Not sure if these have been posted before or not but found them very interesting... Not the most scientific test but should open a few eyes as to what some of these scope brands are capable of right outta the box...

On the March scope the reason it's off on the tracking is that March uses a Mil value of 6400 verses the standard 6283... The 6400 is an old Army artillery value and not common in todays scopes... In 2015 March will begin using the 6283 value...

If you put in a value of .097 (6400) mil adjustment in your ballastic calculator verses the .1 (6283) mil value the March tracks perfectly... Just a side note...


Leupy Mark 6 3-18


Vortex Razor HD


Bushnell Elite Tactical


March 3-24


Mark 4 6.5-20 M5A


NightForce F1

Wow!!!! Someone who is actually willing to show some informative shooting results, instead of just talking chit about how great they are and how everyone else is a "[bleep] idiot"...Lol

Thanks EHG,

Negative EHG....

I keep being told how awesome three of those scopes are....



Here's a buddy testing what is normally a very good scope for a match.


Setup...






Results of two consecutive runs. Scope was zeroed beforehand.






Two more of the same type-





Only three that I have seen fail, and all three used the same Warne Vertical Split Rings.


Off goes those scopes and on goes these-

]

I've been reading about all of the chitty scopes in various forums here on the 'Fire over the past week or two. Even if I came to the conclusion that you are correct, and that many/most commonly used hunting scopes are junk, what can I do about it?

I have several rifles between me and my teenage son that would need to be re-scoped. If the only good scopes cost upwards of $2,000 or more each, I would need to remortgage my house in order to put good scopes on my rifles. I don't think that I, or most other hunters with middle-class incomes, are going to do that.

What would you suggest? I think I'll just bury my head in the sand and stick with what I have....

Most of the best scopes are under $2k. The SWFA SS lines are fantasticly reliable and start at $300.

The last two Nightforce compacts that I bought were both under $1k.


Other than the scopes in that picture I don't think I've talked about or recommended any $2,000 scopes.

Coalcracker, given the opportunity I convert said scopes to the Leup 6x42

What you can take away from these videos are this.

1) you can test your scopes tracking ability and reliability on the bench so you know how it tracks better in the field.

2) which line of scopes actually tracked the best. In my opinion the NF scopes performed the best.

I have been slowly replacing the scopes on my rifles over the years. Seldom do rifles depreciate in value unless abused by the owner.

In this day and age most people want a tactical scope bug don't spend the time to learn how or what it's capable of doing....

This is a tutorial of checking your scopes out....Good info...

I appreciate the information and suggestions. I have my mind set on saving money for a new lightweight, short-action, big-game rifle. Without having given it a whole lot of thought, I was thinking along the lines of scoping it with a Leupold 2.5-8x36 or a 6x36.

The SWFA SS and Leupold 6x42 would be in my price range, too. I'll keep reading and learning in the meantime....

Here is one I posted recently of a a Bushnell HDMR that I am going to do all my shooting with this year after spending last year with Nightforce Compacts for DMR and an F1 BEAST for PRS. It is one of the "budget" scopes.

I did not watch every video, but the first one with the Leupy 3-18 is something that I noticed years ago with Leupys.

How far you plan on shooting your lightweight big game rifle?



Travis

The results of the individual scopes tested there are pretty common, even though I would suspect cherry picking

To say that every scope of each make and model tested will perform exactly like the individual scopes tested is completely wrong.

For example, not every Vortex Viper HD will perform exactly alike.

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.







I had a couple of the MK 6s and both had click values greater than the 6283 Division 0.1 Mil. The reticules were spot on (Horus Tremor, TMR). Not really an issue if a guys knows it and it ain't much but still annoying.

The MK 6 is not really my cup of tea as the resolution really falls off after 15X. In my opinion it would have been a better scope as a 3X-15X.

Form,

You mentioned all three scopes that failed had the split Warnes.

My Tikka has a 6X SS in Warnes on it. The scope adjustments are close to centered and it has been doing great with tracking and RTZ, but three failures makes me worry.

I thought the Warnes were a good option on the Tikka because they mount on the integral rail and have the recoil pin. I also thought they would be more durable than the Talley LW.

With your negative experience with these rings, would you suggest a rail and picatinny rings?

Thanks.

If you're not having issues I wouldn't necessarily worry about it. That is zero doubt with that particular line of scopes, those rings and the ring placement caused the failures. 15in pounds with those rings caused the parallax to lock up consistently. Could not make it happen with multiple sets of horizontal split pic rings even with 40in lbs.


I have rifles with Tally LW's, DNZ's, DD's, Weaver, probably several others and of course picatinny. As I go I am replacing them all with picatinny base rings. Less issues, perfect spacing on the scope, strongest setup, and can swap scopes with the turn of a wrench and near perfect return to zero. Win/win/win.

Thanks for the response.

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...



I highly doubt the people involved with the video's cherry picked anything... I'd guess the comment comes from your emotional attachment to Leupy's... Its easy to find a Leupy that will fail a tracking test... All one has to do is open a Leupold Variable box and you're golden...

I opened every single one of these boxes and didn't find a single one that failed to properly track.

Personally shot every one and tested every one.



Don't you owe me a broken 2.5-8X36mm VX3 to test??

Emotion goes many ways.

I like to play and experiment, but, Wow! How many rounds did you fire and how long did that take?

That's proprietary info I believe....

WOW.... I guess you deserve a cookie... Thanks for solidifying the emotional comment...

If Leupy made a better product than what I own now I'd own them... If somebody else made something better I'd own those... I've given Leupold a run... Tried to like em... They don't last for ME... They may work for everyone else on the planet but if I can't use them then they are of no use to me and I will share MY experiences with them as I wish...

If Leupy's were such great scopes why would a guy have to install a worthless reticle and cheesey (not to be confused with Cheetohs) 1/3 MOA turrets to pimp them... The product can't stand on its own...It's not good enough for Captain Spray Tan to use as is... Shocking...

I don't owe you, or anyone else for that matter, anything at all... I was lucky enough to trip the VX3 before it fell apart... I do have a Mark 4 fixed 6x on the way to satisfy my curiosity on just how far a 6x will take me... If it happens to chit the bed before I'm done with it you are more than welcome to have it... Though the fixed 4's were pretty tough so don't hold your breathe... I'd hate to see you get red in the face.... Oh wait...

elkhuntinguide,

My experience with Burris is the same. Burris was all I used and sold for years. Then they started failing. I no longer will use one. It's like a pox on me and Burris to be together.

You're so full of Schit it's spewing out your ears. No offense

My attachment to Leupold isn't emotional, but IS completely RESULT oriented .............

Mark 4 6.5-20 LR ERT FFP







VX3 6.5-20 LR 40mm



Mark 4 M5 A2 6.5-20




Mark 4 M5 A2 6.5-20

840 yards




Mark 4 M5 A2 6.5-20 at every range imaginable in every condition imaginable...





VX2 6-18 LRVD

[img]http://i379.photobucket.com/al...A9-7498-4A4C-A5E5-C0307F5E3446.jpg[/img]


VX3 6.5-20 LR 40mm

760 yards

[img]http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo236/rcamuglia/Ibex030.jpg[/img]


VX2 6-18 LRVD

[img]http://i379.photobucket.com/al...052866E2-5495-000009C4A2D8EF2C.jpg[/img]


And my fave with the same POS scope that doesn't track or return to zero...


[img]http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo236/rcamuglia/c99227b0.jpg[/img]








There's so many more that I might get emotional

And why are you addressing me with your comments SFB's ?

Quoted ehg. Not directed to you at all.

Unruffle your panties!

Just don't be telling everyone. Averaged about 80rnds per.

Scopes went on the collimator and adjustments were verified. Mounted and shot through breakin.

Of course others were run for a bit longer.

This is the optic on my .264 Win today. It was a return from a famous gunbuilder because it would not "track". I decided to test it and it worked OK for my use. Never been back to Leupold

7mm Rem Mag Barrel




750 yds with the 7mm Mag barrel.



Lots of round later the 7mm Barrel died.

New .264 Win Mag Barrel and miraculously the scope was right back on "track".

760yds, on video.



780yds on this Buck.



450yds. Better buck than I am used too.



Still workin.

[img]http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb428/GreybullPrecision/DSC_0031_zpsb800cb05.jpg[/img]

4 digits on the range finder. (1000yds)

[img]http://i1205.photobucket.com/a...0131119_093023_844_zpsc130453a.jpg[/img]

Darn still workin perfectly.

[img]http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/bb428/GreybullPrecision/DSC00068_zpsf27f7de1.jpg[/img]

Latest picture I have is my bull this year. 550yds.

[img]http://i1205.photobucket.com/a...014%20Elk/DSC01214_zpse1929bae.jpg[/img]

Scope has 2 more elk (575 yds and 40 yds) this year and the barrel is running up on the 2K mark.

I rather expect any day now the scope will explode and poke my eye out but it sure seems to be doing OK up to this point.



Cool. You got it all figured, except, as the OP you couldn't figure out how to actually watch the videos you posted or to figure out how compensate for click values that don't match specs.

Sharing that kind of "experience" might not be as great as you imagine. But rock on as you are on a roll.

It is also worth saying that you did not "share MY experience" in the OP but instead posted others videos.



The non emotion in there is striking, Captain Spray Tan . I like the passion. I might recommend redirecting.



Well actually you did agree to run that VX3 to failure and then send it to me. As you admit you were unable to get it to fail. Seems simple to me but ,bluntly, not surprising as nobody has been willing to let me test a supposed "broken" VX3.

I didn't respond to your OP to start a pissing match but that stupid statement about all VX3s fail was just too dumb to leave stand.

You don't like Leupold, we get it. Some of us, using Leupold, have done way more than you in hunting situations.

that was a pretty interesting test. I sure would love to see more scopes tested like the vortex pst series along with the SWFA super sniper line. bottom line if you want tracking just buy a nightforce. There isn't anything better that I have seen at any price point. I loved that test because it got rid of the shooter and the accuracy of the rifle.

bryan litz on applied ballistics said he has never seen enough tracking error with nightforce to make a difference to even bother with correcting for. However the leupold he tested had a 4% tracking error.

you guys that are leupold lovers. quit denying facts it is what it is. both the leupolds in that test IMO failed the tracking test. Really in my mind bushnell and nightforce were the only ones that passed.

Another great showing to solidify the emotional attachment to an inanimate product... I doubt one would pull out the family photo album with pics of holes in paper, dead animals with yardage tags and pics of a self built shrine of how awesome you think you are to show what a great product you own and attempt to awe the masses of its/your awesomeness...

You could probably place well entering a high jump match with midgets as well... Still not impressive by any means...

Which were the two scopes you just sent recently to Leupold for repairs that failed you and your awesomeness...

The pics do nothing for proof of your "Champion' scope's durability, tracking, zero retention or anything else you are hoping to accomplish here... Leupold has a high failure rate for those that truly use a scope as said scope was designed or marketed... That is a given... For most a leupold is a great scope and may serve them well... Thats fine... For others it's pure junk plain and simple...

There was no emotion in my post(s) either way... I understand you sell Leupold and will jump at the chance to prove its awesomeness... I would expect that from a salesman... Your pics and videos, although quite cute,don't impress the least bit...

I didn't start this thread to have a Leupy fight, nor did I claim the video's as MY own... I am posting from my phone in a bad service area thus the reason I had trouble watching them, and I do now how to compensate for click values that don't match specs but why would a guy spending 2k on an optic want to deal with it... IMO thats a failure in itself but YMMV...

I shared my experience with the Leupy variable failures I have had... Every variable I have owned has failed at one time or another except the 2.5-8...Which in time would have done the same... I traded it for the Mark 4 6x, to this day I have not had a major failure of a fixed Leupy... One had tracking issues and was repaired and has since been sold...

I have no hate for Leupy... I had invested a large amount (to me) in their scopes and additional amounts in turret/reticle changes and could not see dumping more cash into a product that consistently fails...

I'll ask again.... If Leupy's were such great scopes why would a guy have to install a worthless reticle and cheesey (not to be confused with Cheetohs) 1/3 MOA turrets to pimp them... The product can't stand on its own... You seemed to miss that question...

You may have accomplished more using a Leupold than I have using a Leupold but don't pull a muscle trying to pat yourself on the back for your accomplishments.... You have no Idea of what I have accomplished or could you ever... That is a fact...

Well, thanks for thinking I'm awesome

The pics were posted simply to illustrate results of using Leupold optics. I'm positive that anyone else who can shoot would have the same results using the same optics.

You're statement says that my ability can overcome poor equipment which is a nice compliment, but not true





This is the first thing I've seen you post that's true



Actually it's the scope used to shoot the two awesome groups in the first two awesome pictures...a Mark 4 6.5-20 LR ERT FF TMR.



I chose to show those examples of the awesome results I've had with Leupold simply because it happened within the last awesome week of my awesome life. As you can see, Leupold did an awesome job of repairing it



Only someone with a true emotional hard on for a particular outcome could say that while looking at undeniable results obtained with the product. The pictures are IN FACT proof the scope's durability, tracking, zero retention.




I think those folks for whom Leupold scopes have worked well probably can shoot...for those that think Leupold is junk probably can't shoot.

It's a lot easier to blame the optic than to admit a complete lack of awesomeness

All you need is 8000.00 dollars.

+1
Thanks for the informative test EHG.
Spot on results.


dave

RC, I am sure you are a better competitive shot than I am, but that doesn't mean that I am incapable of detecting tracking issues. I used leupolds for a number of years before switching to Nighforce NXS and then to S&B.
In my experience S&B is the finest scope I have ever used and that includes Zeis Davari and US Optics. The lowlight ability of S&B has to be seen to be believed. Coupled with extremely precise tracking and renown reliability as well as resolution comparable to top spotting scopes and you become spoiled.

Yep. No question whatsoever that the S&B's are great scopes. Most of the guys in the top 50 of all precision shooters are using them.

You've seen me post about the scopes I use and the fact that the Mark 4 M5 A2's on my target rifles are the best functioning scopes that my gunsmith has ever seen in over 25 years of mounting and testing scopes.

What that means is that the scope was tested in a similar fashion to what is seen in the videos in the OP. The scope was dialed and actual movement of the reticle was checked and compared to what was dialed. These particular scopes are perfect in every way, all the way to the end of travel where the knob bottoms out and stops.

The value dialed is exactly the value the reticle moves for the entire length of its travel.

I'm kind of a "if it's not broke, don't fix it" type of guy.

Plus the fact that they are 1/2 of the price of S&B...

Your not alone in that.
Longevity has always been an issue.
Build quality, chi-com parts.
Might work great out of the gate but in the long run,you will get burned.And more than likely at the worst possible time.
dave

You guys are really selling Rick Ham-uglia short on his amazing shooting skills. I mean do you guys have any idea how much skill is involved in guessing how much erector shift he deals with, compensating for same and still make hits on steel plates ? And Burns....Burns can make leg shots on Elk at hundreds and hundreds of yards and still smile for the photo op too........I'm truly not worthy.

Wow.

I guess if I used Steiner, I'd rule the World

I'd call you an idiot, but that would be an insult to all idiots

No offense taken as I think you're a jerk-off as well.

Classic.

dave

Very interesting John. Any of those scopes VX-3's ?
I had a chance to shoot with one of the local sheriff's TAC Squad guys not long ago. About 2/3's of them were shooting fancy looking AR-10 rifles with Leupold VX-3's. Hunting scopes, not Mk.4 scopes.
They worked as they should.
BTW, in Kalifornia, any police sniper must shoot his rilfe at least once a month. He must record the weather conditions, and note exactly where his first and last round hit. If he shows up in court over any shots he took, he must be able to prove the rifle was properly zeroed, etc. E

Do you know how I know when the other fella knows he don't really know what he thought he knew but his ego won't let him let it go??

It is classic, in so much as it is a predictable outcome in these types of threads.


WTF are you yappin about???

ehg don't know as much as he thinks he knows? That's some Grade-A humor right there...

Tanner

Always amusing around here.

Yeah, I had a weak moment there but came to my senses when they came back, adjusted perfectly, and shot 1-hole groups.

how 'bout the 34mm tube offerings?

Any scope will be more durable for you since you don't have to deal with scope shrinkage/swelling since you have that aluminum bedding block in your stocks right?

I put little value in reports from those with an agenda. Formi and EHG have no agenda but do have lots of experience with various optics. When they talk I listen.

My personal experience is a high failure rate with Leupolds.

As I have mentioned before, a current highly decorated benchrest guru has won many comps with Leups yet he will dog cus them. As I understand, the only reason they are predominately used in benchrest is to make weight, NOT because of reliability

Well, thanks for thinking I'm awesome

I don't think you're awesome, but you can read in to it what you must to feel good about yourself darling... In reality I see you as an Egotistical prick going through a midlife crisis/menopause which ever fits your scenario, surfing the internet to get the cyber pat on the back that you are special...

The pics were posted simply to illustrate results of using Leupold optics. I'm positive that anyone else who can shoot would have the same results using the same optics.

Only someone with a true emotional hard on for a particular outcome could say that while looking at undeniable results obtained with the product. The pictures are IN FACT proof the scope's durability, tracking, zero retention.

How do the pics show proof of the scope's durability, tracking, zero retention... The internet is supposed to believe it because it's YOU... The pics do nothing for the Leupold optic line... A good sample of one here and there is bound to happen... For the most part Leupys are fine for the average guy who is not going to push an optic, use it in rough conditions, and is willing to pamper it as the delicate object it is on a daily basis... At one time I used nothing but Leupold... Day in and day out... Then the failures started... Over and over... One here and there is gonna happen... But not every single variable (except one) a guy has in his tool box... We understand you're a Leupy Poster gal.... Trying to mask a product with a high failure rate as something amazing shows no more that how attached you are to said product whether financially/emotionally... I could post pics of groups and animals at random distances and say they were shot with X brand and at X distance and who would really no the difference... Its the internet dumbass...

You're statement says that my ability can overcome poor equipment which is a nice compliment, but not true

Fixed it for you...

I chose to show those examples of the awesome results I've had with Leupold simply because it happened within the last awesome week of my awesome life. As you can see, Leupold did an awesome job of repairing it

I highly doubt all the pics you posted in this thread happened in the last week but its your story... Tell it how you'd like...

I think those folks for whom Leupold scopes have worked well probably can shoot...for those that think Leupold is junk probably can't shoot.

I can't shoot worth a chit... You got me there... Ones mans junk is another mans treasure.... You must feel like a Pirate...

It's a lot easier to blame the optic than to admit a complete lack of awesomeness

Until your optic fails... Then where does the blame lie... I'd of thought you'd have figured that out by now Turbo...

Just like E F Hutten I guess.




They are the embodiment of perfection.






I buy my Leupolds just like anyone else. What is my "agenda" ?

The trials and tribulations of trying to become an internet legend...

The Emotional roller coaster must be devastating...

My Lord! Lots of red there. So obvious you're on period. .

I'lltry and save some time for those who would have the audacity to dispute the musings of rcam........

If you don't plink away at distant game animals til one falls, it's only cause you're jealous cause you don't have the skills........

If your scope results don't jibe with the word according to rcm, it's only cause you're jealous cause you don't have the uber scopes he has.......

It's always the same illogical line of BS from this guy, in other words.............

If you're not a complete self-absorbed a$$hole, it's only because you're jealous that he is.

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.

So what's your reply to the fact that only 2 (two) of the Top 50 precision rifle shooters in the country are using Nightforce scopes.

You have taken the position that because it has not been my experience it is not so.

Now, you report that you recently experienced two failures, then somehow try to convince us that its okay, and that we still need to ignore failures reported by others.

Your position on Leups is simply not logical.

When police snipers start shooting past 200 yards let us know.

Right when I thought this couldn't get any better.....

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.





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.

15x top end on NF's only FFP offering mainly, and to a lesser extent an over belief in "glass", and sponsorship. Beyond that, how many Bushnell Tacticals were in the top ten...?


The 5-25x S&B has been and is the standard for high end FFP scopes for tactical matches. It was for a long time the only viable choice. You will see ALOT of Vortex Razor Gen II's in the next few years, and a bunch of NF FFP ATACR's. S&B's failing at matches is happening more and more and people are starting to notice. The Gen II's will be very popular this year, and the FFP ATACR's will kill it when they are released.


You'll wanna order the 4-16x ATACR.... and that's not a guess.

John,


I was in the community when the change happened. I was there when Tod starting pushing them. I know what drove it. I know why it continues, and why it's the correct choice. I also know that despite the legitimate use for it, that ain't the whole reason we have it.


Stop with the "I know cool people" stuff. You may, and probably do. But that doesn't matter. I used one of the very first S&B's that had a Horus in it. I was in the school when one of the very first was being tested. Most shooters don't care why stuff happens or why they have what they have, they just use what they are given. And that includes the very top.

Well there be 2 Ds in Todd and if you think that is where it started at the Tier 1 level then I got to smile.

The real world advantages that the "Fly Swatter Reticle" brings to a gunfight has to do with skipping any dialing at all. Gut hits, ankle hits, leg hits all count for a mobility kill. Getting a hit any where faster is the name of the game.

There is a reason Light Infantry lives by the Fire, Move, and Communicate motto.

In that realm the Horus is a rangefinder (with the first shot) and a quick and dirty way of pouring rounds on a schithead that needs killing. 20 (7.62) and 30 (5.56) box mags are great facilitators in this type of shooting.

While very important and not to in any way be ridiculed that is not modern sport hunting.

One well placed hit to the vitals or I pass if that seems in question. Deer, Elk , and Antelope deserve way more than savages.

To equate the Horus choice to be because of Leupold tracking issues is just goofy and stupid.

Ok.

Actually, I won't want to at all.

When Leupold makes a scope like the Mark 4 M5 A2 there's no reason to do so unless you don't like money.

How many S&B's, Nightforce's, US Optics, Steiners, Khales etc....do you think I have beaten over the last few years with Leuopold scopes finishing as high as I have at the few major matches I've shot?

I admittedly don't have the drive or desire anymore to prove what I can do in the Rifle World as I did in the Shotgun World. But there's no doubt that Leupold isn't holding me back

Ric,

Does Leupold send loaners when yours are getting repaired? Or are you like the rest of us... without scope/rifle for a few weeks?

I was pissed when my LRF died, but Swaro gave me a loaner so that eased the pain a bit. Didn't do me any good while I was in the field with a dead LRF though. I'd imagine the same would apply to a scope dying on a hunt or comp, wouldn't?

Jason

They don't send a loaner. Repair turnaround time is quick. The two I had to send back were returned to me in 3 weeks

I explained my post as slowly as possible and why I posted what I did... It has nothing to do with my lack of knowledge on how a scope works or the value at which one tracks... As stated before I did not watch the video prior to making that post...I've seen at least 2 other video's and numerous pages of complaints on March scopes and took for granted that the attached video was the same... That was my bad and I manned up to it...

Now I will ask for a third time....


I guess it doesn't really matter as you've dodged that question in another thread as well as 3 times in this one... It's really none of my business or anyone else's for that matter... Obviously it works for you and you're happy with it... I still think its cheesy at its chessyest...

I doubt Tanner was blindly agreeing with anyone... The young man is very astute and will go places and do things that 90% of the masses will only read about...

I painfully will have to Bow out of this discussion for a bit as I have to attend a Crocheting Convention in the southern part of the state... That Crocheting stuff is serious business... I won't have service again until the 16th so you gals have fun...

Keep it Real Agent "Orange"...

"Cheesy" 1/3 MOA clicks equate to .1 mil.

Wtf is wrong with that? That's what good scopes are based on.

I recall Frank Galli (Lowlight at Snipershide) stating, "Leupold fails the most, Nightforce the least, and S&B somewhere in between." Or something to that effect, I just remember the main idea.

I know Frank used to be much more willing to share opinions on Leupold failures but I think people started getting defensive (offended). He stated numerous times that he is just relaying what is seen in his classes and others precision shooting schools. Its really no different than what Formi has been saying...

Post by Lowlight:

Re: whats wrong with leupold?

Funny, you see the truth, you point out the problems, which happen far too often, you're a hater of the company...

When class after class the number one scope to fail is Leupold, --then people claim because so many of them are out there, well these are their "tactical" scopes and not the hunting line. When we have a competition with 92 shooters and the one brand with multiple scope failures on the line is Leupold, to the point where people can no longer continue to compete, that is not hate, but a problem within the product line.

However if I see a problem and bring it to the company and they tell me we'll look into it, and I say nothing --- people also get up in arms.

When you point out the scopes "no longer" say Made in USA, people get upset with the messenger, and don't question a company who's prices have gone up, who's failure rates has increased, and who moved to second tier parts enough to lose the Made in USA tag, we are haters.

Sure plenty of scopes are made overseas, but their failure rate is not reflected on their location. For a company like NF, who is bringing things on shore, and is used every bit alongside Leupolds in the military, the failure rate cannot be compared... it's easily 5 to 1, maybe even 10 to 1. Sure Leupolds are packaged with system rifles, but that is not based on success, but volume, the ability to produce replacements better than any other company.

Are they god awful, no not at all, but really would I invest my money in one given the choices, absolutely not. Given the same budget, there are better scopes to invest in, some for less money.

I have a new M5 here to review, I think from the outside it is a decent scope, we'll see how it performs... but other companies out there are definitely beating Leupold at their own game haters or not.

Link to Lowlight post

Always get a kick of the "Leopold" reference.

Interesting, but....

I'd rather see a summary data table with accurate measures as opposed to watching videos where data is reported as something like "about 19."

I can see giving them another go if you've had good luck with them..

What about the next time? I dont have that exact scope you have, but believe they all use the same erector..So it will happen..someday you might just get tired of fuggin around.

I agree with formadiolo on why the Horus came about. However I think it's a crappy concept when your scope works correctly mechanically if I am doing a holdover reticle the best one I have seen is the nightforce velocity reticles.

Look the Leopold deniers are ill rational. That means they can't be reasoned with. That means it does no good to argue with them, imagine pouring water on a rock.

It has everything to do with your lack of knowledge. You didn't bother to actually watch videos you posted because you were just sure those vids would support your view point.

March gets a pass and a (wrong) explanation of how to adjust for miss matched clicks but Leupold is crap. Seems Legit.

Here is a hint. Do your phhucking due diligence. That's how the Big Boys play the game.


Do you know how I know that you know you know way less than I know on this subject.

Looks like there isn't a body hit on that cow pic John ? Blood on the front leg though. Probably a non-pass through VLD ?

Your friend,

Roy

I experienced too adjustment issues with Leupold just as Lowlight posted. RC, john Burns and a friend that is an amazing long range Hunter shooter use leupolds and have had better luck with them than I. I simply moved on have been very pleased.

I like tater tots................

This.

I think the reason so many confuse the two are they have little actual experience hunting, and none gun fighting....

To borrow a term from my 10 year old, that's Captain Obvious, and has been my thought process all along.

If my priority is reliability, should I listen to a gun fighter whose survival is at stake or should I listen to a long range hunter who sales the scope he promotes and has no risk of survival?

....

Troops:

I'd rather not listen to anyone. Just put up documented data describing ones methods or procedures, the products compared, and the results.

I see statements here like 5 to 1 failure rates. How many of each were compared? If there were 500 X's and 100 Y's with respective failures of 100 and 20, then we have similar rates of 20%.

Show us some data please. The videos exhibiting 1 Burris, Leupold, Tasco, etc that are not even remotely similar products (i.e a 12X vs a 6X vs a 20X) does not a trial make.

How much are you paying for documented data? Discretion is your friend.

Heck, I couldn't tell you how many Leups have failed me alone. But I can tell you its WAY more than is acceptable TO ME, without quantification.

There is one constant that is the same in both hunting and gun fighting, the need for reliability and that Is why it is brought up.
A totaly reliable scope with high resolution and excellent low light ability is an asset in either gun fighting or hunting. Those aspects correlate.

Wow, I am imagining pouring water on a rock.



Look again.

VLD exit at point of shoulder. Stream of lung blood on front leg.

Right now I am very angry at you and will not be sending you a birthday card this year. Harsh, yes, but fair.

Your Friend,

John



Seems like a pretty level headed approach.

John,

Still waiting on my rifle.....................

Again, "Captain Obvious" how many gunfights do you intend to be in with said scope vs how many long range hunts?

Combat reliability/precision and hunting reliability/precision are not necessary the same.

If you buy a combat precision optic, you're probably overpaying for reliability you'll never, ever use.

Can an optic be "too reliable?"

It can be uneconomical for it's intended use. Why spend money on the ability to take abuse the scope will never see?

All of my hunting optics are hunting optics. My fighting optics (on my AR pattern rifles) are fighting optics.

They are not the same. Even my hunting ARs have fighting optics sighted in for that use.

I don't exactly agree with your take on this. I travel all over the country in the work that I do. I pull a trailer with clothes as well as hunting rifles I have found all but the most reliable scopes change impact points in transit. I do not think one can have too much reliability in an optic. But that is just me, I hate to have a scope tracking issue that requires sending the scope in for repairs.
Buy the very best one can afford and one will receive top results. At least that has been my experience.

Totally agree with this.

Don't agree with "buy the best there is no matter the application or cost."

These guys have all the precision they need and all the reliability they need. All I'm saying is it is a balance or trade-off based on needs.

The most winning short range bench rest shooter of all time is Tony Boyer.
He runs Leupold competition scopes.
Leupold uses Mr. Boyer in there adds.
What they dont tell you is that they give him the scopes.
And of course fix them when they break.

dave

E's statement may have been true years ago, but they've relied too much on their name and reputation for too long and let their competitors catch up and surpass them in features, performance, and value: $ spent. They still make good stuff, but they've had to come to the realization that others are now offering superior products for the same or less $. That fact is evident by all the recent changes in their product lines. They've always been the benchmark for great warranty & customer service, but some of their competitors are now offering warranties and CS just as good. For many years, they touted their "made in US" status, yet the only parts content that is made in Oregon is their scope tubes and mechanical parts of scopes. Everything else, including lenses for their scopes and entire optical product lines outside of riflescopes, is outsourced to Asia. They are really no more American made than Meopta Meopro, Zeiss Conquest, Trijicon Accupont, and others that are assembled in the US from parts made elsewhere.

Technologies borrowed from the VX7 series is used in VX3, at a much lower price. Because of this, the VX3 is now equal to their competitors in the same price range. They've tried repeatedly to compete head to head with the high end Euro scopes with their LPS and VX-7 scopes, and they weren't successful, as evidenced by the new VX6 series coming out that's intended to replace VX7 at a much lower price point (sub- $1K). Comparing feature to feature, their MK4 series tactical / military scopes don't stack up well at all against current offerings from just about everyone else -- Nightforce, S&B, Premier, Hensoldt, Vortex, US Optics, IOR, Kahles, March, and others, all of whom offer better optical performance, better adjustments, better knobs, wider zoom ratios, and better reticles. The MK4 optically lags behind even their own VX3 series. The very fact they are introducing several new tactical scope series is their admission they need to improve.

The upside to all this is Leupold is being forced to up their game, and we all benefit from the stiff competition by having better optics available from not just Leupold, but everyone else.

Thats a pretty astute observation there RifleDude.
In markets that they should by all rights own,there now tail end charlies.
A general rule of thumb is that loopie,these days,is about 7 to 10 years behind,everyone else.

I stopped drinking the coolaid several decades ago.



From Lowlight on Snipers Hide:

So what do you tell the guy who traveled 1200 miles to take a class.. he paid $1500 for the class, plus rental car, hotels, meals, and by the first day it fails... now he goes from what he thought was a solid optics with a stellar reputation to being the guy holding up the class while we run up, get a new scope for him, usually I am pulling one of my NF off to switch it for him. If you want to play the one up and working, the NF I use is heavily used, my S&Bs too, and guess what, of all of them, with more combined rounds than I can count, and only one scope has ever gone back for repair. They well worn and definitely show signs of use.

yes, other brands fail, but not nearly with the frequency as we are seeing with Leupold. it's every week in some cases, and even in the military classes we have Nightforce on the unit rifles next to Leupold... but I don't see the NF failing nearly as much, it's stark the reality of it, especially when you see more than 1 or 2 a week.

It's easily 20 to 1 when you compare the Nightforces on the line with the military units, this last class had 4 Leupolds on the line, 1 failed the first day, the remainders where USO, NF, and S&B... Do we see others fail, sure but not nearly as much.

If you want to start a generic scope failure thread go ahead, but don't be surprised by the results. Facts are what the facts are, in a class of 15 Leupolds on the line I expect and account for anywhere from 2 to 5 scopes to go down, I don't figure that with the same number of NF on the line. Its closer to 1 per every six months of classes, not 1 for every six people.

I wouldn't call that Brand Hatred.
More like a statment of fact.
I personally dont care for 20 to 1 odds that im going to have a problem.

The flip side of that could be.
"You leupold coolaid drinkers have made the optics page about useless"
See,it works both ways.




dave

From 24hour
This is the Shot Show report from Accurate Rifles;


A Contrast in Style � American vs. European Optics-Makers
Among the major optics makers, the difference between American and European marketing styles was painfully obvious. Leupold and Burris had fast-talking, glad-handing salesmen, who, for the most part, knew very little about their product line and even less about optics engineering. By contrast, Zeiss and Schmidt & Bender staffed their booths with real optics engineers with Ph.Ds, many of whom were directly involved in the design of the products on display. At Zeiss we spent nearly an hour talking with Stephan Albrecht, the German engineer in charge of the new 20-75X Diascope spotting scope and the new Diavari Flourite riflescopes. During our conversations with Stephan he actually solicited our feedback, took careful notes and promised to explore some of our suggestions. We also were able to share our field test results directly with Eric Schumacher, President of Carl Zeiss Optical, USA. By contrast, Leupold�s decision makers and top-level engineers were nowhere to be found, and when we voiced our (now annual) plea that Leupold stop building scopes with canted reticles, we were greeted with nothing but blank stares. Leupold�s reps couldn�t comprehend the canted reticle problem, even after I pulled a scope (with 3� canted reticle) off their display rack and showed them.

Butch
Butchlambert

I enjoy a good Fra diavolo on my pasta.......

Any company that sponsors a shooter provides him with the product and services that product if need be.

I trust that's not news to you.

This includes Schmidt and Bender, Nightforces, Khales, Bushnell, Steiner and whoever else you'd like to plug in there.

David,

I have had more Leups fail than not fail. FOR ME reliability is now my number one priority. I am tired of failures. Its that simple.

Talking out of my ass? How so? Please elaborate

Clint

I've seen Jim Carrey do it, and it's not easy.

True! And he gets paid well to do it.

Holy mackeral, you have a Youtube video answer for every question!!!!

That's some funny Chit!

Pun intended! LOL

My bad for saying that. I've retracted the comment.

dave 7mm,

Interesting observations from Frank/Lowlight

Of course, hunting and sniper school are different.

Hill Country Rifles has been saying for the past few years that the QC and reliability of Leupold's scopes has diminished considerably.

And all they're basically doing is sighting them in and testing loads.

dave

According to one poster here, who is is very well respected on my fronts, and not just optics, I was told that Leupold's QC really dropped off right around the mid 2000's. Seem to recall that that was around the time when one of the last Leupold family members retired which seemed to trigger the start of their QC drop off. My own feeling, and I also agree with the person I referred to, that was when Leupold really started to expand their product line (the Zombie should be a good indicator of their distancing from the fine company they used to be, and I believe that unless they really expanded their workforce, this is probably where QC started to fall off. It's sad that this is the case, as myself included along with many other posters here, was a dedicated Leupold scope owner and all my rifle wore them. Also, the poster here seemed to get the feeling that the company seem to really, really focus to much on large profits as their interactions seemed much more profit driven and there was much less talk about construction of their once notable reliable scope line. to me, when I thought about Leupold scopes, the first thoughts that came to mind were, ruggedness, light weight, very fog proof, good value and great CS, which fortunately is still solid.

With leupold its pretty much always about the number of rounds fired.
Unless its one of the many other issues they are noted for.
900 to 1100 rounds has always been where every one i've ever owned, started to puke.
Then you can start talking about how great there service is and how quick you got it back.
Ive done pretty well with S&B and Nightforce in my 1000 yard BR game.
Last summer I built a 6mm Dasher on a 12 pound BR rifle and topped it off with a 10-60x52 March.This is my first March and im only at the 400 round mark right now.I like the scope alot but only shooting it, will tell the tale...
For big game hunting I only run FFP Euros.
I consider leupold ,way overpriced, very light duty scopes,that can serve you pretty well, as long as you dont use them very much.

dave

RD thats when the chi-com parts came onboard.

dave

You guys are something else. As the saying goes, somewhere in the middle likely lies the truth!

I've had good luck with Leupolds, but I've not put them through the punishment some on here claim they will fail under. For hunting purposes, they work well for me.

Blind agreement... More Grade-A humor. What ehg did or didn't accomplish in the Armed Forces is none of my business.... But I've seen his hunting success. Think it'll suffice to say that you don't have a clue about what he does on a regular basis.

Tanner

Tanner likes tater tots too.....

The SO I shot with shot at 300 yds. just to warm up for their annual qualifications. They use the 800 yd. tactical range to qualify. These are rural cops, not big city sorts. E

I can understand leupolds philosophy of wanting to supply chi-com wally world shoppers a bubble wrap scope that they can stick on top of there slidemasters and shoot one box of shells for the next 30 years and build it to the much lower quality standard to save money.
I get it.
But why in the world would a company apply that same philosophy to a competition scope or god forbid something that ends up on the battlefield.

dave

Shared my home range with local SWAT snipers last summer.
100 yards was the qualifying yardage.
But they did play around shooting through windows and windshields.They also did some timed events.
Was kinda interesting to watch.
They shot Blazers in 308 with 5.5-22x56 NF scopes.
Good bunch of guys.
I had one of them try out my Dasher at 500.The guy got a kick out of the 2 oz. trigger.... and the 1 inch group at 500 yards.

E.
What happened to your name anyway?

dave

Ah, yes. The famous 20-30% "failure rate" rants. Posted by guys that think that all Leupold scopes are made the same. Nightforce and S&B don't make far cheaper hunting scopes. Scopes that can cheaply converted to quasi tactical scopes. Leupold even makes lines of cheap tactical scopes as well as top quality ones. They also have no idea which scopes are new and which have histories of high use. Funny those of us that shoot and have hunted alot don't see anything like these failure rates.
Leupold's quality dropped off after 2000 ? So, they now make lower quality scopes so they can maintain a large repair department because that is cheaper ? Sure they do.
Nice try Dave. E

Couldn't log in some time back. So I logged in with a different name. E

Actually E.
I figure my 900 to 1100 round count number is a bit high.
I tend not to want to believe my loopies would quit like that so I push on hoping im wrong.
The number is more like 700 to 900 before the flippie erector bites the dust.
I just didnt want to believe it.
Sad actually.

dave

That's pretty funny Dave. I haven't had that happen. Neither have any of the guys I shoot with unless they shoot really hard kicking rifles. When that happens, they can't seem to find anything that lasts longer. Unless it's a Leupold fixed magnification scope. E

Man everybody sucks Im so confused. Im a Leupold fan but I think that Burns and Murgia both come off as pompous a holes.

So where does that leave me? I am not a Sniper I don't shoot tacticool matches. Longest hunting kill was a Whitetail at 438 yards. Longest shot on target was 735.

I get by with a 6x I don't like variable's. But I can say that I have put well over a 1000 rounds each on two different 3-9 Varix 1s and they are still working.

My 6x42 on my 7mm Mag has been on there approaching 1500 rounds and I bought it used. The 6x42 on my .223 has been on two different rifles totaling over 5000 rounds.

My old 6x36 M8 has been thru 800 round on my .50 cal muzzleloader and I really have no idea how many on different rifles that I have bought and sold. Its kinda my floater scope.

Never had any issues with any of them. So in my experience they Leupolds hold up well past the 1000 round mark.

About forgot I have a old m8 4x also that I have had for 20 years. Dont have a clue how many rounds it has presided over but its several. Even once killed a doe at 350 yards with it. Must of been lucky.

Leupold may not be the best Sniper or Tacticool scope out there but they are a pretty damn good scope for the money.

And Old Formidilosus even though he ain't a Leupold fan speaks like he knows what he is talking about. So I do listen to what he says.

Like I said Im confused....

Well you would be 100% wrong. Pretty sure if he wanted that to be a topic of discussion he would have gone there. Hint.

I agree 7mmMato. These constant Leupy failure threads are almost laughable. Do some fail, of course they do. They all do.

Having used lots of Leupy variables over the past 42 years hunting big game (zero failures) and having over 100 hunters show up in our hunting camps toting rifles topped with Leupy variable with zero failures, it makes me wonder if there are that many people who do not know how to properly mount a scope, know anything about parallax, etc. Leupold cannot possibly put out as much junk as dave's ridiculous regurgitated BS shows.

Do Leupy's fail, of course some of them do. Some of every brand fails. The 24HCF optics discussions often times have me shaking my head.

JG, One thing is for sure, the more rounds down range, the more likely you are to see a failure. Realize that we arent all idiots, we know how to mount a scope, and we know about parallax. We have learned from our own personal experience. What is laughable is that some try to tell us it didnt happen! Hell, I was there!

Tell me exactly how you discovered a failure por favor

I think he shot at a tree.

And Missed.

Could be wrong but WTF it makes me smile.

Side note: You and I are Pompous A-Holes. Like that is really "News"

Extra Side Note. You really are a Pompous A-Hole. Me , I am just a wall flower that is misunderstood by a few.

Extra Extra Side Note. While I am not exactly a shotgun aficionado that picture of the trophy with Andy Duffy's name and yours is pretty F'n cool.

Well done and good shootin, that did not come easy, Rick.

Johnny, would that statement extend to Hill Country Rifles too? Or would you agree that HCR must have an idea on properly mounting scopes, etc.?

HCR from what I can ascertain has no agenda. They've simply been reporting their vast experience with Leupold QC and failure rates over several years.

So is it safe to assume that Mr. Burns knows EHG personally? And that he knows him better than most. And that by him (burns) saying that Mr EHG is full of chit, that he speaks from experience? I've seen several of EHG's posts in which many fine animals were taken....he seems to know his stuff....

I found the videos interesting. Mostly in that it showed a pretty good representation of how to set up a tracking device to test your scope. I also found it interesting that some of these scopes were repeatedly off by a small margin.
Now being how these scopes were "cherry picked" or not remains to be seen. The fact is that if these scopes that were in the videos were off on tracking on the bench, what would it be like in the field? Now depending upon what rifle a guy is using, being off a few clicks may not matter, but using a heavier round would definitely have adverse affects....ie....a 264 win mag vs a 30-06....wouldn't it?
I'm sure all scopes have a point in their lifetime that fail. It is that stance of some here that Leupold products fail more than others, and it also safe to say that some Rick and John have not experienced these failures as often, or at all....
any scope is only as good as the guy behind them. I'm no long range guru by any means, and I don't claim to be one either, I prefer to bow hunt.....but that is a personal choice...have I taken animals with a rifle, yes....from no distance anywhere near what Rick shot that coyote at...that's a heck of a shot on that one Rick....good job.

What size of target do you guys practice on?
So I guess I need to ask is how should I practice at these long distances to become more proficient? With MOA sized targets? I'm looking to get better at shooting further. I mean I can hit the silhouettes at the Whittington Center, and have shot the white Buffalo, but that thing is like the size of a UPS van...I didn't find that much of a gauge of my skills... lol

Thanks in advance for any help or info....

Wow! With numbers like that no one could offer up an argument. I hope one keeps better track of their finances.

So, does that mean something like 7 failures, 200, or 3,157?

RC, My experience has mainly been with the 3.5-10x40 VX (Vari X) III with M1's or target turret, which was my go to setup for years. I am not and have never claimed to be a "long range" hunter. These scopes were to get me to 400 yards comfortably. I have a 400 yard range with the 400 line literally 10 yards from my back door. Safe to say I'm comfortable at 400 yards. I would estimate conservatively that the number of Leup scopes would be 20. Of the 20, at least 10 have failed. Failures include shifts of zero, and I'm not only talking about little shifts either, but mostly big swings. Tracking was individual to each scope. Click values were not what they should be and returning to zero after big swings was a crap shoot (big swings were mostly during testing but I occasionally get to go long).

I'm not a fan of heavy rifles but I do have one and consider it my tester. Its a 308 with a bunch of rounds down the tube but still holding them tight. When a scope is in doubt the rig tells the tale, and its ratted out several.

Here's a sample of six 5 shot groups.




1minute,

Regarding finances, I appreciate your concern. I am a current licensed CPA. I've got it under control.

Remember, you are the one with the argument, not me. I have never claimed anyone's account to be false. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I have only followed the reports of others, with discretion, and vaguely reported my experience if anyone is interested. I have made my own conclusion based mainly on my own personal experience, confirmed by others' experience who I consider reliable sources.

This is 10 rounds from my most current rig, which weighs in at less than 8 lbs including rings and scope! Point being, shooting is NOT a priority of mine and not really even a hobby anymore, though I do my share of it. I am not an expert. But I am not an idiot!

Zinger.

Hope you get it soon.

Nice rifle ctsmith......even better shooting...
Hardly anyone anymore posts pics of 10 shot groups....
I'm interested when you want to sell it,
What are the specs?

Thanks John.

I think.


Unless you're just being a pompous a-hole Ha!

Nothing worth having comes easy and it's obvious you know that. On being branded as pompous a-holes, I think that feelings get hurt when blatant evidence is shown by either you or I that is contrary to what the owner of those feelings wants to believe. The evidence acts like a Ronco inside-the-egg egg scrambler in the brainial region of the feeling-holder causing dissonance.

I would have said "cognitive" dissonance, but there's not a lot of cognition happening around here.

There's always the possibility that he didn't want it to be a topic of discussion. Hard to fathom, eh?

I never said you were an idiot, ever. What I did say is that there are an awful lot of guys, including gunsmiths (via reliable info from our own MD's books) that do not know how to properly mount a scope. I've seen it myself on a smaller scale. There are even more of the every day hunters that don't know what parallax is, and have never even heard of it, but like to blame the scope first. We've had several instances in camp that verify this as well.

The fire has a strong legacy of shockingly ignorant PR by business owners. John Burns, Marc Taylor, Whambasted...
Say what you want about Stick, at least he has the sense to separate his income source from internet pontificating.

Hey Fost. No, HCR knows the program, 100%, and I believe you and their results as well. Notice I said earlier that I have no doubt there are a certain amount of Leupy failures. By contrast, when they lapped rings and mounted up my Leupy scope on my HCR 7mag, tracking and performance was perfect because I asked them. They said the .5" group was "easy" to obtain.

It's like anything else....if I told you personally that HCR rifles sucked because I have had multiple failures with their rifles, while at the same time you have had multiple successes with your HCR rifles, You'd likely have a hard time understanding or believing that HCR rifles suck, and I wouldn't blame you.

I'm posting this with no claim of being a expert of anything.

When I was looking for a quality knob turner scope I asked a gunsmith that I respect & does a lot of tactical rifles for his opinion, his reply; "I don't recommend any scope anymore, they all have problems!" I said,"Come on? Even S&B and Nightforce?" His response, "I've even had them come back with issues." So I redirected my questions as,"So what are on your personal rifles?" His response, "Forget it, I no longer recommend any scopes to friends and/or customers. They all have issues these days."

Of course the conversation went from there to; what kind of issues & why? He shared a lot of information with me which I will not go into here.

My recommendation is buy with in your budget and expected to have issues or get lucky and find one that does not. Truely it is a crap shoot, in my opinion.

I wouldn't. If I had good luck with them, but you and three or four others could demonstrate that there were significant problems, I would rightly figure their QC was off, and would not take the risk. Why should I? To do so, is the definition of burying your head in the sand.

Agree 100%.

Ask my good friend John (Hondo) how that philosophy turned out for him with his Zeiss a few weeks ago. And the great part about it was that I happened to be with him in Texas to witness it (actually was spotting for him when it happened). Classic!

Eating_Crow_via_Zeiss_HD5

A sample of 100 different Leupy variables perfoming as intended is hardly "burying my head in the sand". The vast, vast majority of these same hunters show up with Swaro binocs. Maybe this proves to the 24HCF experts they aren't dumbazzzes after all?

Leupy QC may be off, I don't personally know (time will tell though).

I love the Meopta stuff I've fiddled with....a lot.

ctsmith....that would indeed pisss me off. This is exactly why, in my hardheadedness, I'm currently sworn off of SwaroA/Z3 scopes. Not to be boring redundant but I had one come apart while actually trying to kill a 190" mule deer buck. Shot the poor thing to pieces. In fact, this is what made me go back to VX3's and VX6's, at least for a while. Swaro CS is stellar though (which is a terrible quality to mention according to many here) in that they had it back to me, new erector assembly included, within 3 weeks. I sold it promptly.

My hunting buddy Big Al had a Zeiss 85T spotter go titsup (focus wheel broke) rendering it useless. It took them over 6 months to get it fixed.

Some really funny stuff there on that thread. Especially the part about dropping rifles on their scopes and the expectation that they should retain their zero.

fuggen amazin'

I've never used their tactical scopes so I have no idea behind their reasoning or even if they are a faulty as others say. So I guess I can't answer or agree/disagree with your statement.

Pretty articulate. For an ape.

Gonzaga, here's a link to the rifle.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...s/9290309/Beanland_Light_308#Post9290309

Sweet rig there ct. Nice shootin' too.

From Terry Cross on Snipers Hide:

I apologize in advance but I have to rant for a second.

I have always been a huge, huge Leupold advocate. They were always my benchmark for quality, innovation and U.S. workmanship. I own an awful lot of their product and continue to use it regularly.

However. . . . In the last few years, I have seen a change in the way Leupold does business and delivers product to the market. As they have grown, they have embraced many less than admirable traits that seem to define too many parts of American businesses. While their pricing has been steadily increasing at a faster rate than inflation, their quality has dropped. They are still capable of producing a sharp, repeatable optic but not as dependably.

My biggest aggravation with Leupold is the fact that less than 5% of their product line that can be legally stamped "Made in U.S.A." and I'm not even sure that those few are !!! What started out with a few of their Wind River imports has blown into an all out effort to prostitute their name brand for a dollar.

I just received 18 RX-4 range finders, 18 Tactical 10x50 Patrol Binoculars and 18 Mk 4 LR/T 4.5-14x50mm TMR Illum. scopes for a package deal I have to ship. This is pretty much suppossed to be their better gear. Guess what? Range finders "Made In CHINA". Binoculars "Made In China". Scopes have no country of origin marked on the packaging, instructions or product. Call back from Leupold informs me that the scopes are assembled in Oregon but so many of the parts and sub-assemblies are made over-seas (mostly China except for some of their lenses)that they do not qualify for the Made in USA stamp!

I can assure you that sourcing their components and products from China has dropped their costs very, very dramatically while they have continued to raise market prices. You know, honestly, it isn't even the price/profit thing that burns me. It is the fact that they chose to move their sourcing and manufacturing (I do consider "manufacturing" and "assembly" two different beasts in this instance) out of the country and specifically China. Why couldn't they keep most of their production here and just up their pricing 10%? Jesus, I could drop my selling price and triple my profit on freakin Pod-Loc kits if I used components from outside the U.S., but I refuse to go there. Guess that is why I still drive a 10 year old truck.

While they may still have satisfactory product performance and at least attempt innovative ideas occaisionally, I believe that they are straying from their roots, pumping a ton of money into foreign factories and putting yet another hole in the bottom of the lifeboat that retains at least a small fraction of our ability to domestically support our police and military logistics in the event of any serious conflict. I remain firmly convinced that we shall sorely curse the day that we wake up and realize that we need to raise our military to a task only to find out we have cut off our own legs. I aim this statement not only at Leupold but other textile, steel, electronics and molding industries based in the U.S. You don't just start that [bleep] back up inside the U.S. borders overnight.

I will continue to use my original Leupold products but I shall migrate away from giving their company blanket support. I will, instead continue to give more and more support to companies that take risks, accept slightly lower margins and consciously make the effort to strengthen our own economy and workforce. As you purchase your gear or spec out the equipment for your agency bids, please consider more than F.O.V. and click value.

I would seriously love to debate the execs at Leupold in front of their Board about some of this.

DISCLAIMER: I know that some out there will have personal budgets at home that restrict your choices to imports and I totally respect that. A non-US product is better than no product at all in some cases.

DISCLAIMER #2: Yeah, that was more than a second. Sorry.
TC

Answer from Lowlight on Snipers Hide.

Amen,

Every year they seem to get farther and farther away from what made them the company worthy of the reputation they have, which I personally feel is no longer warranted.

The shear number of them we see problems with is staggering, on military weapons systems no less. They seem to be completely out of touch with the shooter, all shooters, Civilian, Law Enforcement, and Military.

Unfortunately people still flock to their products based on the past reputation, regardless of the fact their current products don't hold up to that standard.

Thanks!

Maybe one day I can entice you with a big pot of chili and you can see it first hand, during your deer season, and I'll be so kind as to deliver it to camp.

What amazes me is that you bought 20 scopes and never learned your lesson! This is why I don't use a CPA.

I have 2 leupold vari x II 6x18 with target turrets. I liked the glass very much but both scopes have been back 2 times for new errectors. But the bigger problem has been a point of impact difference between powers. This last spring there was a 2" difference at 200yds between 6x and 18 power. I sent it back, but when the scope was sent back to me "fixed", I found the problem still occurring. I sent it back again, and this time it actually was fixed. That scope is now in its box replaced by a swfa 3x15. I hunt coyotes every day and I just got to where I couldn't trust my leupold. Two identical scopes both with the same problems.??

atse....parallax maybe?

Dave,

In 2010, Calvin Johnston was CEO of Leupold. He was formerly President of Galls (uniforms and LEO gear) and CEO of Russel Athletics (sweat pants?). He had limited experience (none?) in optics or shooting/hunting equipment.

In 2013 Calvin Johnston left Leupo and in 2014 joined a candle and candle accessory company, Candle-Lite. Sports optics to... candles?

In 2014, Leupo appointed Bruce Pettet as CEO. He was formerly CEO of Collective International (Airwalk skating shoes among other companies) and CEO of Brooks Sports (running shoes). Prior to those, he was Chairman for Famous Brands International (Mrs. Fields and TCBY yogurt brands).

Leupo press releases state that Pettet is an avid outdoorsman which is great, but the reality is that Leupold hires these guys to improve sales and profitability.

I think Leupold has done well keeping some assembly jobs in Oregon. And they still maintain excellent customer service to an extent, but I don't think their business objective is to build bombproof scopes for hard use. They probably could if they wanted to but I don't think this is what they are after. There is no doubt that they have done the cost-risk analysis.

They want to expand and increase profits. And that is probably best done with the "hobby consumer" as someone stated earlier. Just speculation on my part, but I thought it was interesting to see who ran Leupold. And in contrast to someone like Jeff Huber at Nightforce... who understands his products well and is in direct contact with fellas like Frank Galli and Terry Cross. Maybe even Formi, who knows...

Then there is Chris Farris of SWFA. I heard a rumor that Chris was asked about building tough hunting scopes based on the SS models... but he wasn't interested. Leupo, Vortex, Nikon, etc. own the hobby market.

I think the focus of NF and SWFA is to build tough scopes without the fluff that a bigger company like Leupold is after. Not saying Leupo is bad... I just think they have a different business objective.

Jason

I am not even a fan of leupold even if the scopes were bomb proof. to me they aren't that friendly to get behind. get behind a nightforce and see how forgiving the view is behind it compared to a leupold, or even a bushnell elite is nicer to jump behind to me, at least the 3x9 elite is.

So back to the OP...are the tests as shown in the videos an accurate way to test a scope? I can see what you all see that some track and return better than others but wondered if the test method was an accurate.

The OP is out of pocket for a bit I believe.

Ghost,
In the first video it shows how to set up a target board so you can make sure your scope tracks properly.

I think you could set up your own with known values. With the targets available now, a guy could find exactly what you need. Check around the snipers hide....or maybe one of these guys have access to them.

CC,

The only scope I care for from Leupo is the 6x42. Otherwise I'm not interested in their products.

I drive by their facility almost everyday. Been there numerous times with scopes and binos for myself and friends. I'm about to chuck my son's Leupo binos in the river... I'm tired of taking them back. A few friends have given up on the Leupold variables due to failures to hold zero (all older VXII 3-9x40).

There's a few good guys at Leupo and a couple of jackasses I've dealt with. But, if something is busted or not getting love, I've learned who to contact after going there enough times If he left, I'd not have nearly as much confidence in them fixing things. I had two 6x42 scopes that took 4 trips each to get fixed.

Still, I love the FX3 as it is forgiving and easy to use. And has taken a beating on heavy kicking rifles and from me dropping them in rugged terrain.

Jason

Thank you and I would say your assessment sounds accurate.

dave

I've actually done that several times and may agree with you except.....my comparisons with NF have been with two different VX6's, a 2-12x42 and a 3-19x44. If you were to do that same thing you would find the VX6 to be the most user friendly variable ever made. It's that good.

I checked the parallax both times and it was not the issue. Also once the scope was fixed and I shot it again the p.o.i. problem between powers was eliminated.

Dave,

I have a Leupo story. Have only shared it with one or two other people here via PM. I thought you'd get a kick out of it...

Jason


Old PM, with some edits:


I've had my share of experiences with Leupo C/S. I live near their facility so I hand deliver my returns. Had two scopes with smeared lenses, internally. It took 4x before they got it right. From "America's Optics Authority"! My buds were shocked that it took that many tries to clean the internal lens surfaces. I stood in the Leupold lobby with my flashlight showing one tech after another how the lenses were cloudy. Amazing really, but the lack of detail was a wake-up. I never found out the reason for it. Maybe contaminated gas, chamber, or lines? Still, someone should have caught that as a QC item right?! I could see it getting missed once, maybe twice. But 4 trips to get it fixed!!!

Also had a VX2 with the new fast focus eye-piece... but the entire ocular spun when I put the rifle on its side with BC caps. C/S dragged their feet (head of C/S and lead designer were on a trip), then they said that the lead project engineer admitted that it was a design flaw. The entire ocular wobbled too and didn't inspire confidence. No jam nut on the new VX2. Leupo more than made up for my time/expense on that scope so I can't complain too much.

I've taken back 3-9x Leupos for wandering zero for some buds. One sold a rifle before he found out it was the scope! Leupo couldn't make that scope hold zero so they offered a new replacement.

Another good story... one of my old shooting buds introduced me to his friend that had just gotten a job offer at Leupo as a design engineer. One day at the range we talked about different scopes and ideas for new models. Nice fella. He was really excited to work at Leupold and we discussed some things like a true-1x tac scope, and other tacti-cool snipery stuff and .mil contracts.

Next time we met at the range, he had a different demeanor. He was like a beaten dog. He said, "The old man runs the show there. They said they don't give a fuuk what people want. Don't like what we have, go somewhere else was their motto." I didn't ask who the "old man" was but he said it was an uphill battle to get new ideas going.

He had some proto-types for us to play with that were well before production so that was fun but the bad moral and resistance to forward thinking was disappointing. Now, whenever I visit their facility I take note of the attitudes and demeanor of their employees as they leave just for fun. I get there in the late afternoon and see a bunch of people leaving for the day. Vast majority look sad, depressed or angry. Now, I could be reading into it more than I should, or there is something I don't know about... maybe they get cavity searched upon exit?

Leupo has always taken care of my complaints but sometimes with resistance and I've had to escalate. I have dealt with one of their lead techs many times. And even bought a rifle from his boss. There's some good people at Leupo. But there are absolute jerks there too... just like anyplace.

Companies change; products morph. Happens in all industries. Formerly great companies that produced fantastic outdoor products get sold, change management and usually the product ends up not for the "better".

I can think of Eddie Bauer, Abercrombie, Winchester,some bullet makers....others as well.

Why should Leupold be any different?This is nothing new. If so many people notice Leupold failures,there should be something to it.Not everybody is an idiot....I hear it from accomplished match and BR shooters, too,and have for years.

It's nothing "new"...I was breaking Leupold variables back in the early 90's.Adjustments have always been less than stellar for tracking.The scope that may last 20 years on a 243 or 270,may crap after 200-300 on a 300 or 375. ( I said "might")..the reason I hunted with fixed powers on rifles like that.

Americans love cheap shidt with great warranties.Makers build to a price point.That price point might get a guy the durability he wants but if he's a really active shooter, it might not.And the more he shoots the greater the likelihood he will encounter scope problems. It's where economics runs squarely into round count.

Not much mystery about it.

I think you are right, but I don't think its common knowledge.

Funny thing around here, since Leupold is local... blind faith was extremely strong. Over just the past few years its like Leupold got the rug yanked out from under them. Many it seems have gone to Vortex for the "cheap shidt with great warranties". Everyone and their brother is a Vortex fan now.

Its nice to hear a report of whats going on at home!

It's a real shame that more and more companies are becoming interested in mass production at the expense of quality. I believe it's becoming the norm in any industry.

Spoke with Matt Bettersworth of HCR yesterday for a bit. He reiterated that in their experience, Leupold remains a disappointment.

He also stated that they've had issues with the Zeiss HD5 series. As with Leupold, HCR will no longer offer/sell them.

On the bright side, he said they've been extremely pleased with the Nightforce SHV line.

William, do they see many meoopta's by any chance? I plan on spending a little time with R. Seipp, the big cheese w/Meopota, at DSC next week.

Johnny,

That I don't know. Matt and Dave will be at DSC, you might want to swing by their both and chew the fat for a bit.

It's not their daddy's Leupold. I think that has something to do with it. Me? I bought a Vortex this past summer and stuck it on my main hunting rifle just to see what the fuss was all about. The masses can keep their Vortex scopes. I won't be purchasing another.

No Vortices for me either.

Well then jackass, post my DD214 for everybody to see... You always like to play like you're the cool kid on the block and in the "Know"... Post it or show what a jackass you really are... Fact is you've never seen it, ever had a copy of it or have a clue about what I do on a regular basis... You simply ran your cock holster on hearsay and second hand info... Plain and simple...

You sure are quick to post chit like you've BTDT and come off as some badass Gunfighter... Regale us with your "Gunfighter" experiences... I mean the real deal stuff... Not the John Woo tuck and rolls in some prairie in Cody, hammering clay pigeons with your over priced chit wares or shooting paper targets that don't shoot back... Thats all kinda cute and stuff but lets hear the good stuff... Like how you used to kick doors in Iraq... Clear buildings in Baghdad... Or maybe of your countless tours in Afghanistan... Pulling patrols in the Helmand Province and the multiple engagements there with the Taliban... Perhaps serving High Risk warrants with the USMS SRT or your skirmishes along the Border with the Cartels and ISIS... Gunfighter my ass... When was the last time you ever had to fire a shot in anger... Better yet, when have you EVER fired a shot in anger you clueless f-u-ck... Just because you may rub shoulders with a Gunfighter here and there don't make you one, jackass...


I've explained my position on this but obviously you ARE as dumb as you look or just too drunk to let it soak in... More than likely both... My view point has nothing to do with what I posted... It was simply videos of somebody doing tracking tests on some of the major scope brands... I had no hidden agenda or hate for any of the brands tested... A person can take what they want from the videos... It matters none to me...


I've also explained this so reread the above... I stick by MY explanation for adjusting MY scopes mil value in MY balistic calculator to compensate for the way MY March tracks...


So now you're a self proclaimed "Big Boy"... That's comical... Because you sell over priced junk to people, and give them the False Bravado that they are capable of doing chit afield that is out of their paygrade does not make you a Big Boy... Best ice down that muscle you pulled trying to pat yourself on the back...


Maybe you take off that goofy ballcap you wear and your fivehead doubles as a crystal ball... I'd hope you would know more than all of us here... After all isn't that how you make a living for f-u-cksakes...

1/3 MOA is close but does not equate to .1 Mil... Close but not equal... Considering your scope choice I guess close would have to work...

It has to do with more the construction of the turret than the adjustment value but since its been side stepped numerous times, we'll let that speak for itself...



In all reality it should retain its zero... If it didn't I'd look for a new optic... YMMV...

My point was more about the rings and bases being the cause for a dropped scope losing zero. The scope by itself being knocked around should be fine.

Gotcha.... Never understood why a guy with a $2500 rig and a $1500+ optic would choose to skimp on the mounting apparatus... I see it quite often...

EHG,

Don't you know that every bad "A" gunslinger from top units are "gun guys" and know exactly why and how their gear came to be.....




In other news.....


Have been beating on the NF ATACR 4-16x F1 and it is a home run. Only have around a case or two of rounds on it.... grin. But it has maintained it's original zero after a couple few dozen accidents that would give most an aneurism. Has tracked perfectly with not one shot being off call. I'll get a few thousand more in the next month.....

I wouldn't call Seekins Rings and a picatinny rail "skimping"

Do you think Leupold Dual Dovetails are a poor design?






I would never think that any mounting system can hold a scope's zero if it is knocked hard on rocks or the ground.

You really ought to show up to the Steel Safari, Sniper's Hide Cup, or any of a number of Precision Matches with that rig. I would think that with equipment like that, you couldn't be beaten.

Who says I haven't?

Beats me.

Just sayin' that having equipment that you're confident in is a big part of the equation and you'd most likely do well

Doesn't really matter as we don't know who he is anyway. Heck, I could go to most any of them and say I placed in the top 5 afterwards. He could be Lee24 for all we know.

Formi is the real deal.

I was just making a little funny. Little doubt in my mind that he does what he says he does and shoots a lot too. I think he brings a ton of good info to this board. Besides, any man who serves our country has my utmost respect. My father is a WWII vet, hence my respect for all who have served this nation.

My comment wasn't directed towards your equipment but a general statement of what I see over the course of a year on rifles in general... Glen's wares are top notch as many others are...

I can't really speak of Leupys DD mounts as I have no experience or have I ever personally used them... From my take on what I know of them I would not be interested in them... A mount that uses leverage to hold the ring ring tight would seem like it would always be under pressure and putting stress on the fasteners... Again I don't know enough about them to really say if I think it is a poor design or not...I don't intend to find out either...

I would hope a mounting system would stand up to the rigors and abuse that one would dish out to a weapon... If not then I'd be looking for a new mounting system... IME most optics that have lost zero from drops and falls was more the optic than the mounting system...

I've had scopes that would lose zero from rides on the front rack of an ATV... I could re-zero the optic and a couple days later the optic would lose zero again... I replaced the optic using the same mount and 3 years later the new optic has never had to be re-zero'd... It has fallen out of the bed of a truck twice and dropped 10-12 ft off a rock face during a sheep hunt and has still kept its zero... Again YMMV...

I'm looking forward to giving a couple of them a try... Seems to be about the perfect optic to fit my needs... Thanks for the update...

Oh boy,

Feel better?

Lil Fish don't like my slacks and now you don't like my "goofy ball cap". You kids are a tough crowd.

Funny how you seem to watch all the vids and read all the posts. I would say you might be "conflicted".

All that bitchin about me does not change the fact that you put up a post that was 100% wrong.

End of message. Nothing follows.

elkhuntingguide if you haven't already read it take a look at "Rifle Accuracy Facts" by Harold Vaughn. In Chapter 5 (page 93)he details a test of the mounts that showed 1/2 MOA of lateral movement on target.
Test basically consisted of tapping the front mount one direction and the rear mount the opposite direction using a small hammer and a wooden dowel. Haven't tried it myself yet but will sometime. Something to think about anyhow.

You're obviously clueless

If a rifle loses zero under the conditions and treatment that formy and ehg seem to give them (ie. Continually dropping the rifle on rock beds directly on the scope, turrets and mounts, throwing them into a truck bed for a ride out for use or back to camp) , the scope is a POS and probably a Leupold ....

I'm going to test it out myself, if one of the more well known and respected members of the forum would try and post results it could be interesting.
I don't use 2 piece bases so that might have an effect. I might have a set still floating around though.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kig4NxSskQQ

I found this the video while looking up some stuff. I was trying to figure out if EHG knew what he was talking about....it seems he does. I found it interesting. It seems that Frank says exactly what EHG was trying to say...

I wasn't trying to give the impression that I was questioning anyone or their knowledge. I just read his comment on bases and scopes with scopes in his experience being more likely to be the cause of lost zero and remembered reading something about base movement. Took me like 15 minutes to find the book.

That is why many people bed their bases.

IMHO Seekin's are as good AJ's it gets.

How convenient to side step all questions/statements with yet again no response and notice I called your cap "Goofy"... You're jackassery knows no bounds... Jackass...

The only thing I am "conflicted" with is the fact I may have given you to much credit as being only as Dumb as you look... Its obviously much deeper than that... Jackass...



You should have lead with this post from the beginning as it is/was you're only move... Jackass...

Thats the first astute post I think I've seen you post... Ever...

You're coming along fine Petunia...



Funny how stuff like that would rattle a gal...Put down your f-uc-king purse and go use your stuff... You'll watch your failure rate rise and in a hurry...

The scope that was mentioned above that couldn't handle a lil ride here and there on an ATV had nothing to do with the mount... It was strictly a scope issue from the start and worsened with each ride... Look familiar...

dodgefan... I have tested mounting systems and found the ones that work the best for ME and MY use of a weapons system...

I very seldom use any 2 piece mounting system unless it is on a LW Rifle that I'm trying to keep light... In that instance I use Talley LW's and have found them to work well in MY usage...

For all other systems I run Seekins 20 MOA bases with NF, Seekins, Leupy MK 4, Badger or similar rings... On occasion I will run a Near Alpha Mount with said base if I feel the rifle will get more abuse than the others or will go with a NF Direct Mount if applicable in the situation... On all my Remmy's that I intend to keep, the base mounting holes are opened up to 8-40 fasteners... I started doing this as early on I noticed on a few applications the 6-48 fasteners had broke and since the upgrade I have not had one fastener break... I have bases that I had to bed to the action but I feel that was a Remmy problem vs. a base problem...

I have very seldom found the mounting apparatus being the cause of an Optic loosing zero in MY situations... After finally replacing all my optics with more robust optics I have not had a shift in zero... YMMV...

Gonzaga... Thanks for posting that video... Frank explains it much better that I can/could...

He is a plethora of information and a great teacher...

Do those Seekins mounts stop a scope from growing in length as good as the proprietary mounts Burns uses ?

That's funny that right there.

I built a Surgeon actioned rifle for Match shooting so no mounts to move and I tend to use Rugers for hunting and I don't ride quads.
I have seen 8X40 screws break too. M24 running a MIRS rail and NightForce with a lot PVS-26 time.

Even if you hadn't read the book you had thought about the potential weak points in the optic/mounting system and worked to eliminate them and arrived at the same conclusion he did.

On a side note I did see a brand new out the box and mounted that same morning H-58 3-15 NXS F1 take a dump. We took it off the rifle and you could hear something rattle inside. The reticle couldn't be brought into focus. Not sure what turned out to be wrong with it.

I've consulted with my florist and the hand bag sales"man", Ren�, at Dillard's, and they both agree that your tone and attitude reek of insubordination.



.

You may consider a consultation with Tyrone', your Proctologist, and see if by chance he can assist you with the removal of your head from your ass as well...

Your Megalomania will soon put you in a place that is hard to escape, that would be a fools fate... In your delicate and fragile state I doubt highly you would be able to recover the consequences...

Are there any light weight scopes that track worth a damn? All the scopes tested were too heavy to put on most hunting rigs and they didn't even pass. Seems kinda hopeless to think a >200z scope could stand a chance. I'm not a fan of hold over reticles but I'm even less of a fan of having a scope not track correctly or return to zero.

I haven't had much luck finding a light weight scope that tracks consistently. Obviously haven't tried them all, but had failures with burris, and leupold.(4 times on the leupolds.) I finally went to a swfa 3x15. It is not light, but I decided that the extra 6 to 8 oz. was worth carrying for the added dependability. This scope has worked flawlessly so far.

Short answer to that, at least IME, is not really. I've had decent luck with Leupold 6x42s "tracking" and returning to zero, and retaining zero, but it's been a crap shoot for me save for those scopes.

Seems that the SWFA 3-9, and Nightforce's 2.5-10s are about the lightest scopes out there that offer consistent return to zero, zero retention, and tracking reliability...

Tanner

has anyone checked the vortex pst series. I think the vortex razor guys should be alarmed at the tracking test in that video, that isn't a cheap scope. its actually more expensive than a nightforce.

The SWFA 3-9 comes in at an ounce or two under 20, as well...

The couple of PST's that I've tested and used tracked and RTZ 100% correctly. Click values had <0.5% error. The Razor I have now tested out at <1% error, and has been completely reliable. It's only got just less than 1000 rounds so far, but zero problems.

I know a guy who is having good luck with his razor too, but they are not light either.

VX6.

What about Meopta?