How many rounds do you think most scopes will take before starting not to hold zero, in round like the 25-06, 243, 308, etc's?

I have a Leupold straight 4 on a Savage 99 308 that is between 40 and 50 years old and the 99 has been shot a lot and it still holds zero. I don't know if this is typical or I am just plain lucky. I also have one of their first 2-7's on a 243 but it doesn't have the recoil factor the 308 has.

I have a ten year old Nightforce NXS 5.5x22 that has over 5,000 rounds atop 7WSM's, 100's of rounds atop 338 Lapuas, and then 1,000's of rounds atop 308 and various others 243, 260, 308, and 300WM during load development. Still works perfectly and still is the scope I use to check new rifles. I sent it back to have a zero stop added once NF started offering that as an option, which is the only time I have ever sent a scope back to NF. In typing this, makes me realize that most of the rifles have moved on, but the scope still remains.

I have seen some models/brands (who shall remain nameless) fail in less than a box of shells. In some cases, the cross-hairs fell out in others they just lost their seals. Of course their manufacturers repaired/replaced them quickly. (lot of good that does you when they fail on the stand or on that trip 'out west').
Like Coyote talks about, I have 2 old Weavers that my Dad bought in the early and mid-fifties. Both still hold zero and, other than sending one back to have it cleaned(The old Weaver customer service in El Paso was quick and amazing, even purged it, cleaned the internal glass and re-filled with whatever inert gas they use).
I have a friend that has a 300 WM that has around 2000 rounds of rather 'robust' loads through it. His Leupold VXII is nearly 40 years old and still going strong. He says he's tried other brands/models/magnifactions etc but always goes back to his 'faithful' Lupe (as he spells it).

I'll bet that most are designed to fail starting at 200 rounds and no more then 600 rounds unless they are military app.

Really, 200-600 rds. ? I've got an old B&L, 4X I bought in 1972, and a 7.5XAO Leupold that I bought second hand made from that time. Both have over 600 rds. on them w/o lost of zero....
Then there is my old Leupold 4X that I bought back in 1984. Again, even after some nasty falls, never had to be rezeroed unless I changed ammo.
How about an old 3.5-10X40 VariXIII ? Bought in the mid 90's. Never lost zero.
A 3-9X33 Compact Leupold. Nasty falls and all, never lost zero.
I have managed to break a few reticles, but I could still use the scope.....
I have one "military grade" scope. It's a VX-R Patrol, 1.25-4X. Some may argue that it's a "cop scope" and not true military. Oh, well. E

If you exclude the bottom rung scopes, I'd say that I'd expect the barrel to need replacement before scope failure to hold zero on rounds generating 20 or less foot pounds of energy, provided they were properly mounted and not dropped on the scope.

When you get into 40 foot pounds of energy and more, then I wouldn't be surprised to find the occasional scope failure, but I'd still expect the majority of quality scopes to handle 1000 plus rounds just fine.

Had to look it up, remembered reading this in a Weaver catalog...

"Classic K-Series™ fixed power scopes are built to take heavy recoil punishment and hold zero to 10,000 rounds from a .375 H&H magnum rifle."

Don't know if it's true or not, but, I have yet to have one fail.

Now that's funny!

I've got way over 600 rounds with a leupy 2.5-8x36 and way over 600 rounds on a leupy 6x42 that were mounted on the same 375H&H. Not shooting reduced loads either full house 260gr to 300gr.

When I was shooting my Rem 40X in 308win a lot. I know I shot well over 3000 round on a leupy 3.5-10.

Due to swapping scopes or having scopes on rifles that don't get shot much I've only tested a handful.

Trijicon 2.5-10x56 on 30-06 Benelli, ~1600 rounds, no problems. The scope consistently held zero/tracked predictability until taken off. Didn't get dialed very much but worked well when it did. Now sitting in my closet looking for a rifle.

Leupold FX3 6-42 on two differnt lightweight 7mm-08's. After ~1200 rounds it lost zero and quit tracking. Was repaired by Leupold, now resides on 30-06, ~200 rounds - no problems.

Bushnell 2.5-16x42 6500 on 338Fed, ~1600 rounds the scope failed wouldn't track or hold zero. Unlike the Leupold, this was not a sudden drastic failure. Sent back to Bushnell who stated it coukd not be repaired and eventually they sent me a brand new replacement. Sold both scope and rifle.

SWFA SS 3-9x42, 6.5mm Creedmoor ~600 rounds. After ~200 rounds the graduation scale on the turret came loose. A generous dollop of super glue (as prescribed by Tanner) and the scope has had no more issues. This scope gets dialed a lot, has never been rezeroed.

SWFA SS 6x42 ~200 rounds 7mm-08, ~5-6000 precharge air rifle. No recoil to speak of with air rifle, but LOTS of dialing! Scope has never been rezeroed on air rifle, functions perfectly.

SWFA SS 3-15x42 ~800 rounds 223. Not much recoil but lots of dialing. Flawless. Never been rezeroed, tracks perfectly.

Leupold 6x42 w/ M1 Turrett installed, ~120 rounds on lightweight 7mm-08. Relatively new and not shot much but no problems so far.

David

I've got a Weaver K-3 from the 60's and a K-2.5 from the late 70's that still work perfectly and are still in use. Both have spent a considerable amount of time on various 12 gauge slug guns over the past 40 years where they were subject to several hundred rounds each at the very least. One year I put nearly 300 slugs of various manufacture through a rifled 870 with the k-2.5 on board. That scope is currently mounted on my Marlin 336 .30-30 and that rifle is one of my main venison getters. The scope wouldn't be on Ol' git meat if it didn't work as it should.

I don't think you can really put a number on it.

Most would go at least a new tube but that can vary from less than 1000 rounds to over 10,000 depending...

I had a tasco... yeah I know, that I used for testing 223 ammo for years.. it took a lot of shots, I can't say how many though, but likely close to 10,000.

It failed a few years back finally.

I"ve sent every brand of scope in for fixing though and all have made me happy so far.

A recent Zeiss they claimed they could not repair, and simply upgraded it to the next level since it was no longer made, AND gave me target turrets in the process since I"d asked for them when it was fixed... NO charge... that scope had lived on a 338 win mag for 10 years or so, guides gun, bounced a LOT in planes etc... and then I had it for close to 10 on a 308 bolt that got shot a fair amount... it was not babied...

I'd think the rubber seals will dry rot and fail long before most decent scopes break internally. At least in those calibers and barring a hard fall. Or if you just got a lemon which does happen at times.

I've read, but cannot confirm that about 30 years or so is the life expectancy of the seals. Some scopes last longer with no problems, but I'd not take a scope made in the 1980's on an expensive hunt no matter how well it has proven its self in the past.

Weaver K2.5. Had it since 1964, it's older than that. On a 22 Hornet since I've had it.

Weaver K4. Came new on a Marlin M444 in the mid to late 60s. Been on a 1903 sporter for 24 years.

Weaver V12. Had it since the early 70s, on various centerfires and one rimfire since.

Tasco WC 6x24x40AO (Japan). On same 25-06 since about 1980. Well over a thousand rounds on this 'un.

Bushnell Banner 4x12x40AO (Japan). Been on the same M700 25-06 since 1978 or thereabouts.

Leupold VXII 3x9x40. Been on a M77 25-06 since the late 70s.

These are some of my oldest scopes, none of which have ever caused me any lost sleep, or lost game.

With a forever warranty that doesn't give a ratsass who was the original or the 20th owner

Leupolds are designed to take more than 200 rounds.....tff

I think older Leupolds are built better then what is offered today, based on numbers returned over the years by friends of mine. I never had a issue with a Leupold failing to hold zero.

I find most scopes that are going to fail do this almost immediately.

I had 2 Swaro 4-12x50 scopes both fail under a box of ammo. There is zero chance I buy another.

Fixed powers should last longer, less moving parts.

I'm not a bettin man, but if I were, I take you up on that bet...very quickly.

A friend of mine passed down to me a 200th year Ruger in 270. Hes is just shy of 400 documented kills with rifle scope combo.
It wears a Leu. Vari-x III in controle mounts. The scope is one of the early ones with the blue tint flouride coatings.

When scope was purchased and mounted, a load was developed with IMR 4831 and 130 Hornady SP. After dialing in the load and scope, the settings have never been touched.

I have a VX-2 mounted on an 06. I have 273 rounds through it. After load work up, I have never adjusted the settings.

I cannot same the same for some of the Tascos that I once bought.

So what you're saying is I've fallen a bunch of times, but don't shoot a lot as this thread is about scopes failing due to accumulative recoil....not clumsy hunters. We've all heard this story about the 3 or 4 scopes you've owned over 50 years of hunting E, but your cut and paste, one size fits all, rah rah Leupy posts are irrelevant to the topic here. Maybe you could resurrect some of those DEVA posts that are 30 years old as well.

600 rounds? tff

You guys don't shoot nearly enough

Heavy recoiling magnums I'd estimate 1200 rounds average.

270 and less recoil I'd estimate 5000+ rds.

My biggest caliber I have is a 270 Winchester and I've always gone standard for a reason. It kills plenty well and I never seem to have the scope or scope ring/ bases issues I here many rant about.



Shod

I have a 2.5x10 Vortex SPF , ~ 1000 rounds on a 300 Win and 30-06 and another 1000 on a 223. Dials have been ripped from 100 TP 1100+ yards with no issues. Must of gotten lucky on that one.

Scopes that were made 40 years ago (or 10 years ago) have absolutely no bearing on scopes made now, even with the same label.



Sitting on the shelf or in padded safe.... They all last. If being shot from a bench is your idea of "use" then I guess they last a long time.


I'm thinking I've shot more than a whole freaking lot, and the gent that stated "200-600" ain't far off. A Leupold made today, ain't the same as one made 20 years ago.


This week was the first in a long time that I didn't see or have an optic failure..... Granted the only things shot were irons, Aimpints, Nightforces and SWFAs. And it were a slow week as I only pressed the trigger about 1,300 times.

I don't think he's far off either especially with Leupold as of lately. I've got four scopes that Leupold can't seem to fix. Fourth trip for two of them and third for the other two.

SWFA needs to come out with a lighter hunting scope with the same internals and low profile windage. Tell me that wouldn't fill a niche.

Other than a Nikon pro-staff, that I had on my model 88, in 308, I don't have a scope made since the 60s, several back into the 50s. Have NEVER had a problem with them not adjusting. Used a American made, in Denver Redfield on my 375 and 300 Wby. also, on the Wby, used a Balvar 8, and of course, nothing to adjust, as adjustments in the bases. Might get some newer ones, as noticed the optics so much clearer in the new scopes do to the coatings, etc.

I have a cheap Bushnell Banner from forty odd years ago, when they were still decent scopes. It has been on every rifle I've owned except two, and is still on a currently used rifle. It is a 3-9x40.

The most aggravating thing about a scope that has a few hundred rounds fired under it, is changing point of impact. It will shoot a 1/4 inch group and then shoot another 1/4 inch group 2 inch or more from the first one. People who never use a scope except from one deer or elk season too another never know what a bad scope is from a good one. If you don't shoot a lot on paper or in the field a scope sitting in the safe will last you a life time. I do think friction adjustments seem to hold zero better than most click adjustments. Most scope internal failures seem to happen after around 2 to 3 hundred rounds when used on light weight rifles with recoil in the 25-06 range and sooner in the magnums in my experience. There are only three or four top brand scopes that have a really good rep for lasting over the long haul and they cost what the down payment on a new car would be, except for the Super Sniper. If you have never had a internal scope failure then you don't shoot all that often.

All scopes are prone to failure, sooner or later IMO. There's no way to answer the OP's question without SWAG'ing it, which is what everyone has done on this thread, and what I would do if I answered, so I'll leave it as "who knows"?

That being said, the only way to know if you have a shifting POI/etc is from the bench when you happen to shoot on a good day. I do not believe the average shooter, which is what 95% of the shooting public is, when shooting from hunting positions in the field, i.e. prone, Bog Pod, bipod, etc, is good enough to know if it's a scope problem or a shooter problem, especially when the complaint is "my scope is off by 1-2 inches at 200 yds". It's convenient to always blame the scope, which is what the reply is from our hunters who miss. Don't forget there are lots of people, including gunsmiths, who do not know how to properly mount a scope in the first place.

Yeah, I've seen as many (and probably more) "bad" scopes caused by poor mounting as actually bad scopes.

That said, I've now had 16 different brands of scopes fail from sheer shooting over the decades. That's brands, not individual scopes, and they included several high-priced models.

Wow....that's pretty discouraging.

Wow, over 600 rds over a 43 year period. I'm overwhelmed by the shear enormity of that round count. That's three quarters of a box of ammo per year !!!!! No one should subject a scope to that much punishment and expect it to last.

Poor mounting is an issue! A few years back I started using Burris Signature Zee rings on Talley rails where ever possible. They are very forgiving and trouble free, just torque the screws to the correct value, even if it doesn't seem that tight.

A SWFA SS 3-15 x 42 with low profile turrets like the ones on the Bushnell LRHS would put a hurting on Bushnell's version of that scope. Let us pray........

You may have something there.

I have a thirty year old Vari-X III 2.5-8x36 that spent many a year on top of 7mm and 300 magnums, and some time on a 338, back when I used to think recoil was part of the fun.

In the last decade or so it has spent its time on top of various 308's for a lot of rounds. When it's on top of my 5R Milspec or 40X I cut small groups with it, and the adjustments are positive and they return to zero.

That seems possible. I keep hearing how the Mark 4's don't hold up.

I have an older Vari-x III long range, the one they were making just before they came out with the Mark 4, and it's absorbed over 2500 rounds of 7mm STW without a single hitch. I have to wonder how the new Leupolds would take the same beating.

What if a feller had forty or fifty rifles, shot 600 outta one in 43 years; Coupla thousand out of another half dozen or so; And maybe only a few hundred in a dozen or so others?

Quite a few people I know shoot less than a hundred rounds per year in anything, yet manage to mosey out on opening day of deer season, for example and still manage to kill a deer every year. Lucky sumbeeches. ;O)

My opinion, real world experiences with various scopes over time, is worth reading about, which is what the OP was asking.

Well, that would be very different, however in E's case, my little joke probably is more accurate as he has a tendency to relay his "experiences" over and over and over again here. Never heard him speak of a vast gun library. Also, and again I'm messing with E, he went into a different topic about how his scopes have held up to being dropped and banged around, when the OP wanted to know about round count and scope wear.

E has a ton of experience hunting western deer and tracking the animals he hunts. I'm sure he has a wealth of knowledge on the topic. I wish he would share more about those experiences instead of repeating his optics knowledge which, by his post content, has little experience with a couple of scopes he's actually used. Believe it or not, I do respect his hunting experience.

Boy, is my face red. Didn't even notice that was "his eminence" there. Musta been throwed off by the modified handle?

Pretty sure 2" off from field positions at 200 yards would not be something that I would notice, i thought I was a good shot but i'm certainly part of the 95% if that is the hurdle.

From the bench or maybe prone i would notice but a softball sized group at 200 yards off both knees or sticks is perfectly acceptable for a deer rifle. I practice with drinking water bottles at that distance but really don't care where on the bottle it hits as long as it blows up and waters the landscape.

I've had only one scope lose its zero a cheap swift decided to shift 8" up and 3" left at 100 yards during a Colorado mule deer hunt and at about 280 yards i missed the biggest buck I have ever seen through crosshairs. I'm sure that I scared the hell out of him 3 times but those big tracks were still moving well with no blood a mile away when they lost me. Even worse the rock i used to check at 80 yards was big enough to be hit so i thought it was all me choking the shot.

That allowed me to miss another buck at about the same distance the week i got home before i went to the range to get the bad news. After that i changed mounts, bought a zeiss conquest and a rangefinder and learned my lesson about cheap scopes.

If only it had shifted 8" left id still be talking about head shooting that monster buck at almost 300 yards.

Last year I mounted a new Z3 Swarovski 4-12x50 on a Weatherby Fibermark 7mm wby. The first 2 bullets out of a cold barrel at 100 yards were touching. I cranked it up 1.5 high and that group same result but they were just a tad further apart but still way better then I had anticipated. I put it down to cool and fired my other guns and then I went home and cleaned it . I went back to the range 2 weeks later and it was a 1 foot group and that is being kind. No w/e adjustment would do a thing as far as POI, it went back to Swaro and they replaced a spring . It went back to the range and it was its old self. I sold it after hunting season ended.

I've puked bucket loads of glass,upon a multitude of platforms. Have whistled through 1000+ rounds of .473 casehead boltgun fodder in a day,more often than once. Have puked lotsa mounting systems and stocks too,as well as shooting out lotsa barrels. Smoked (5) 7-08 spouts on one receiver alone and have multiple 22LR's with 100,000++ round counts.

Weather,recoil and actual use is tough on all things The Rifle. I've looooooonnnggggg had a preference for fixed glass,over variables,due their inherent ability to take a lick. I disfavor adjustable objectives,for like reason and as glass goes,less IS more. Lotsa glass will fail initially and then get schittier from there. Hint.

Joe Average is a Clueless Dumbfhuqk,as this Thread and all others attest. The supposedly stalwart "long lived optics" extolled here,would fall flat on their fhuqking face aboard a Skookum rifle,with a savvy gent driving same. Red Flags would immediately appear and then it'd go wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy downhill from there. Hint.

Zero would shift on zoom selection and on both ele and windage inputs. That before actual round count,quickly amassed and unseated compromised internals.

What these Drooling Dumbfhuqks are reiteratin',is that wares used the least,by THE most Clueless of Fhuqks..."works" and "lasts" the "best".

Imagination and Pretend are very "real" to them folks.

Bless their hearts.

Laffin'!

Fired a shot oncet, maybe, I think? Mighta coulda even been TWO shots?

Just stepped out the back door and fired three shots offhand at a milk jug from 65 yards with my 336 and the broken old K 2.5.. Grouped dead center on the jug and it measures 1.5" CTC.. Yep, that scope is fugged you stupid hickerbilly bastard.

Pretty hard to disagree with this.

RD, you need to learn to read more carefully. I odviously have used far more than 3-4 scopes over my 50 plus years of hunting.
I have, currently, five big game rifles. I shoot them from 1-3 times a month for 40-50 rds. per session. Been doing that for 15 yrs. now. Prior to that, 100-250 rds. per year through whatever I had in the way of big game rifles, usually two or three.
I hunted four B&L scopes, and about 10 Leupolds. I've never broken one from recoil. That's probably because I've used the old external adjustment B&L's and fixed magnification Leupolds for 80% of my shooting and hunting.
Nice try. E

Two scopes you've owned for 43 yrs have 600 rounds under them and you feel this is proof of what. The rest of your post was just static so I crossed it all out. OP wants to know about recoil break down......not oheremicus falling down...

In the early 90s I shot short range Benchrest.
The rifles were 13.5 pound heavy varmint 6mm PPCs.
Of the 3 leupold 36 BRs I had two went 900 rounds and one went to 1100 before they became non competitive which in BR means aggs in the high .1s and low .2s went up to .4s and .5s.
A very common problem for leupolds with that many rounds fired.
The problem is simple to fix by sending your leupold to Cecil Tucker for the Tucker conversion.
leupold has never adressed the problem and even there latest BR scopes can be altered with the Tucker Conversion.
I avoid leupolds for any serious shooting and just run a S&B or a March or a Nighforce.

dave

What is a tucker conversion? I have mostly Redfields but a few Leopolds but would like to know.

Some plain points, some of which are repeated:

1. Fixed is fixed, anything that zooms adds a weakness.

2. AO...same as above, it moves and it weakens.

3. Dialing accentuates problems. This one I hate, because I love to dial. It may not be a true failure to hold zero, but lots of scopes won't be repeatable when dialing. I don't care if it moves 1/8" or 1/4", as long as it moves the same each time in each direction...when it doesn't it's failed.

4. External physical influences...rain, recoil, dropping, poor mounting, falling on it, in a gun boot for hours on a tractor, etc...wear on a scope (and mounts). Even the best break, everything has a breaking point.


I've gradually moved to fixed powers with a simple marked reticle (LRD). Simple is good, simple things last. I love to dial and can't (won't) give it up for some things, but a simple fixed scope with nothing moving (in a quality build) is about as reliable as you can get...again, given the right stress, anything is going to break.

A turret on a variable leupold is an oxymoron. Where can I get a tucker conversion for my last donation to leupolds bottom line?

Try this out.....

http://firearm-dealers.gearsuite.com/l/51170/Tucker-Cecil-R

I'm sure that will be helpful to the OP seeing how so many folks use externally adjustable scope mounts these days. Boy, don't I look foolish.

The last Leupold I owned died in 50 rounds. I killed a couple Ziess Conquests with not much more. On the flip side, I've got a cheap Burris C4 that is well above 1000 rounds and still going strong and it is always spun.

I think Leupold has gotten worse, and Burris has gotten better over the years.

The way some of these scopes behave, those old mounts might not be such a bad idea!