Maybe I'm just crazy, but when I lay out 3-4 hundred bucks for a scope, I don't really have high expectations that it will perform like a scope that you would use/need for the type of work you do. I'm a retired LEO and I get the concept of equipment failure not being an option. With that in mind, I always bought the best equipment for a specific task. I know that you have mentioned a couple of scopes that do cut it for your job and are very reasonably priced (SWFA SS and the FX-3), but outside that, your list gets real short and in a hurry. Some guys (mortal hunters) might not want a 20+ ounce scope (the SS) on a Kimber Montana, other maybe fine with it. I know in a perfect world, scopes would track perfectly, hold zero regardless and return to zero in said fashion. I think that you have to remember that the scope makers are business men first just like any other business, meaning they have to cut corners. They have a market....average hunters who shoot very little for the most part, and if upon their annual range trip they have to adjust their scopes they probably think nothing of it. Heck, in that scenario, they probably chalk it off to any other number of reasons a "scope" could be they culprit, you know, like change in ammo, bedding shift (they usually just tighten the guard screws) and go out and kill a deer with amazing regularity.
