This morning I sighted in a new SWFA 16x42 that I just mounted on one of my rifles last night. At 100 yds I bore sighted the scope by looking through the barrel while the rifle was resting on sand bags. Then with 2 shots I had it hitting 1" high and dead center. Switched to 218 yds (200 meters) and with 2 more shots had my turrets adjusted and zero'd. Then started dialing and shooting at some longer ranges.
My friend that I was with, witnessed a fello at the range a couple days before, fire over 40 rounds with a "bore sighted" scope and rifle before he had it on paper and was satisfied. I think we've all seen this many times and the reality is most people dont have much mechanical apptitude and very little shooting or rifle knowledge. I once stopped a group of guys that were shooting beside to tell them where their bullets were hitting while they were trying to sight a rifle in. They were easily half way through a second box of shells without much in the way of barrel cooling. One "experienced" guy was helping his two friends and the rounds were hitting near the top of the 12-15' high backstop at 100 meters. They kept adjusting the scope and shooting. I stopped them and told them that the rounds were hitting the ground about 50 yds out and bouncing up into backstop. They looked at me like I was a complete idiot and kept shooting. They ran out of adjustment then the experienced guy said there was something wrong with his mounts and they left.
I believe a high percentage of hunters would not recognize if their scope had a problem. Other guys I know take their rifle (mostly 300 mags of some sort around here) out into the bush just before hunting season with whatever ammo they managed to buy, then they pace off 100 mabye 200 paces and make sure they can hit a cereal box before they go moose hunting. They are successful hunters but not knowledgeable shooters or rifleman. Again probably wouldnt recognize a scope problem.
Last year when my leupold 6x36 started causing my rifle to shoot like crap, it probably wouldnt have kept me from hitting a lot of the animals I've killed, but I shoot it a lot so noticed the problem right away at the range. Could have gone undiagnosed for a long time on someone elses rifle .
I helped a guy out last year that had burned through half a box of ammo with little reward on target. Got him zeroed with a couple rounds left over so he could try it himself. Got a box of .243 brass for my trouble.
Didn't have anyone to show me the ropes when I started out as a kid, but I did have a copy of The Complete Book of Rifles and Shotguns courtesy of the Outdoor Life Book Club.
Squirrel season just opened Sep. 1 here so weekend before last I took out my favorite .22 and .22 Mag. squirrel rifles to verify zero. Neither had been checked since the same time last year, though I had killed some chucks over the summer with the .22 mag and it seemed to be shooting fine. I realize they're only .22's but both were still sighted in perfectly, .22 dead on at 50 yards and repeatedly punching 5 shot groups of .5 - .75" and the .22 Mag. punched two .5" five shot groups 3/4" high and perfectly centered. The .22 wears a 4x Bushnell Banner purchased new in 1990 and the .22 Mag wears a 2-7x32 Nikon pro staff purchased new in 2006. Neither has ever had any trouble with holding zero. Same for a bunch of my centerfire scopes, from Weaver, Nikon, Bushnell ; Bausch & Lomb and Leupold. I have had a few fail, a couple of Tasco's, a Simmons and most recently {last summer} a Japanese Bushnell Banner from the early 80's but I don't worry much about my old standby's. Time will tell with the 2 new Leupold's I've purchased just recently but they can't all be bad. Ingwe seems to like his Redfield Revolutions and has reported no problems I've seen and I doubt they differ much if any from Leupold's VX-1's internally. But hey, maybe Ingwe just doesn't know shyt from Shinola about rifles and scopes.
The Melvin Forbes question was in reference to this prior post.
Originally Posted by jimmyp
I think its a bunch of stuff with L, and there are many here who just do not know what they don't know. If your taking more than 2-3 cartridges to get your desired zero in a rifle off the bags at 100, then odds are you have a brand new Leupold. Its really that simple.
Ah! As I recall, when Melvin told me about mounting and adjusting brand-new Leupolds, he mentioned the first round landing within 6 inches of point-of-aim at 100. That's very different than being sighted-in.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Bushnell , Simmons and Nikon are on most of the deer hunters rifles around here.
Same around here. I bet more deer are killed with Bushnell Banners and Nikon pro staffs by a factor of at least 10 to 1 over Leupolds and 1000 to one over Nightforce or SWFA here in NY and we kill over 200,000 deer per year. This aught to be common sense anyway as economy rifles like Ruger Americans and Savage's Wal- Mart specials outnumber high end and customs by 1000 to 1 too. Remember, according to IRS statistics 60% of the entire American workforce earns less than 20.00 per hour and it's less than that in rural areas. Average Joe hunter simply can't afford $1500.00 plus rifles topped with $1000.00 plus glassware.
It's not so much that they can't afford it,it's mostly priorities. In my area average Joe hunter smokes and drinks at least one $1500 rifle and $1000 scope every year. After two packs and half a case a day,there's only enough left for a blister pack Walmart special.
Bushnell , Simmons and Nikon are on most of the deer hunters rifles around here.
Same around here. I bet more deer are killed with Bushnell Banners and Nikon pro staffs by a factor of at least 10 to 1 over Leupolds and 1000 to one over Nightforce or SWFA here in NY and we kill over 200,000 deer per year. This aught to be common sense anyway as economy rifles like Ruger Americans and Savage's Wal- Mart specials outnumber high end and customs by 1000 to 1 too. Remember, according to IRS statistics 60% of the entire American workforce earns less than 20.00 per hour and it's less than that in rural areas. Average Joe hunter simply can't afford $1500.00 plus rifles topped with $1000.00 plus glassware.
It's not so much that they can't afford it,it's mostly priorities. In my area average Joe hunter smokes and drinks at least one $1500 rifle and $1000 scope every year. After two packs and half a case a day,there's only enough left for a blister pack Walmart special.
I know alot of hunters around here who don't smoke or drink and still can't afford a 2,500 dollar rig. I think many of the financially well to do folks here are so far removed from the reality of living on a blue collar income in a rural area that they don't have a clue. Besides, some of these guys know damn good and well they don't need an expensive rig to get the job done year after year because they do it. Beyond that, anyone who really needs/relies on top shelf equipment to shoot deer hundreds of yards away to be successful ain't much of a hunter. Hell, we stacked deer like cordwood with smoothbore slug guns that wouldn't do better than 6 MOA on a good day for years.
I own a lot of Leupolds. I have sent back A LOT of Leupold scopes to get repaired. If I told you how many Leupold scopes I have sent in to be fixed, you would not believe me. According to Leupold Repair Service Reports I have received when I have sent scopes in to be repaired... CUSTOMER COMPLAINT: Point of Impact. Aka won't hold zero Repairs done!!!! Reworked Erector System Replaced Erector Spring
NRA LIFE MEMBER OHA LIFE MEMBER RMEF LIFE MEMBER *MOLON LABE SKYLA*
Question is: Did they actually fix the ones you sent back, or pat them on the head and send them back home?
I can see where outsourced parts, like say, erector springs, not up to spec, could raise all kinds of expensive Hell for a manufacturer ala un-annealed primer cup material. A smart outfit would figure that out and do something about it, but a cheap one will keep on using the bad stuff and hope for the best.
After a little talk with one of the Jons, I ordered a Tract. Looks a little Euro for my old fart taste, but it's going on a Euro-rifle. We shall see.
Bushnell , Simmons and Nikon are on most of the deer hunters rifles around here.
Same around here. I bet more deer are killed with Bushnell Banners and Nikon pro staffs by a factor of at least 10 to 1 over Leupolds and 1000 to one over Nightforce or SWFA here in NY and we kill over 200,000 deer per year. This aught to be common sense anyway as economy rifles like Ruger Americans and Savage's Wal- Mart specials outnumber high end and customs by 1000 to 1 too. Remember, according to IRS statistics 60% of the entire American workforce earns less than 20.00 per hour and it's less than that in rural areas. Average Joe hunter simply can't afford $1500.00 plus rifles topped with $1000.00 plus glassware.
It's not so much that they can't afford it,it's mostly priorities. In my area average Joe hunter smokes and drinks at least one $1500 rifle and $1000 scope every year. After two packs and half a case a day,there's only enough left for a blister pack Walmart special.
I know alot of hunters around here who don't smoke or drink and still can't afford a 2,500 dollar rig. I think many of the financially well to do folks here are so far removed from the reality of living on a blue collar income in a rural area that they don't have a clue. Besides, some of these guys know damn good and well they don't need an expensive rig to get the job done year after year because they do it. Beyond that, anyone who really needs/relies on top shelf equipment to shoot deer hundreds of yards away to be successful ain't much of a hunter. Hell, we stacked deer like cordwood with smoothbore slug guns that wouldn't do better than 6 MOA on a good day for years.
It's just different ways of looking at things. I take pride and enjoyment in my nice equipment. I know folks with cheap equipment that take pride and enjoyment that they can do "just as good" with their cheap stuff. I hear the same tone in your post.
It would be a very rare case however for someone who actually couldn't afford nice equipment if they wanted it bad enough. I have some nice shotguns and rifles,not as nice as some of these guys on here but a lot nicer than most of my hunting buds. I'll be dove hunting today with a $2500 Beretta 686 shotgun. It took me 2-1/2 years to squirrel away enough to buy it though,just stashing $20-$30 a week whenever I could back in my safe. I bought my $2500 rifle the same way and several others.
It's all about decisions and priorities and good sense. I don't have to go into my gun fund though to pay the light bill or land taxes because I'm smart enough not to blow money on rented movies and take out pizza,and PS4 games,and a thousand other things that I'll need later in the month to pay those things. I've gone from being a very poor man who started out life as poor as anyone living in a one room shack with no water or electricity. I've been poor and watched poor people all my life and most of what keeps poor people poor are poor decisions.
Question is: Did they actually fix the ones you sent back, or pat them on the head and send them back home?
I can see where outsourced parts, like say, erector springs, not up to spec, could raise all kinds of expensive Hell for a manufacturer ala un-annealed primer cup material. A smart outfit would figure that out and do something about it, but a cheap one will keep on using the bad stuff and hope for the best.
After a little talk with one of the Jons, I ordered a Tract. Looks a little Euro for my old fart taste, but it's going on a Euro-rifle. We shall see.
Yes they did fix them. Well 95 percent of the time. I have had several scopes they fixed twice. One went back 3 times. And they have replaced 4 scopes so far. I have sent back 3 scopes ,within a month this year. I have talked to Leupolds Vice President and Head of Technical Services about there erector system problems. It was a waste of my time. They did put target turrents on 5 of my scopes for free. Free hats, t shirts and a Gerber knife.
NRA LIFE MEMBER OHA LIFE MEMBER RMEF LIFE MEMBER *MOLON LABE SKYLA*
I have talked to Leupolds Vice President and Head of Technical Services about there erector system problems. It was a waste of my time.
That's what I expected. They've got their business model and will ride it out as long as it's profitable. When (if) they start losing market share, they'll make a big show of "The New Leupold" and maybe get some stuff straightened out, but also maybe not. Been there, done that, when my company went through a brain-sucking phase that re-defined Quality. I forget what it was, but remember it wasn't "Goodness", which really meant it wasn't really quality.
My notion was, "If they're paying for it, it oughta work."
The Tract guys seem to have the right idea. I re-read Mule Deer's review and think his notion that the extra weight of the 1" Tracts should mean they're beefy where it counts- inside, makes sense. We shall see. Their online ballistics program, if accurate, is going to be handy for the holdover boys.
Interesting thread to say the least, regardless of my personal experience. I have no doubt some have problems with L stuff, many do not. I really have no hobbies anymore other than shooting, hunting, and fishing. That's where my extra coin goes. I've posted before, and still find it very, very interesting, that out of the approximately 150 hunters we had in camps over the past 14 years, the vast majority of them wore Leupold scopes. The vast majority of them also used Swaro binos. Most of these guys have hunted around the world with their gear, and that is what the chose to buy. These guys were not turret spinners by any stretch.
Pappy, I think your gonna love that Tract scope. I have the 3-15x Toric and its is a very nice scope. My son has it on his Tikka 260 right now and has about 300 rounds with it. Glass is stupid good.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
Here is a video of a typical leupold actually it's not a typical leupold it's one of their most expensive scopes over $2 grand. It has close to 10% tracking error. If your over 1 percent you need to account for it. This scope is 10 times that. This scope they market as being able to be dropped from a helicopter. LMFAO
Hope so. I had already ordered a $215 VX-2 3-9, but if this thing fits okay on my new CZ, that one might go back (or just go in the spare stack). They've got a nice .22 scope with aiming points out to 150 that I'm eyeballing now, and I haven't even got the first one in hand.
Here is a video of a typical leupold actually it's not a typical leupold it's one of their most expensive scopes over $2 grand. It has close to 10% tracking error. If your over 1 percent you need to account for it. This scope is 10 times that. This scope they market as being able to be dropped from a helicopter. LMFAO
To be clear I'm not arguing for or against the scope here, but there is a technical error in the target. They used a fixed vertical shift of 18" for each 5 mil angular difference. This is incorrect. For a vertical target the amount of vertical shift per mil becomes greater the farther the angle is away from zero.
Yes they did fix them. Well 95 percent of the time. I have had several scopes they fixed twice. One went back 3 times. And they have replaced 4 scopes so far. I have sent back 3 scopes ,within a month this year. I have talked to Leupolds Vice President and Head of Technical Services about there erector system problems. It was a waste of my time. They did put target turrents on 5 of my scopes for free. Free hats, t shirts and a Gerber knife.
"I have talked to Leupolds Vice President and Head of Technical Services about there erector system problems. It was a waste of my time."
Supports what Formi stated about the Leupo reps seeing the scopes fail on the shooting line, and not admitting it. And my speculation that they have their priorities aimed elsewhere.
