Stick,
You need to give Ronnie and/or Chris a call and let them go smack their bedding/QC guy over the head.
Formi,
Thanks for the report. I appreciate your willingness to perform the test, document with images, and then write the report. It's a good deal of work.
Makes me wonder how many people chase their tale with equipment that doesn't work properly.
Jason
A bunch. What's interesting is how many people will argue that their scopes are awesome, yet the first time they get behind one that actually works the look of surprise when the bullet moved EXACTLY the 3.7 mils that they adjusted. I see people shoot bunches of scopes that they think are doing fine, yet I can tell they're broken.
Great review. What was the reason behind telling them $1000
Remove preconceived notions. People "see" what they believe/want to see. Cover the label up and hand a bunch of people an S&B and tell them it's BSA, and quite a few of them will look through it and say "yeah, it sucks". Conversely, do the same with a Leupold Rifleman yet tell them it's the new Swarovski, and they believe it's great. This really is the source of all the "just as good as" nonsense.
Form,
Great review, I love the detail and I can promise you some of my scopes would fail!!!! The "response" is their lower end right like a $300 scope? Its a tough comparison to hold it up next to a Nightforce ATACR which can run up to 3K depending on the model.
But, if something is claimed to be "as good as" then it needs to be put to that same test. Not a "proportionally for the money as good as" test...soooo, in short good work, the comparison is apples to oranges, but if an apple calls itself an orange, it should be tested as such.
I didn't compare it to the NF, just used it as a baseline. You have to remove errors and doubts in the shooter/gun/weapon system. SWFA SS's pass the above with flying colors- including their $300 1-4x Classic. You are correct on the "just as good as" statement. Tract has repeatedly said that their scopes, including the Response works perfectly, and are great scopes, just at a lower price point because of the direct to consumer model. They chose to send out the $300 scope to be evaluated and assured that it was held to the same standards as their top of the line models.
Thank God someone is putting the truth out there, I sold a couple of good guns in the past before I realised that the so called bulletproof Leupold I was testing them with was the problem.
Went through a lot of that before realizing how bad most scopes really are as an aiming device.
Formidilosus thank you for the detailed examination and study of the tract response. Maybe many of us are getting past wanting to argue objective size, resolution, chromatic aberration, FOV, "brightness", and eye relief.
20-30 years ago "glass" mattered. There was a huge difference between a $200 scope and a $800 scope. Today there isn't. A Leupold VX1 has the clarity, brightness, and resolution to kill animals in any legal light. There just isn't that much difference anymore. Look at all the "just as good as" companies that crow about "glass" and "features"..... Their glass is good and they do have features.... but they fail as aiming devices.
Well, that's disappointing, especially that the groups were larger than with other scopes on the same rifle. I'm not any kind of optics expert, but that alone indicates to me that all the other tests weren't going to go well. Looks like I'm going to have to mount my SS on a couple more rifles to verify how they really shoot.
I had never looked at this line of Tracts, but after reading this went to their site and checked it out. The Response scopes are made in the Philippines as are their .22 scopes, not Japan like the Toric and Tekoa. At $374, considering all the "features", it's not all that surprising that it didn't measure up even given the direct sales model that's supposed to deliver more value per dollar. If you're going cheaper, then it makes sense to go simpler as well.
Since my hunting rifles are operated in set and forget mode, I'm crossing my fingers that the Tekoa 3-12 on my Grendel will hold its zero. If it goes down, at least I got it on sale! But it looks like the search for a reliable hunting scope with a proper reticle for the purpose, covered low-profile turrets, and hopefully weight of maybe a pound or less (fixed 6x) will continue.
Nice work, Form. Thanks.
No problem. You are correct- within the first five rounds it was obvious that this scope was going to have problems. A lot of times it only takes one shot. If that one round doesn't go exactly where it is supposed to by the adjustments applied to the turrets- it's going to have problems.
Manufacturers do not design/spec scopes with incorrect functioning, i.e.- inconsistent adjustments, incorrect tracking and failure to return to zero are all symptoms of a greater problem.... bad Quality Control. I have seen it hundreds of times- a scope doesn't track, doesn't return to zero, but seems to stay zeroed once there. Eventually these scope gives problems as like losing zero, etc. because the incorrect functioning in the beginning showed that their was a problem with it. A manufacturer that doesn't care about "dialing" doesn't care about staying zeroed either...
sure would like to see a similar test on the toric, a light 12 inch drop is a hell of a lot less than my scopes get from time to time.
A 12" drop is nothing. 24" is just approaching being meaningful.
I would like to see the Toric as well, however Tract has stated several times that their lower cost scopes are held to the same standards, so I tend to believe them.
Formi, much thanks. Great test and report.
Jay, I'm thinking the reason he said it was a $1000 scope was to remove pre-conceived thoughts of cheap glass.
Yes sir, exactly.
Good review.
Scopes really are becoming much more niche oriented. A set and forget hunting scope for shooting out to 200 yds doesn't require the same characteristics as a long range 'dialing' scope. My Leupold FX-II 4x has stayed zeroed for years for my needs and I don't mess with it. My hunts also are public land where my average shot <100 yds. The dialing/long range phenomenon sudden has many inexperienced folks thinking they have to have a target scope to hunt where the vast majority of shots are under 150 yds.
I guess the consumer needs to make an honest assessment of what equipment requirements they have and buy accordingly. If they think they are going to shoot game at 500 yds, with a 'tactical' scope, and it has to be less than 12 oz, AND cost <$300 they are going to be disappointing.
That is true. I would say that older Leupolds performed pretty well at holding zero, but newer ones do not share that trait. Have seen multiple fixed 4x and 6x's with problems straight from the box.
Form, please get ahold of a few Athlons and put an end to the madness.
I have. They're just like everyone else's "spec'" scopes. Their Cronus seems to be ok, but it's also a $2,000 scope. All their other lines that I have seen.... well, they have features.
Why people will willingly spend lots of money on unproven, over hyped and over marketed products, but won't spend $300 on a bombproof scope that just works baffles me. Slick salesman and catchy marketing really do work I guess.
