I think that the situation at Leupold and Toyota are analogous.
For years Toyota made vehicles that performed well and had exemplary quality and reliability. Folks beat a path to their door.
Recently however Toyota has grown so fast and become so focused on market share and model proliferation that they lost sight of what made them great in the first place, exemplary quality and superb reliability. As a result both slipped.
When market share takes precedence over all other corporate principles then something, most likely quality, is bound to suffer.
Originally Posted by rob p
..... the benchrest community has 3 bones to pick with Leupold scopes. 1. Canted Crosshairs. 2. Lash in the Parallax adjustment. 3. Inconsistent Windage and Elevation clicks.
There is discussion that quality control has gone down, but problems and all, a Leupold 36 or 45 power competition scope is a thousand bucks and to get better, you've got to go up another $400 to a Nightforce (which is a lot heavier) or another $1500 for a March.
Lets not forget that leupold was the last major player in the rifle scope market to adopt usuing Mulit coated glass in there rifle scopes.You dont have to go back that far to find used loopies that have non multi coated lens.There current quality problems are compounded by a company attitude that somehow allows them run 10 to 15 years behind there competition in technology. ie...they just started a tacticle rifle scope division in a market that they should have owned 20 years ago. The living on a name thing,is getting kinda old.
dave
I firmly believe that a truly great company must have a GREAT LEADER at the helm. Folks who are passionate and focused about the product they are building. Not just a manager, but a true leader.
Three great American rifle scope making companies were at their best when such a person was at the helm.
Bill Weaver founded and grew Weaver scopes into a GIANT from 1940 to the late 1960s,when he sold his company to OLIN CHEMICAL.. after that, the company made a LOT of stupid mistakes and sat on it's laurels until they ran 'er into the ground by the early 1980s. About the only thing they did right after Bill left was the Micro-Trac adjustments and the "T" model scopes, nearly everything was merely running in place.
Gaines Chestnut was a DYNAMIC leader who fostered the growth at Redfield from the 1960 through the late 1970's.. By the time he left Redeild, they were the most Highly regarded rifle scope maker in the US. No coincendence that Redfeild went to the dogs after they lost him at the helm..
And Finally we have Jack Slack at Leupold.. He really drove the focus for SERIOUS state of the art rifle scopes at Leupold from the 1960s to the 1990s. He was basically retired by the early 1990s. Since Jack Slack left, Leupold has not exactly been the company it was the 20 years prior..
All of the men mentioned above were SHOOTERS and RIFLEMEN. They were on a mission.
People matter both in management and on the production line. Without them NOTHING HAPPENS. Their devotion and talent are what makes or breaks a product.
Last edited by jim62; 03/09/10.
To all gunmaker critics- "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.."- Teddy Roosevelt
