Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Need Long range s/a Varmint thumper help

Yep. You'll learn someday!

How about we call it a 5 MOA rifle? Then every scope you put on the thing passes the test with flying colors! If it prints a small group several inches away from where it is supposed to be, it�s still well within the 5 MOA precision of the rifle so the scope is fine! Another great Leupold!

Come on, John. It�s starting to get very used-car-salesman-ish in here.

You guys are acting as if that's the only Leupold he has ever seen. If you had actually read any of his posts you'd know he in no way jumped to a conclusion based upon one test of one scope. You wanted pictures, he gave them. Then you attack the pictures. Surprise, surprise.


There�s nothing anonymous about me. I post under the same username on every board, and on every board have a link in the sig. Though I see the mods have deleted that on this board. They don�t like me. The truth hurts. It�s restored in my profile.




There�s a big difference. He was talking about his own experiences, not calling your shots BS. You aren�t talking about your own experiences, you�re saying his are BS. Big difference.

No bias required. I simply thought yours and John�s pile-on of a good guy was without merit and uncalled for.

So, you�re using a 34mm tube $2400 scope. So when people say they see lots of $300 hunting scopes with turrets on top have issues, they must be making things up because your 34mm Tube $2400 scope works well. Do you not see how that logic won�t fly with those people?

As an aside, does this mean there was not a single 30mm tube Leupold in the top 20 at the SH Cup this year? Not even one that you know of? What does that tell you?

OK, now this is a bit more relevant. So you have used one of their 30mm tube variables extensively (albeit a new and expensive one) and it performed perfectly. That�s great! Congratulations! We are all so very happy for you!

But it�s an example of one. By no stretch of reasonable logic does it disprove the hundreds others have seen first hand not perform perfectly.

Nobody said YOUR particular scope has a canted reticle or does not track properly. Yet if you believe since your one example does not, this is some sort of proof the hundreds of scopes seen by others with these issues somehow don�t exist, you have a failure of logic.

Only the most twisted fan-boy type of logic can make such a leap.

They are statistical measures. It's not that complicated. Those who have dealt with hundreds or even thousands in civilian or military training schools, enough to see every brand fail, have a statistically significant population upon which to draw conclusions about statistical measures.

That's where the term failure rate comes from. You are familiar with what the term "rate" means, correct? It describes a percentage of the population in which failures occur. A percentage. Even with a high failure rate, many examples in a population will no fall in the percentage in which failure occurs. Your example of one falls into this category. And if you passed grade school math, you'll understand that proves nothing about the overall population.

Much less, that the population has a failure rate of ZERO. That's what you're trying to argue here. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Yes, you did goad him into stooping to your level. Congratulations. I would put it differently, however. I would say the difference could also be described as differing standards, along with some good salesmanship.

For example, if I recall correctly, John advises his customers with his scopes to dial beyond their required dope, then to dial back down to the desired value.

To some that may be considered standard operating procedure.

To others that�s a crutch to cover for scopes that don�t track worth a damn.

In which camp do you fall?

I know you couldn�t give me a scope which needed to be used in this manor in order to track accurately to shoot a match with or even live with casually because it would bother the crap out of me. And I�m not in a line of work where my life depends on the thing, you can just imagine the opinion of those who are.

From what can be gleaned from your long-winded post doing nothing but parroting other's arguments and experiences, it's quite apparent you are nothing but a wanna be.

As soon as you can bring something to this conversation other than what others have told you, you'll get feedback from me.

Until then...




Shot with a 400$ Leupold


This...





The same scope that tracked perfectly for a first round spanking of this:





And then continues to do this to this day:

565 yds...




760 yds...



BTW, the glass on my VX2's I'll gladly put up against any EuroTrash scope made. And function....

I'll take John's long range prowess every day of the week and twice on Sunday, but not necessarily his opinion of a Leup. This is nothing personal, just business so to speak. No salesman is going to badmouth their only product. I am making no insinuations regarding Leup scopes, John's ability, or character, only that I take John's opinion of them with a grain of salt. If he were not profiting from them it'd be entirely different.

Formidilosus is in the business of abusing scopes. I am not skeptical of his expertise and he has no other agenda (selling scopes). I have experienced Leup tracking issues and failures at a rate much greater than I would like. Formidilosus' assertions surprise me none.

rcamuglia......well.....he shoots an A Bolt..........

Ha! One of the most accurate rifles I own. Must be the cheap Leupold making it shine!


1/2" 600 yard group...




More Tangible evidence that Leupold works:

1520 yard 5-shot group from a .300 WM with the VARIABLE 8.5-25 Mark 4 LR/ERT FF M5...





Gonna try some videos with different scopes on the jig.

Should be enlightening for the rookies.

Been busy....









There was no purposely putting the Leupold on a POS gun. The Leupold was put on the gun it was because it was available. We were not there to shoot LR or groups. rcamuglia asked for targets so I went out during a break and shot some. That gun has just over 4k rounds on it and averages right at 1.4 MOA for 10 round groups with MK262 MOD1. It gets grouped weekly for score. It averaged 1.2 MOA for 10 rounds when new.

The 5 round zeroing target was just over an inch. Then it was immediately shot on the bottom dot for "tracking". Can't say why the group was that big. There were 3 shots on the top dot. One was just off the edge of the IPSC target. I did in fact measure the group, was just over 1.2 inches.



It doesn't matter if it's a .6 inch group or a 6 inch group. Mean point of impact (group) is mean point of impact. Tell yourself whatever you want , that Leupold did not adjust correctly, did not return to zero and has a canted reticle.

I will not "dial past and then back down" to insure that the scope adjusts. That's a bandaid for a weak erector system.

Leupold has never won an open military scope contract for their variable Mark 4's. Ever. Mark 8, yes. Mark 6, yes. Mark 4, no. The 3.5-10x40mm M3 LR on the M110 is a package from Knight. The 4.5-14x50 LR M1 on the M107 is a package from Barrett. Etc....






John, you called me a liar when you said that I was bluffing. You either have the most magical Leupolds on the planet, or......


SOTIC, Benning, Camp Robinson, the SEALs, and probably the civilian school that sees the most US SOF snipers (other than Accuracy 1st) Rifles Only, all report the same thing: Leupolds develop more problems per capita than all other scopes combined. The reason is simple- they took a hunting scope that was never made for repeated dialing and truly rough use, rebadged it and called it tactical.



I have and currently still use several Leupolds. One needs 18 MOA dialed to adjust 12MOA..... But hey, it adjusts consistently and stays zeroed so it's awesome, right? A 6-18x40 TT has had the erector assembly replaced twice. The fixed powered Leupolds are truly great hunting scopes and I recommend them heartedly. For the cost of variable Mark 4's or their hunting scopes with turrets there are better, more reliable scopes available IME....




I see a lot of rounds fired a year. Between the military, competition and training my annual round count alone is north of 30K. From my and my buddy's/mates experience I recommend these scopes- Night Force NXS, Hensoldt, SWFA SS, Bushnell HDMR, and Leupold Fixed power Mark 4's. These scopes consistently give solid service with little drama.




If you have one that works, great. So do I. Use it, beat it up, but don't pretend that they don't have a higher rate of failure than others.

As expected, when you finally realize your fanboy-twisted-logic argument is laughable and hopelessly outmatched, you give up and resort to name-calling once again.

It's good though, thanks. I'll be sure to let all the people who finish behind me at my next match I didn't really beat them--"I'm a wanna be. Rick says so. Somebody else was obviously telling my bullets where to go." I'm sure that'll make them feel better.

See, if you actually meant that you'd feel no need for a $2400 34mm tube Leupold and you'd shoot all your Precision Rifle matches with the VX2. But you won't, it's only internet fanboy talk. Just make sure if you do to dial way past your mark and back down to it every time....

One more question: If I shoot at a coyote at 930 yds and miss, then I shoot at another one, then another one...I shoot and miss at 99 coyotes...but I actually hit the 100th coyote at 930 yds and take a pic....

How does that pic look any different than if I had hit the first one I shot at?

And just to be clear- I have never used a GreyBull Leupold. They have different specs and may be the greatest scopes Leupold has ever made, I don't know. I'm speaking to the ones you get off the shelf and issued scopes.

I'm not selling anything, nor do I have anything to gain from stating this other than people getting the best gear that they can.

Formid,

You mentioned the Vortex Razor before, but you left them off of the list of scopes you recommend. How has the Razor stacked up to the SWFA SS and Bushnell HDMR, etc, in your experience?

Jordan, I wondered the same thing. Here's a quote I found from Formidilosus.

+1

The last time I was at the Toyota dealer, the salesman did not tell me how great Nissans were.

The general consensus on Leupolds has always been "they are not that great of glass, don't track correctly, and their adjustments are usually not accurate...but they are light and have a great warranty"

They are what they are, get over it.

That group of 2 shots darn sure is not �28 inches and a bit�.



Here is a little more math that is interesting.

If one expected 25.25 Inches at 100yds but actually got 26.7 inches that would equal a 5.77% error.

Why would you place your dot for 7Mils/24 MOA/25.2 inches (looks to me the dot is really 25 inches) at 100yds and then dial the Leupold optic to an arbitrary 25.25 MOA??

If comparing 3 optics why would you not dial all the optic the same amount??

Dude, have you actually BEEN to SOTIC? Rick Boucher didn't teach you that.

Did you learn not to "dial back down" from the same guy who taught you to lube an M4 with a grease gun?

I just finished a completely OBJECTIVE test of two scopes that I own. A Leupold VX3 6.5-20 40mm LR with target knobs that I sent to Leupold to have the VHR changed out to the TMR, and a Nightforce NXS 3.5-15 50mm F1 that I picked up off of the prize table at the Steel Safari.


First, here are some data on the scopes:

COST

Leupold Retail $949.00*






Nightforce Retail $2567.00




*this will prove to be very important


RETICLE SUBTENSION ACCURACY

Leupold TMR: Perfect

1 mil = 1 mil
5 mils = 5 mils

Wanted to video the tracking and click value accuracy of each, but I couldn't find anything to hold or mount the camera perfectly behind the eyepiece while I ran the knobs. So, I just took a photo of the view at the board through each scope's eyepiece to illustrate the method used. Note the position of the MIL marks on the right side of the board and each reticle. The left side of the board is set up for MOA.






Nighforce R 2.0: Not perfect but negligible. Only off the width of a reticle line starting at 4 MIL mark. The Illuminated Reticle is cool! The reticle is a tad more sophisticated with different subtensions for accurate ranging.






CLICK VALUE ACCURACY


Leupold VX3:.25 MOA adjustments True Click Value out to 45 MOA = .24725 MOA

Nightforce NXS: .1 MIL adjustments True Click Value out to 12 MILs = .10169 MILs

Both excellent


TRACKING


Leupold VX3 : Tracking on the vertical line of travel perfect to 45 MOA, then slight straying from the vertical line gradually increasing till the full adjustment range stopped the knob.

Nightforce NXS: Tracking on the vertical line of travel perfect till the end of adjustment range was reached.


RETURN TO ZERO

Both scopes returned to Zero perfectly



OPTICAL QUALITY

Both scopes were excellent. Slight edge given to the Leupold.

Given the Nightforce was only 15 power and the Leupold is 20 power, I would have thought the edge would have gone to the Nightforce. The Leupold was brighter at every power level and very noticable edge when comparing each at max power.


POI CHANGE WITH POWER SELECTOR CHANGE

Both scopes had no change in POI.

The difference has to do with how the power selector functions. The Nightforce NXS power selector is the entire eyepiece. The whole thing must be grabbed and turned to select a setting. This makes using scope caps inconvenient because they turn with the eyepiece and interfere with the stock and bolt throw.

The Leupold power selector is separate from the eyepiece.


WEIGHT

Leupold VX3 : 18oz

Nightforce NXS : 32oz


The physical reports:







CONCLUSIONS

Both Riflescopes are of excellent quality and function and when in use I doubt the user could discern any difference between the two. The max power of the Nightforce of only 15X really is a handicap in any long range game. The Representative from Nightforce was at a Precision Match my gunsmith attended and actually apologized to the shooters at the meeting for not producing a scope with higher magnification for the Precision game.

The weight differences between the two scopes is obvious and would preclude me from choosing the Nightforce for a hunting rifle. It would be fine for a competition rifle where weight is not too much of a problem

The Reticle differences are negligible. The Nightforce has a more sophisticated reticle for ranging, but generally would be a feature not used much under time constraints. The Leupold TMR is simple and solid and dead nuts perfect as far as subtension is concerned.

*Cost is where the major difference lies. In my estimation, the Leupold at less than 1/2 cost of the Nightforce is a far better value.

I was happy to find that I have two great scopes ready to use.

Go beat them around a bit and report back.

The Nightforce was brand new out of the box. The VX3 has been on 4 different rifles over a 6 year period and has been beaten, if you can call normal use a "beating".

It has been fired on a 243 WSSM, .264 Winchester Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum.

After the reticle change, it will live on a custom .300 WM hunting rifle.

Looks like the optics forum has branched out......

Threads "morph"...

LOL

On the 'fire? This must be a first!

When indisputable fact is posted also, it does seem to put the "Kaibosh" on a thread that a bunch of Keyboard Experts have posted on!

LO [bleep] L!