And they will shoot one hole groups.
Until they fail again. And they will.
There are at least 4 different sets of videos on YouTube testing multiple scopes like the ones above. In every single case the Leupolds and Vortex's have problems. In every case the Nightforce's work correctly. Every mechanical object can and will fail. I saw a briefing in the not to distant past with the recorded failure rates of every then current US military issued sniper optic. Two things stood out-
1) Everything we were seeing in the field was correct.
2) Nightforce NXS's are the most reliable, durable scopes ever fielded.
Leupold variable scopes are extremely prone to failure. Every organization that uses them in large numbers and collects data says the same thing.
Short range bench rest- Leupold's weak erectors well known
50cal benchrest- dominated by Nightforce, Leupolds problems well known
US Military- evey sniper course, branch marksmanship unit, and most snipers all say the same.
Rifles Only- 20- 30% failure rate of student issued Leupold Sniper Scopes in 5 day courses
A little history.....
Every Military scope for the last 5-6 years have had a Horus Reticle as a requirement. There are multiple reasons for this, not the least of which that when the SPR and M110 came online with their variable Mark 4's, there were so many failures that it became common to not only hold instead of dialing but being taught holds instead of dialing. Holding for all shots with regular mil reticles sucks. However, most did not have access to other scopes and did not realize that there were scopes that worked perfectly. Along comes Horus. It was an easy sell, nobody wanted to touch their turrets and it made holding more accurate. The biggest benefit that was being pushed is not having to dial, because "we all know that sometimes scopes don't work"... BOOM every scope from then on out has had, and will have a Horus reticle as a requirement.
They only two groups in the conventional and white special operations forces that didn't jump on the Horus bandwagon immediately was Navel Special Warfare and the Marine Corps. This was because they either didn't use Leupolds or had switched almost every optic over to another brand and were not seeing failures.
No currently issued Leupold has won a full and open competition against their peers. Most sniper weapon system contracts are for the system. I.e.- the manufacturer can use whatever scope they want as long as it meets specs. The scopes are not tested separately for function. Leupold, like a certain manufacturer of semi auto sniper rifles, has DEEP ties with manufacturers, and therefore gets it's optics on most systems that are submitted. Just because a piece of equipment is issued doesn't mean that it was the best or even competed against others. The 1.1-8x Mark 8, the 3-18x ECOS and the 6.5-20x 34mm tube Mark 4 Leupold are all examples of this.
Don't confuse what some are using as necessarily what is best, especially the vast majority in the military. Most have no choice or don't know better, and even those who do have to use all of the issued equipment to remain current. I use plenty of Leupolds, S&B's, Nightforce's and one or two others, because they are issued optics.
Manufactures will keep building junk, if people keep buying.
For the record I think there is a whole lotta bullschit in your post.
Dark side SOF drove the Horus requirement because of real world gunfight techniques. The fact you don't understand why that is speaks volumes.
Real world gunfighting and hunting are 2 very different applications.
ehg don't know as much as he thinks he knows? That's some Grade-A humor right there...
Tanner
Actually if March were using the French, NATO, old Army 6400 division in a circle then the reticle would have moved less than indicated. It was moving further than indicated.
In other words the clicks were bigger than a real Trigonometric 0.1 Mil so the March Mil would be fewer division in the circle, or less than 6283. The Russkis used a 6000 division Mil.
You are correct and I guess I shoulda watched the video before making my comment... I took for granted it would be the same bitching and complaining of how the March does not track in true Mils etc... I stand corrected and my statement should be a general statement of the current March scope product line and not directed towards the video... I only watched the first video and then posted the others as I am working off my phone with sub par service... Ive been able to watch the Vortex, March and half of the Leupy video and am not at all surprised of the results...
Umm OK.
When someone posts a completely wrong post that offers advise that actually makes the problem worse I figure that fella fits in the "don't know what he don't know" category.
For the record I started out pretty light handed.
On a side note I reckon EHG is way above average and for that reason I actually spend the time to really read what he has to post. That is why I am the only one here that actually understood what he posted and why it was factually wrong.
Respect is not just blindly agreeing with someone just because they have a pretty impressive DD214.
