Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Tract Response Range Tracking/RTZ/zero retention results

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

When I made similar comments on Tract products a few weeks back, I was attacked by the Tract people and their fanboys. Clearly, their products are just an overhyped junk that does not deserve to be on anyone's rifle.

Hopefully, they will be banned from this site as they just keep spamming every Hunting Optics topic with their "you should check out Tract, its German quality at a fraction of the price" crap.

Thanks again for your work and your time!

Once you get used to systems that work right, it’s really hard to accept one that doesn’t. If a $5000 scope was the only one that worked properly, I’d save up to afford one. Luckily, that’s not the case!

Certainly understandable. For shooters looking for and needing a sub MOA competition scope, this may not be the choice for them. I just wanted to point out that consistent 1 MOA-1.5MOA may be better than some need or want, especially while it tracked that well. The other features may be what people like, want, and need.

Now, there may be an issue with this scope because of its use and abuse over a few reviews and members shooting it. Thats why I would like to get it back so we can narrow down what the problem maybe or if we can just improve it to be more competitive with the NF and similar scopes in regards to drops, etc. The first reviews posted of it from the members that shot and used it were favorable and it was up to their liking. But, its certainly not a $1500+ combat optic like a NF.

I personally would like to see Tract send FormD a Toric for him to run the same tests. If not, there will always be the lingering question of Response vs Toric.

this company has balls. Waiting on Tract to drop one....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6LXAXu15eg

Except that it was only one gun. The other two, and other adjustments showed very inconsistent movements.

As well no manufacturer has the wrong spec. Scopes that groups double in size, inconsistent adjustments, and incorrect RTZ- WILL have other issues eventually. All of those problems are symptoms of poor QC.









Brother, any scope that loses 50% precision due to mechanics isn't a "good" thing. Also it had inconsistent adjustments throughout. More than once it was adjusted and produced significant errors to what was input. Example- when initially zeroing the 14.5 M4A1 it need a 1.5 MOA left adjustment. When adjusted left 1.5, it moved POI left nearly 3 MOA. I did the same tracking "test" with both of those guns and if you took the center of POI for groups on adjusted approximately 23 MOA and the other 24 MOA, for the 25 MOA adjusted. Granted it hard to truly tell with 2+ MOA "groups".








Tell me you are not serious? The difference in a $350 scope and a $1,500 shouldn't be in correct functioning. The SWFA SS scopes are $50 less than this scope and have spot on functioning. Of course they put the $300 into mechanics, not "features".







10x for both. Not that it matters as I shoot 6x scopes nearly daily and have zero issues shooting 1 MOA ten round groups. However, to keep equal footing, again 10x for both.

You do more whining than the girls at my 6th grade daughter's slumber party. Geeesh.

Very true. A year or two ago, a close friend had a Leup on his target rifle. After seeing how my SS's, Razor, and LRHS worked, he decided to buy an LRHS. I've heard him mention several times how it's difficult to go back to zeroing or dialing a Leup after using the LRHS for a while. He now has multiple LRHS, DMRII, etc. Scopes that work right are like Pringles- once you pop, you just can't stop.

I want ALL my scopes, hunting or target, to be capable of pointing my bullet to the same pin-point POA every time. Then if I get MOA groups, I know that it's my rifle or load that is responsible, not my scope. The last thing I want nagging in the back of my mind is whether my rifle/load are actually capable of shooting 0.2-0.5 MOA, but my scope is jumping my POA all over the place within a 0.5-1 MOA circle. A rifle system that bugholes builds confidence, even if it'll only be used for hunting at 300 yards or closer. Field shooting is largely a mental game, and confidence in one's rifle is an advantage in that respect. I doubt there is a single hunter or target shooter here who, if given the choice between two identical rifle systems- one that shoots consistent 0.5 MOA groups, and one that shoots 1.25 MOA, would ever choose the 1.25 MOA rifle.

My SWFA SS's do this for $299. I'm confident that if TRACT is willing to listen to the customer and make the necessary improvements, it can put out scopes with the same mechanical integrity that the SS's have.

Jordan, you menttioned those LRHS scopes. What purpose does that circle at the center of the reticle serve?

Exactly why we are here and sent this scope out. First few reviews went well then this scope was put thru some added paces. Form will be shipping it back so we can look at whats come about and push on from there for improvements.

To funnel one's eye to the center of the scope in fast target-acquisition or low-light scenarios.

Business will be brisk this year during the SWFA Black Friday Sale, as usual.

That's it?

If it weren't for the metric system, I'd be there. 99% of my world is in MOA. I fear upsetting the apple cart without a conscious commitment to start over.

To be clear, mils are angular measurement- they're not "metric" though it works with the metric system obviously.

Having said that learning to use mils is the easiest thing to do. A 20 min talk, 20'minutes playing with it and it is highly unlikely that you'll want to go back to MOA.

Yep, they're just base ten fractional parts of radians.

Poetic license aside, I've been on the fence for some time. My world is in inches and fractions of an inch. Most days, a 16' x3/4" Stanley tape measure is clipped to my right front pocket. I've got no problem working in 10ths or 1000ths of an inch. As irrational as it might be, I've got a pile of scopes with MOA adjustment graduations and reticles with MOA graduated subtensions and fear being compelled to replace them all with those based on milliradians. Maybe I'm over thinking it.

Either way, I thank you for your continued encouragement.

Says the guy with "math" in his screen name.....

There was a time when I was in the same boat. I finally made the plunge and bought my fist MRAD scope, and I’m glad I did. Now nearly all of my scopes are in MRAD, and I won’t be going back.