Originally Posted by GrimJim
Originally Posted by kingston
Originally Posted by GrimJim
Originally Posted by bhoges
I fail to see why the same review that I think isn't fair is always brought up. I'm trying to find the location of that optic and I want to retest it myself. No other company would reveal their engineering or testing methods. I myself have never heard or seen Nightforce , Vortex or Leupold answer this. Again if you don't like or plan on purchasing a Tract I feel your only hear to stir the pot. You may not like me or Tract and thats fine. Bring up valid points and we can talk.


I think this is an excellent summary. The hunters that use Tract Torics are pleased with them and rely on them. The negative comments come from those who are not using them and would not use them. I don't see the need for another test to military conditions of a hunting scope. Please spare me a discussion of random vibrations or impact loads.

As far as the need for unbiased independent testing, in my world of defense electronics the production engineers certainly regard the quality control tests as unbiased and independent. No production facility can consistently turn out quality product if the quality tests are not unbiased and independent. The production facility in Japan that builds scopes for Tract and others has an excellent reputation for quality which they could not do without quality control and quality testing.



The scope reviewed and tested by Formidilous was a Tract “Response” not a Tract “Toric”.

His testing could hardly be described as represented military conditions.

The Tract Response was built at a factory in the Philippines.


The following is a link to the test/review.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...ange-tracking-rtz-zero-retention-results


I think everyone knows the test was on the Response and that it was built in the Philippines although the test on the Response is used to denigrate the Toric, which wasn't tested and was built in Japan. (I explicitly stated this in an earlier post.) I have no need for a similar test on the Toric. I understood that Formidilous's testing methodology was for military purposes from his replies to me a couple of years ago. If I misunderstood his comments which included his photographs, I apologize.


Form never “dropped” this scope.... hell, it barely made it to the tracking phase. If you go back and look, the scope wouldn’t even stay sighted in, and caused group size to double.

Top that off with Trevor’s BS about all the scopes being held to the same standard...and you can see when/why/how Tract went off the rails here on the fire.

This test wasn’t “military” style.... it wasn’t even “hunting abuse”. The scope flat out wouldn’t work under the most simple and mundane of all practices.... bench shooting groups. It didn’t hold zero, it didn’t return to zero, and it didn't track. End of story.

Why the hell would anyone ponytail up $40 on a Toric for Form to test. Tract oughta be sending him the best that they got, then thanking him afterwards. If it passes Form’s gauntlet, they’ll sell a few here..... if not, you can tell us we were right, and go back to the drawing board.



You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......