Originally Posted by JGRaider
Originally Posted by qwk
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
Originally Posted by SLM
I’m not struggling at all.
Retailer sales me an optic that arrives in good shape, they have fulfilled their obligation.
If optic has problems after use, I contact the company that provided the warranty.
If I have an issue getting a satisfactory response, I contact the retailer to see if they can help or have a contact that can rectify the issue.
Pretty simple really.

[Linked Image from external-content.duckduckgo.com]

Nobody is struggling with how a repair works.

You and JiggloRider are STRUGGLING with a Refund vs Repair for a defective scope. The manufacturer is not going to refund you.

LiL Fish claimed her Leupold was defective out of the box. She should get a refund as she claims Leupold can't make a functional scope. Leupold can't repair her shooting or rifles.

She is not a good candidate for a repair because her MK 5 works. She STRUGGLES.

Instead of getting a refund or selling the MK 5 she is attempting to order more Leupold products.

If you are still confused please enter "refund vs repair" in your favorite search engine (Duck Duck Go).
I’m so certain that the scope Larry tested also wouldn’t pass Form’s test, I’d bet $10k on it. Any takers?

You'd have to be a freaking moron to take stock in Form's drop tests, if that's what you mean. His tracking/return to zero test may be interesting. Buy it from Stick and send it to him. Wonder why Form left this board?

He left this board because he wasn't being worshiped by everyone, and some had the audacity to challenge him. I think his drop tests do speak to how rugged a scope is, but I don't they are the end-all-be-all. I don't know what to make of them losing zero riding on the seat of his truck. I am skeptical of that.