Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters What makes a scope hold zero and be robust/tough?

I would love to know what makes a scope actually physically hold zero and what is the best way? Which brand is best for holding zero? Thanks. Rob.

All sorts of things, including the spring material, placement and type of springs, the material of the erector tube, thickness of the main tube, and how the pieces are screwed together. In some scopes the screws are just tightened down, while at the other extreme some use permanent Loct-Tite-type compounds, essentially making the scopes “sealed units” that have to be completely replaced rather than repaired.

Everybody has an opinion on the toughest scopes, and toughness also depends on what you’re mounting them on.

They have to be built to withstand what you're doing.



Travis

Just coyote hunting, varminting, shooting and getting bumped around. I'd like to know who's scope has a great reputation for maintaining zero and being well made. I really like leupold but have a thing for the nightforce shv. My question was more for info and knowledge. Mule deer has a way of describing and teaching. Although I do despise poi shifts out of the blue.

Which companies use , in your opinion, the best springs, materials and process?

Start with a 2-7 Leupold. They stand behind them. They are not heavy. A heavy scope might move more.

You can use that scope on almost any hunting rifle.

The Leupold friction adjustments did not move in my experience and once you had a load and a scope set you were good to go season after season.

I can't speak to the exact reasons some scopes his hold zero better than others. Likely has to do with th materials such as erector springs, and tolerances allowed by the makers. As to your second question on companies that build these good scopes,I can tell you that SWFA makes a rock solid dependable scope at a very good price.I dont have a Night Force or a Schmidt and Bender but they ha e excellent reputations for dependability, but they are expensive. But they are likely worth it.

I can't speak to the exact reasons some scopes will hold zero better than others. Likely has to do with th materials such as erector springs, and tolerances allowed by the makers. As to your second question on companies that build these good scopes,I can tell you that SWFA makes a rock solid dependable scope at a very good price.I dont have a Night Force or a Schmidt and Bender but they have excellent reputations for dependability, but they are expensive. But they are likely worth it.

Don't forget that a top quality scope on cheap mounts can cause problems too.

My personal favorite is the 1.5-6x42 S&B.
I have multiple examples.
You will bitch about the price and the weight.
dave

The shv 4-14 x 56 is a big scope, be sure you look at it before mounting it. I ordered one and sent it back for a 2.5-10 x 42 NXS. Everyone has there opinions, but if a lot of people are raving about the great service a company offers that tells you something.

Mule Deer offered a quick overview. Maintaining zero on a rifle also includes the rifle build, bedding, and bases and mounts.

As far as scopes- the lowest failure rate of any U.S. issues sniper optic has been the Nightforce NXS's. To put it into perspective the issued Schmidt and Bender has a failure rate four times higher than the NXS..... Leupolds not even close.


From seeing several hundred thousand rounds a year fired, about the only scopes that just work consistently are NF, SWFA SS and Bushnells HDMR/ERS series of scopes.

Thanks guys. My main rifle I'd like to mount something like this on is a custom .22-250. Shv 4-14 might be the perfect powe range

Ah yes, here we go again. Funny thing is the US military uses alot Leupolds that apparently work very well for them.
Nightforce has secured no significant contracts from the US military unless I missed something recently.
Alot of shooters here use all of the above as well. Funny we haven't seen anything like such "failure rates."
I'm sure alot of S&B users will be surprised to find that their favorite scopes do so poorly. E

Nightforce was chosen for a contract for $25 million worth of sniper day scopes in 2010 for multiple branches.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/258-Million-for-Nightforce-Sniper-Dayscopes-06382/

Lol "...here we go again..."

Everyone knows that nothing beats a Tasco World Class scope.
...because it says "World Class."

One of the things that makes the Bushnell Elites so tough is the reticle cell is cemented in, then secured with a threaded steel ring which also has screws going through the threaded ring itself. Triple secured.

I'd venture that bedding issues have more to do with point of impact changes across time and conditions than brand of scope. I have a Tasco on one of my ground squirrel rifles that stays dead on for thousands of rounds as long as one does not change the power setting.

The best quality mounts; a rifle that doesn't kick much helps; don't drop your rifle!

Sounds like a real prize alright.

I had an old Weaver K-2.5 on my 35Whelen for about 30 years. The rifle has been carried for hundreds of miles in all sorts of weather and rugged condition' On one trip I spent a lot of time crawling through slide alder and branches would occasionally get stuck between the scope and barrel. After a while, I just started jerking on the rifle to break the branches (I was getting tired and out-of-sorts). This rifle has never been off by more than an inch or so. This year, I decided to replace the old scope with a new Leupold 4x to take advantage of superior optics and eliminate the rusting which plagued the old Weaver. Scope is clearer but the jury is still out as regards durability. The 2.5 is now on a Mauser 30/06. I like those straight-tube scopes. Light, tough, durable and compact, they stand up well to the abuse they may receive on a working-class rifle. GD

Anything made by Nightforce is going to be durable. Any scope can break but Nightforce and Schmidt & Bender are probably the toughest two out there. As someone else mentioned, you might not like the price and weight but they are tough. It's been a long time theory that light scopes were tougher because the components aren't as heavy and thus affected by recoil as much. That's total BS but makes a good internet rumor. The toughest scopes made are all pretty heavy.

Leupold has long had a niche because they are in the "not crazy expensive" category like NF and S&B but still gave decent performance. They are not in the same league though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5pVya7eask

dave

Let me add that crosshairs etched into the glass is a big help.
I also want a scope that uses hardened tool steel for the adjustment clicks.

Poor bases and rings are one cause for a good scope to act bad

Good bases and rings installed incorrectly is another

I couldn't disagree with either of these posts. I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't the cause or part of the cause with LAW rifle talked about in the rifle section of the Campfire. Bedding, nicked up crowns and improperly installed mounts are usual suspects when rifles start acting up.

I had one of those. Point of impact moved 6 inches between 3 and 9 power. I didn't sell it, just threw it in the trash.

If a handloader, you will , 9 times out of 10, need to make scope adjustments when a different lot of the same powder is used for the same "formula" of bullet/powder combination. The same applies to any other changes, such as primer, to "the formula". We all know that, don't we?

That being added to "stuff" moving from where it was 6 years ago... whatever the causes.

Regarding scopes: price alone will not guarantee "toughness" or perfection. To me, service is very high on the list. High end Euro scopes means a VERY long wait unless the dealer will make an exchange on the spot. Personally, Bushnell means a relatively short drive for repairs or exchange within a week. The cost is time and gas. I mostly shoot heavy recoiling rifles. And I mean HEAVY!

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

DT: That's funny! I don't blame you!

I've had more expensive variables that did that. Got them replaced by the factory and sold them without opening the box.

I once tested a very expensive 5-15x variable made by one of the famous foreign companies. When on 15x it had over a foot of parallax at 400 yards--and it didn't have any parallax adjustment of any kind. It did not fall apart but....

I know the scope you're talking about.

I'm not a fan of the non parallax adjustable 4.5-14 Leupolds either.

John: Sounds like it came out the box "fell apart".

Eleven years ago a 3/4" change of impact at exactly the wrong time cost me a win at the Super Shoot... for me a once-in-a-lifetime happenstance. I was using America's most popular competition scope. I'll never forgive them for that...

In the last couple of years some of the best benchrest competitors have been using Valdada scopes. Recently I've been told by one of the best competitors (He's also a bullet maker) that he and his partner will use nothing else. They have a trench range in which to test scopes. He also told me he had sixty-eight benchrest scopes for sale.

I sold my last bench gun to a friend a couple of months ago who bought the recently introduced Valdada benchrest model. I've shot the gun with the Valdada scope on it a couple of times and my impression is that it's the best bench scope I've ever shot. I also have a Valdada tactical scope here that has a Sig rifle coming for it. I'm looking forward to using it. These scopes seem to be extremely well put together.

Engineering and quality of manufacture is everything if you want absolutely dependable scopes. You don't use plastic parts when hardened steel is better...

Dick Wright

Dick: That's interesting.

Do you know anything about their fixed power hunting scopes? I notice they make both a 4X and a 6X.

Bob,

No, I don't. But given my experience so far, when I need one I will definitely check them out very carefully.

Thanks Dick. I may buy a 6X and give it a go.

Bob, when you do please give us some feed back.

Dick,

When a European company decided to make an "American-style" hunting scope a number of years ago, they launched the PR campaign by sending samples of the 3-9x to about a dozen gun writers, with each writer's name engraved on their scope. I was one of the lucky recipients, and to test mine I mounted it on a .375 H&H, whereupon it fell apart in less than 20 rounds.

I informed the U.S. representative of the scope company, who said something like, "Yikes!" and asked me to send the scope back. It turned out they'd used a plastic part to save weight, because they knew Americans like lightweight scopes, and the plastic part had failed. They tried to recall the scopes they'd already shipped and replace the part with metal.

In a couple months they sent me one of the newer, slightly heavier scopes to test, and it worked fine (though it didn't have my name on it) but NONE of the other writers had any problems with the scopes when I reported my failure, I'd guess because they didn't put them on rifles that kicked much. A few of the faulty scopes had already been sold to customers and the company had to replace most over the next few years.

Dick,

While I have no knowledge of Valdada Benchrest scopes, I do have quite a bit on their "tactical" lines. In short- they break. A lot. The SH Edition scope (all 4 or 6 evolutions) is probably the biggest failure of any scope ever made.

A cursory Google search for "Valdada IOR and snipershide" will yield some interesting reading.

Nightforce and Schmidt & Bender....2 of the best built scopes, and both can take a beating!!

A heavier scope is harder on the totality of the system more so than the scope itself - IOW, the stuff that connects the scope with the 'rocket and rocket engine'.

Of course, principle of physics: momentum and leverage- also favor stuff that is not sticking out as far.

I may be going off half-cocked on the tactical Valdada scopes. The one I have belongs to a friend. It appears to be very well made and looks thru real well... but that's all I know for sure.

However, re: the benchrest scopes... small changes in P.O.I. (point-of-impact) have driven BR competitors nutz for years. The two fellows that know the most about the Valdadas are Bart Sauter (Bart's Bullets) and Billy Stevens (Steven's Gunsmithing). Both are retired colonels and former Army chopper pilots who are amongst the more serious and successful BR competitors in the world. They are both financially able to buy any scope they want and as many as they might want or need.

Bart told me a while back that they had tested the Valdada's both in their trench and in lots of competition. After using them for a while they now will shoot nothing but the Valdada's in competition. Bart told me he literally had 68 misc BR scopes for sale. He and Billy had tried everything (As I did.) to get other scopes to hold P.O.I. and been unsuccessful as I was. I literally took a $1000.00 Leupold Competition Series scope and spent another $500.00 to get the internals glued together and the adjustments removed. Dwight Scott and Gene Bukys had developed an ingenious mount that was adjustable and which locked up after you adjusted it. Bart and Billy are even selling those...

Leupold can sue me if they want but I have the targets, score sheets and a hundred witnesses that were watching me shoot that day. (Dick Wright leading the Super Shoot is the benchrest equivalent of 'ell freezing over.)

Sorry to vent but that was the only chance I will ever have to win the match that, once a year, competitors from all over the world come to. I'm getting too old to compete at that level now days.

Dick

we have been conditioned to accept mediocrity in hunting scopes. I almost bought a used conquest yesterday but had to stop myself.

Dick I know nothing about bench shooting, but an old friend (now deceased) was one of New England's top competitors.

Basically, he said exactly the same things that you have;scopes were the biggest problems BR shooters faced.He used to tell me that,for BR purposes, any Leupold BR scope needed to go back to the factory after about 800 rounds.

Of course BR demands are pretty exacting,more so than hunters, but I recall asking him what he thought about the variable powered hunting scopes,since he was a hunter as well. He chuckled and said I should know better than to ask.

Anybody shooting March and actually twisting the knobs?

I have two of the 4X fixed and they are excellent. One is on a 9.3 x 62 with a few haundred rounds through and a few hundred kilometers bouncing in the back of vehicle with me with no hiccups at all. They are good, very good for the money.

Most all of the BR shooters I see at the range I frequent shoot either NF or a high powered, fixed Leupy BR w/Tucker conversion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcmVKLoXKJU
I shoot once a month at the Ridgway Rifle Club the game is a combined Metallic Silhouette and 1000-yard Bench rest match.
Its a 40 round match.
10 at 850 crows.
10 at 900 woochucks.
10 at 950 bobcats.
10 at 100 coyotes.
Plus lots of sighters.
Figure, 22,24,26 and 28 inches for the four yardages roughly.
Lots of clicking.
I have a 10-60x52 March that I started with in the middle of last season.Im over 900 rounds and the thing is working just fine so far.
It repeats.
It moves straight up and down.
Its got a bomb proof zero stop.
Im liken it alot.
dave

hatari thanks for that info!

To be honest it's a scope make I never thought of and know nothing about.

I have four of these:

RicksTacRifle by Rick Mulhern, on Flickr

And two of these:

coydog by Rick Mulhern, on Flickr

Over the last 60 years of hunting and competitive NRA Rifle Competition I've used just about everything on the market starting out hunting with a Weaver K-3 model and I had no gripes using it to hunt deer in heavy timber. For my 'earlier' NRA matches, classified as Any Any Matches I used the Unertl type scope which also gave outstanding performance. The NF scopes I have are mounted on calibers from 6.5x47 Lapua to 30/06. The two Leupold scopes I have are mounted on an '06 and a 22/250. When one takes a gander through the NF scopes in comparison to the Leupold...the NF wins 'hands down'....no contest! I don't intend to drive any nails with the NF scopes but me thinks that they're tuff enough that it could be done without harm. I've found that NF holds zero's and is totally dependable when changing to varying distances being fired. Time after time when shooting whatever distance...I refer to my data book and depending upon the temperature, and taking into consideration a needed elevation requirement...the POI is usually right on! The photo of the dead yote shows one of the Leupolds and it too is highly consistent when changing MOA. Leupold could improve their product by doing away with the three small Alan screws which are mounted into their adjustable turrents by using the same method seen on the NF product!!

Echols just did a post on this topic on his blog if you'll excuse the link:

http://echolsrifles.blogspot.com/2015/10/broken-glass.html?m=1

Woodhits,


That can't be. Echols must be incorrect as the posters on the campfire assure that scopes are "good" and they never have problems....


Echols says-

Lots of scopes fail straight out of the box.
Lots of scopes fail with very few rounds fired.
People (gunsmiths) who don't see failures don't shoot.
Busted scope gets replaced with Nightforce and works perfectly.


Hmmmm....... Almost like it's been said before.

There are so many ways a scope can fail...

I bet that >1/2 of scope shooters have a scope that is a POS in one way or another and don't even realize it.

Remember when Bushnell/Simmons came out with that "revolutionary" adjustment method for their scopes? Whatever happened to that? You don't hear a peep about it anymore and you don't hear anyone brag how great they are.

I'd also bet that a bunch of people blame the scope for crappy marksmanship or mounting issues

Crazy, right?

The Simmons Master series. I read a glowing article about it and bought one.It has taken up permanent residence in my crappy scope pile.

That was yet another example of how good designs require good execution to work right.

Have seen a bunch of optics prototypes over the years that were very impressive, but when a production sample showed up it was, as the commercial says, "not exactly" the same.

I remember the days when Bushnell Elites and SS's were all POS. Of course they lacked the " Gold Ring of Confidence"

Those were the Elites, right?

At least a friend of mine likes the Rainguard coating.

No, those weren't the Elites, which have always had the same basic system as most scopes, flat springs pressing the erector tube against the adjustment springs.

Instead, the revolutionary system had a very strong spring at the rear end of the erector tube. But the design depended on the material of the spring, and other details. It worked, but in cheaply-made scopes not well enough to make any difference.