Not putting an ounce of self-worth in the scope, just tired of seeing Leupold being bashed by many who don't base their opinion on objective, measurable facts.
Very few have the equipment actually necessary to be able to accurately evaluate a scope and come to a conclusion that can't be disputed.
Do you have one of these?....
![[Linked Image]](http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo236/rcamuglia/scope20mount20jig1.jpg)
It's a very sophisticated apparatus to rigidly hold a barreled action, precisely mount the scope accurately to the centerline of the bore within .001" at 6".
It is then aimed at a board that is measured to the 1/4" in distance away from the scope. The board is accurately marked vertically in MOA and MRad. The scope is boresighted then aimed at -0-
It is then put through its elevation adjustments for the full range. Any discrepencies between what is dialed and what actual reticle movement is can be seen and recorded. Reticle subtensions can be evaluated as well to see if they actually are what the manufacturer says. The vetical line on the board is laser-leveled and how the reticle tracks up and down that line during the entire adjustment range can be observed. Any backlash or lag in adjustment vs. reticle movement can be observed.
Not many folks have this equipment even some of the scope manufacturers who have been mentioned in this thread. I know this for a fact.
For someone without this equipment to then make statements as fact about certain manufacturer's products is rediculous and based on opinion only. It's like saying you know the condition of your bore without ever having looked at it with a borescope
I have access to this equipment and use it. I also am in the loop with those who regularly use it performing precision mounts on thousands of scopes if every make. I know which brands are good and which aren't so good
The bottom line is that Leupold and Vortex are a hell of a lot of scope for the money and consistently outperform others mentioned as favorites here.
