight did not help, and alas we are minus one significantly good binocular in today's marketplace.
 
Last edited:
I hope that this will settle the issue. The Leupold Gold Ring was a joint venture between the Japanese firm Kamakura and Leupold. Leupold did ASSEMBLE some of the first ones in Beaverton, Oregon. But that is ALL they did...ASSEMBLE, using the pieces Kamakura sent them. Early on, Leupold probably did make some things in Oregon, but the meat and potatoes of the binocular are Kamakua. While Leupold engineers had significant input into the design, it is, or developed into a Kamakura binocular that Leupold helped design. When Leupold first hit the market at then alpha level prices, people went nuts and Leupold had to back off the USA assembly to keep the costs down. Misguided complaints about too much weight did not help, and alas we are minus one significantly good binocular in today's marketplace.
Steve. What do you mean by people went nuts? People complained because of the high price?
 
Steve. What do you mean by people went nuts? People complained because of the high price?

That was certainly part of it. Another aspect, unfortunately, was the fact that they were not German...everybody knows only Germans can build binoculars for that price ;). Remember that this dated to 2006 or thereabouts. Steve Ingraham's BVD review of the Gold Ring HD is spot on the money. There was all sorts on nonsense posted about them in various forums. Still another aspect was the fact that Leupold was entering a new area for them and they were not and likely still are not viewed as a prime binocular source. Their first Gold Ring was a stout, expensive binocular that lacked phase coating and could not compete against the cost equal binoculars that did come from Germany (or Austria). Rifle scopes are another matter. Another aspect was the weight...everybody went nuts over the spec sheet and never bothered to seriously look at one. The weight is glass...good glass. Good glass with proper balance ;).

Another thing not to be taken lightly either is the made in USA stuff. People likely got offended that they were not 100% made here. But as Bill has pointed out more than once that has not happened for a long time. The death of made in the USA binoculars, and the trend toward better quality for less expense probably arrives with the advent of the JTTI. As far as I know (and this may not be right) the last mainstream USA binocular was probably the B&L Zephyr. Even the last several years of the Zephyr were made in Japan.
 
Last edited:
The ONLY people who complain about the weight of the Gold Ring are overwhelmingly those who have never used one.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on that. People have preferences based on experience. I do know at this point that I don't like a heavy binocular based on using a heavy binocular. I doubt I'd buy another heavyweight like the Trinovid 8x42 ever again. It's an awesome binocular, but it's too heavy for me. I've never owned a GR binocular, but it's something I would avoid now since weight has become an issue for me.
 
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that. People have preferences based on experience. I do know at this point that I don't like a heavy binocular based on using a heavy binocular. I doubt I'd buy another heavyweight like the Trinovid 8x42 ever again. It's an awesome binocular, but it's too heavy for me. I've never owned a GR binocular, but it's something I would avoid now since weight has become an issue for me.

To each of course their own ;). I perhaps should have substituted "vast majority" for only. But the point still stands. They do not handle nearly as heavy as one might expect. There are some 30 oz binoculars that handle like 40 oz binoculars and then there are 30 oz binoculars that handle like 24 oz. The old Alka-Seltzer commercial comes to mind..."try it, you'll, like it!"
 
I hope that this will settle the issue. The Leupold Gold Ring was a joint venture between the Japanese firm Kamakura and Leupold. Leupold did ASSEMBLE some of the first ones in Beaverton, Oregon. But that is ALL they did...ASSEMBLE, using the pieces Kamakura sent them. Early on, Leupold probably did make some things in Oregon, but the meat and potatoes of the binocular are Kamakua. While Leupold engineers had significant input into the design, it is, or developed into a Kamakura binocular that Leupold helped design. When Leupold first hit the market at then alpha level prices, people went nuts and Leupold had to back off the USA assembly to keep the costs down. Misguided complaints about too much weight did not help, and alas we are minus one significantly good binocular in today's marketplace.

Thanks for that insight Steve. Oh how naïve I was :)
 
Last edited:
To each of course their own ;). I perhaps should have substituted "vast majority" for only. But the point still stands. They do not handle nearly as heavy as one might expect. There are some 30 oz binoculars that handle like 40 oz binoculars and then there are 30 oz binoculars that handle like 24 oz. The old Alka-Seltzer commercial comes to mind..."try it, you'll, like it!"

I'd love to see one in person and try it. But, they are so rare nowadays.
I almost purchased one of the switch power ones (7x/12x or something) on ebay once.
 
It's quite interesting what you can dig up on this.

http://ukvarminting.com/forums/topic/22919-kahles-832/ (requires registration) :

" ... on a factory visit to Swarovski I went for a wander around the back of the factory and noticed strewn around the rubbish bins lots of boxes with the name Hoya on. As you probably all know Hoya is a proprietary optical glass manufacturer. I did some digging to see what the Japanese glass went into. The answer was that they [Swaro] "assemble" rifle scopes for importers who want their own name on them ! ... "




I notice that Kahles is mentioned in the link you supplied.

Kahles has a history of off and on association with Swarovski. I don't know about their rifle scopes but their binoculars are made in Japan. You may have noticed that the single word "Austria" is on the face of the Focus Wheel of the 3 Kahles binoculars. Nothing on the binoculars or printed on the box they come in says "made in," "manufactured in" or "assembled in" Austria. However there is a small glued on tag on the box which says they are made in Austria.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top