Anyone got any experience with these optics? Good, bad, ugly? I'm thinking about a 4-16x50. Reviews are good just never used one.

I had a 1-4 and it was a great scope. I hear nothing but good about them....other than they are a little on the heavy side.

I have the 4-16 Mil/ Mil. Its a very good scope, especially for the price. Remember the second focal plane model subtends Mils at 10X. Millet is now making a first focal plane model that has me very intrigued, since I love FFP.

Especially because of the low price you should box test which ever one you buy.

I have the TRS-1 6-24x56.
It is a ridiculously large scope, but I love it for its price range. It goes without saying, but I'm going to say it anyways . It doesn't compare to a Nightforce or even a Leupold, but it's also no where near the price for similar zoom, features, etc. It's not as clear, especially at the highest of zoom. I usually keep mine at 22x for best clarity.
Other than that, I think it's a great scope, holds and tracks well.

I've had a couple of the big tubed ones. For the price they were good, but they are heavy. Repeatable adjustments, no POI shift while adjusting power, easy focus and parallax adjustments. I wasn't upset with what I bought and would still have both if someone didn't want them for more than I paid.

I have the DMS-1 on my .223 upper and I have played around extensively with one of the old LRS-1s; both are very nice scopes that perform way above their respective price-ranges.

The ONLY thing I don't like about it is the "made in China" stamp on the underbelly.

Millet delivers a very high value product in my opinion. No reason to be scared of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M13huM9HajQ This guy is a pretty outspoken advocate for Millet.

I use a Millet 4-16x56 on my already heavy 20" bull barrel AR.
It's a decent scope. The support was very impressive, I purchased
a beat up buck gold used and sent it in to Millet (Bushnell) and
they replaced it with the latest version for $10 shipping.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/millet-riflescope-buck-gold-series-4-16x56-30mm-sf-bk30732.html

Got 2 of the TRS 1 models, good scopes for the money. Actually clearer at dusk than my Burris scopes. I like the extermal elevation adjustmets that always go back to zero. Little heavy but worth the money. Lifetime warranty is also good reason to purchase one.

I have a LRS 6-25x. It's huge. It's heavy. It's the best scope for the money if you want all the options (target turrets that work, side focus, wide array of adjustment, diopter adjustment). As someone else said, there are better scopes, but not for the money with all the capabilities.

The only thing bad that I have heard or that have been expressed to me personally is that they are heavy.

And they are not First Focal Plane, but there is some scuttlebutt that they may implement FFP reticles sometime soon.

Saw an ad in a Midway flyer for a new FFP model.

I have the 4-16x50 an it's been a very good scope for the money.

Ive run the DMS and a Silver Buck. Theyre not the best scopes but good for the $. I upgraded the DMS to a Trijicon Accupoint and no surprise that the DMS was inferior. Still have the Silver Buck on a 22. Like everyone else states, good scope for what you're paying but heavy.

JM has them on all of his rifles at the Bandera Gun Club and shoots a lot w/a can, ect..but not long range..I think they work well but they are what you pay for and will not have the glass a premium scope will have..but will work fine on most rifles on 100
to 300 yrds shots..and most hunters never shoot that far anyway.

For more info on first v. second focal plane scopes, see this article on optics planet:
http://www.opticsplanet.com/msgboard/about9-10890.html