Problem with green coating of EL SV 8x32 (1 Viewer)

[twitcherf]

Show some examples then. Instead of just adding to the number of posts abt armor problems

Deet is well known to cause these issues - see DEET Technical Fact Sheet

Quote from the above factsheet

"DEET is a plasticizer and can damage certain rubber, plastic, vinyl, or elasticmaterials such as contact lenses, eyeglass frames and lenses, watch crystals,combs, painted and varnished surfaces, and certain synthetic or treated fabrics.DEET does not damage natural fibers including cotton and wool.3"

I know this to be the case as I had a pair of Zeiss 7x42s that suffered from this issue

 

[dorubird]

My goodness..... You should go birding also...

ok, let's go birding together... but before that let's wash our hands well with Swarovski soup, so we can safely care ours expensive Swaro EL‘s

 

[Crex67]

ok, let's go birding together... but before that let's wash our hands well with Swarovski soup, so we can safely care ours expensive Swaro EL‘s

It'd rather wash my hands with soap instead of soup, if you don't mind. Better for the armor also! (just kidding )

 

[OrangeO]

Any reports of DEET or otherwise-induced armour failures for other brands? Am genuinely interested to know.

Spray your binoculars with DEET, then report back.

 

[Crex67]

Spray your binoculars with DEET, then report back.

And stop blaming Swarovski when the armor’s dissolved…

 

[SGBirder]

Spray your binoculars with DEET, then report back.

Can't. They fell apart before i got the chance to try this out

 

[tenex]

So word comes out that Swarovski are finally using an improved armor that should solve this problem (don't you wonder what conditions they used in their tests, but it doesn't matter now)... yet all it does is fire up a new round of posts repeating all the same arguments all over again. Over 700 posts here in the course of an entire year, but obviously the only thing that counts is each individual's experience good or bad, which is exactly how Swaro have been addressing it. People made up their minds or got their feelings hurt a long time ago, and the argument just keeps going in circles even now. I can't really expect to have any impact on that, but at some risk of repetition myself:

Show me anyone whose armor Swaro declined to replace under warranty for suspicion of DEET use etc, or for any reason at all? (So how is DEET even an issue?)

Tell me why no one actually seems glad, much less satisfied, to hear about the new armor now? (I am.)

Explain why something like a public apology is being demanded as if faulty armor had been a personal insult? (Could it be doubts about the foolishness of paying such a high price in the first place? Swaro do set themselves up for that.)

When can we finally be done with this?

 

[Jos Stratford]

When can we finally be done with this?

You are free to not read and engage in this thread 🙂 It is a personal means of to be finally done with it 👍

 

[tenex]

You are free to not read and engage in this thread It is a personal means of to be finally done with it

You are mistaking the point of what I said. Let me try again: what will or would it take to be done with it, and why?

 

[Maljunulo]

In my opinion, there is nothing "foolish" about buying good equipment. Especially if the manufacturer takes care of problems, as Swarovski are doing.

This debacle must be costing them a big pile of money. (and goodwill)

 

[Patudo]

improved armor that should solve this problem

If new armour is being used that solves this problem (or at least brings down issues to a negligible number, similar to other top brands) this thread will naturally lose its momentum.

Tell me why no one actually seems glad, much less satisfied, to hear about the new armor now? (I am.)

I think most folks are relieved a solution (apparently) exists. But any - or at least many, excepting those whose certitude in the integrity of their binocular armouring is utterly unshakable, like Crex67 - current Swaro owner with the previous armour is going to be wondering at the back of his/her mind whether armouring problems will some day manifest themselves, and how severe they might be. And the further away they live from Absam, or somewhere their binos can be re-armoured (can SONA do it?) the more concerned they are likely to be.

@Crex67 - we are all glad your 10x42 NL hasn't developed any issues, but as one of the regulars is fond of saying, time will tell. The NL x42s were introduced in mid-2020, I think, so about four years ago. My brother's 8.5x42 Fieldpro took about seven years for its armour to start deteriorating. Which you could say is a good innings, but given that previous Swaro models have not have this problem (and indeed neither do binoculars from key competitors - at least not to anything like that extent) one could be forgiven for expecting binocular "armouring" to stand up to regular handling.

I'd still happily buy the right model Swaro, for the right price. @SGBirder, I'll probably be in SG later in the year; if you know anyone who wants to get rid of theirs, we can definitely have a good discussion...

 

[Jos Stratford]

If new armour is being used that solves this problem (or at least brings down issues to a negligible number, similar to other top brands) this thread will naturally lose its momentum.


I think most folks are relieved a solution (apparently) exists. But any - or at least many, excepting those whose certitude in the integrity of their binocular armouring is utterly unshakable, like Crex67 - current Swaro owner with the previous armour is going to be wondering at the back of his/her mind whether armouring problems will some day manifest themselves, and how severe they might be. And the further away they live from Absam, or somewhere their binos can be re-armoured (can SONA do it?) the more concerned they are likely to be.

@Crex67 - we are all glad your 10x42 NL hasn't developed any issues, but as one of the regulars is fond of saying, time will tell. The NL x42s were introduced in mid-2020, I think, so about four years ago. My brother's 8.5x42 Fieldpro took about seven years for its armour to start deteriorating. Which you could say is a good innings, but given that previous Swaro models have not have this problem (and indeed neither do binoculars from key competitors - at least not to anything like that extent) one could be forgiven for expecting binocular "armouring" to stand up to regular handling.

I'd still happily buy the right model Swaro, for the right price. @SGBirder, I'll probably be in SG later in the year; if you know anyone who wants to get rid of theirs, we can definitely have a good discussion...

Sums up my views too 👍

 

[tenex]

Which you could say is a good innings

Actually not, as Jos said a long time ago. My SLC 56s will hit your seven-year mark next year! But if the average lifetime was that short (or less) Swaro repair would be inundated. We shall see... but I won't lose sleep. Or buy NLs.

 

[dries1]

"yet all it does is fire up a new round of posts repeating all the same arguments all over again. Over 700 posts here in the course of an entire year" True but also hilarious.

 

[Maljunulo]

"yet all it does is fire up a new round of posts repeating all the same arguments all over again.

Doesn't almost everything here do that?

 

[paddyluke]

If new armour is being used that solves this problem (or at least brings down issues to a negligible number, similar to other top brands) this thread will naturally lose its momentum.

if there is new armour that solves the problem then that means there is a problem with the present armour ,there are quite a few who won't accept there is a problem??

 

[Binocs]

Hi all. I'm new to posting here. I have enjoyed reading here on and off for a decade.

I like using 303 protectant on rubber wherever I can. It doesn't actually block UV but it does preserve rubber. Seems harmless enough from the MSDS. Leaves the bino and rubber caps feeling right / no weird film.

I have never had defective rubber on a binocular so I can't speak to that. I understand this post is only tangential to this threads topic.

Today I cleaned up the 10x50 SV I have had for ~13 years:

 

[rodneyAB]

if there is new armour that solves the problem then that means there is a problem with the present armour ,there are quite a few who won't accept there is a problem??

well...we do not know that the new armor will solve the problem with the present armor. most likely we will be able to find a problem with the new armor. I accept that their is a problem with the armor, I just do not have a problem with the armor, and therefore there is no problem. If my NL armor cracks up on Friday, and falls off, then I have a problem and I know Swarovski will provide a new armor.

 

[Crex67]

well...we do not know that the new armor will solve the problem with the present armor. most likely we will be able to find a problem with the new armor. I accept that their is a problem with the armor, I just do not have a problem with the armor, and therefore there is no problem. If my NL armor cracks up on Friday, and falls off, then I have a problem and I know Swarovski will provide a new armor.

Exactly my point of view 👌

 

[hopster]

Not true, most plastics/coatings are ruined by DEET, for those who can read, there is even a warning on the DEET package about this. Most armor from other brands will be ruined also when they are frequently in contact with DEET, just a matter of time. Not only Swaro is suffering from this.

But only Swarovski are suffering from the armour failures though it seems.