When you say you've burned out barrels trying to break one, on what rifles chambered for what cartriages ? And what did those rifles weigh ? How many rounds did that take ?
E
Somewhere north of 70k combined rounds in the last few years alone. One 3-9x42mm sat on a Recce M4 through four barrels (12-16k), a bit over 2k rounds of 7.62 from gas guns, 250+\- rounds of 300 Jarret, 100 rounds or so of 300WM, and now resides on a 308 with about 800 rounds on it. Around 8lbs for the 300J and WM and 8-10 for the Recce's and 7.62 gassers.
The least amount of rounds on the newest 3-9x42mm is nearing 10k. The most is..... A lot.
E,
I'm not attached to any scope. I shoot most scopes made, and I get to see the utter failure of the vast majority. The scopes that I see just plain work day in, day out are:
NightForce NXS
SWFA SS
Leupold Mark 4 and M3 Ultra fixed powers
Bausch and Lomb 10x military model
The Bushnell HDMR 3.5-21x50mm is building a very solid reputation.
I have had and see generally great service from Leupold fixed 6x's as well.
Scopes are aiming aids (not observation devices) and as such must-
Retain zero no matter what
Adjust consistently and correctly every single time
Be extremely durable and reliable
And be usable (eye box, eye relief, etc)
Any deviation from that, is a failure.
The above assumes adequate "glass", "brightness" and "clarity" from the start as these are the easiest to produce, yet matter the least on average.
I'm not attached to any scope and rest assured that if any of those scopes start showing problems I'll be the first to announce it.
MZ5,
How old is that 10x?
I've only used the 10x and 16x MOA/Mil models both SWFA and the old Tasco's (not exactly the same), the 6, 10, 12, and 16x Mil/Mil models, the 10x HD, 1-4x, 1-6x, 3-9x, and 5-20x, but none have had a bad eye box as what you say. Have also batted every other scope you mention and the SWFA's take the cake handily for the already stated reasons.
