Jeff O, no doubt about it. If you dial the scope HAS to track perfectly. VERY few do. And I think that is one reason people are attracted to reticles, other then it seeming to be "easier"' Personally, because I refuse to worry about a scope holding zero or adjusting properly I have no use for 99% of optics. As long as I can see well enough to place the crosshair on the target the glass is good enough and all that matters is if the rifle will hit.
I have seen to many of them lose zero from small bumps (or nothing at all), inconsistent adjustments, and wandering zero. I dealt with that for years trying to baby my rifles so they wouldn't get their feelings hurt. I'm done with that. I don't use Swaro's, Zeiss's, Weaver's, Burris's, Nikons, Votex's, most Bushnell's, and most Leupolds, simply because they fail. They fail to hold zero, they fail to adjust 100% consistently every time and they fail to do it for years of use. It doesn't matter how clear the glass is if it fails. Others may not feel this way and that's ok, but this is where we see a lot of frustrated posts of problem optics, or things that simply "cant be done".
There are scopes out there that are clear, have bombproof tracking, durability and consistency.
