Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Back on the Fire

I wouldn't care if a scope says "Sam's Choice" on the side if it works right. Nothing more frustrating than a bad scope. Not a brand snob, but certain brands do perform... Some are garbage.

I might be responsible for that rumor. I previously posted the following, from Jon LaCorte:

"All of our scopes are designed for the same level of recoil resistance, durability as well as the mechanical construction such as tracking and return to zero"

"The scopes go through a drop type test that simulates recoil, the recoil is similar to the same level of recoil generated by the extreme large caliber rifles like the 458 Lott and 458 Win Mag. Our scopes are made in the same factories as many of the other big name scopes, so they all have very similar recoil ratings."

La Corte is co-founder of Tract.

In another thread, some stated that low cost scopes are simply not capable of what Jon claims. Funny because the fans defended Tract, criticized people who were skeptical, yet at the same time contradicted what the co-founder stated.

Hmmm... either the co-founder of the company is full of it, or commentators on the sideline know more about the product than the dude that started the company? Doesn't inspire confidence for the rest of us.

So, maybe the insider dude could clear the air, so to speak? Yet, where the heck did Trevor go?

Jason

Trevor hope the closing goes well and you can get back to a more or less normal routine. Cheers NC

I read that on here too.I have two Z3"s one on an 8mmRem Mag and one on a 300WM.After reading that I emailed Swarovski and left my phone number..They called me right back.Wanted to know where I heard that,completely false.They said the Z5 or Z6 are built different and are better scopes but there's no problem with the Z3 and recoil.

Looking forward to all the “drop” tests. : )

Wasn’t the testing on the tract done using a non magnum round in any event? I’m not bashing Tract, I just feel lie the air needs to be cleared. If the guy spoke out of turn, man up to it. I’m impressed enough with Tract Bino’s that I want to see the business model work and the company succeed. Just can’t bring myself to shell out the coin for a scope until the dust settles by this issue being addressed head on.

To expect the bottom $ scope to be the same as the top of the line scope is ignorance. Lots of folks willing to pick at any possible issue but not many willing try one. I'm not against gaining as much info on something as you can but in the end there's only 1 way to know. A campfire member who's no longer with us told me one time:

"Trying to get good info from people on the internet is kinda like bobbing for apples in a septic tank"

I'd rather just buy the apple.

worms and all......

lol...perhaps.

I disagree. The SWFA "bottom end" models hold up great, why shouldn't we expect the same from a different manufacturer? The excuse of Tract's cheaper model not holding up is simply giving them leeway to make a junk product. Just because it's "cheaper" or made in a different factory doesn't mean it shouldn't hold up... especially since it's still nearly 400 dollars, which for a whole bunch of people is considered a lot of money to spend on a scope. Doesn't matter if they make a fancier model, the 400 dollar model should still work.

If we demand manufacturers make better stuff that holds up, they'll eventually make better stuff. If we keep buying junk, they'll keep selling junk.

This is like hearing from buyers of the new 35,000 dollar Toyota 4 Runner that their engines are blowing up after 10,000 miles, then hearing from everyone else that if the owners expected the vehicle to last, they should've bought an 85,000 dollar Land Cruiser, and even then, it still might not hold up if used really hard (i.e. some of the more expensive Tracts are still losing zero). I don't know about you, but if if that was the case, I wouldn't be buying a new Toyota.

Another factor is that humans are able to collectively learn from others, at least in theory. That's why Consumer Reports exists. That's why people people write magazine reviews. That's why FormD did his scope review. If something doesn't work for others, there's no need to buy one to find out it doesn't work for you. The collective human experience has already found the product lacking. Or, to paraphrase Steelhead, I don't need to suck a dick to know that I'm not gay.

The last factor, as Jason mentioned, is that the owner said the Response was supposed to hold up as well as the others. So someone at Tract is feeding us some bs. Which I would consider a shady business practice. Which means I certainly am not going to grace them with any of my money, unless someone clears up the issue. Which was tried, and then the Tract worker seemingly disappeared...again. Which seems extra shady.

Feel free to keep buying apples, I'll go pick oranges and blueberries (i.e. Nightforce and SWFA).

Maybe we could point La Corte to the thread where Form tried to test his scope... but the scope was unable to even maintain a zero. Then get a response straight from him.

I actually applaud Trevor... takes a sack to come on here and try to hit all the pitches thrown at him. I mean, counting all the ass-holes in the room.... I’m definitely not alone.

But.... the lack of a response on the Response... smells a little fishy. Trevor wanted it to take the Pepsi Challenge.... but it couldn’t even make it outta the bottle and into the cup.

I’m thinking the Toric binoc is my next glass purchase.... but not till after I see what brush they paint this scope test with.

I've more than a few oranges and blueberries in my pantry. I've seen the blueberries fail the same test as the apple. Funny enough, just a few minutes ago I read of a 6x blueberry killing over.

That said, I agree, all models should work and be repeatable. Regarding feeding us some bs....re: "bobbing for apples in a septic tank"? Nothing wrong with gathering info and I do it myself....but you got to be willing to wade through all the chit and separate the experience from the "I feel like". I like to test things and in the end my hands on experience trumps someone else's "I think/feel/etc".

Interesting responses, and many I agree with, especially the ones that say scopes should hold zero, period. I couldn't agree more. I do think we should be reminded of a few facts as well.

I will say I used to believe that Formd had some hidden agenda, but don't believe that anymore.

FACTS: (Please correct me where I'm wrong)
Formid's Tract scope test was from a USED model.

Cubic's Tract test where he chunked the rifle on the ground, scope first, failed. His SWFA failed the exact same test. He rezeroed his Tract and it has performed perfectly since.

Mule Deer extensively tested a Toric, and it has performed perfectly on several rifles including some hard kickers.

My own personal Toric hasn't been given a torture test, as it resided for a short time on a HCR 7mag (75 rounds), then my son's new Tikka CTR in 260 Rem. It has a total round count or 411. It zeroed easily (two rounds), and eventually dialed maybe 200 times out to 600 yds and everywhere in between. It has performed perfectly.

Last fact.....The last 3 scopes I bought were all LRHS's.


Do I guarantee every Tract scope to never fail? Of course not. I do think Cubic's remarks though are very profound.......the 'fire is full of quarterbacks from the grandstands. Many criticize the play calling, few ever take the field. I bought a Toric 8x42 bino not long after they came out.....they are fantastic, with the eyepiece being the only weak link I can find.

I think my drop test vids are still out there. It was 3 drops from shoulder level directly on the scope....it's an unfair test for any scope because it not only tests the scope but the rings, base, bedding, action screws, etc....it doesn't isolate the scope. Both the Toric and the SWFA 6x were off of a 12x12 target at 200 yards after the test.

The Toric I used this year took a tumble down a steep ridge when a sling swivel let loose. When I checked it the next day 0 was perfect. I've dialed it up/down 18 MOA between shots when shooting groups and it's been perfect so far. I can find nothing to complain about concerning that scope, not just performance wise, but also design wise. I've run it alongside a NF 2.5-10 and an LRHS 3-12 and for the way I hunt the Toric is a better design...again, for the way I hunt I prefer it.

I'll be burning powder with it (and the LRHS 3-12...LRHS 4.5-18 will join the mix tomorrow) in about an hour and it may kill over...if it does I'll let everyone know.

Maybe the best way to test the scope, not the mounts, would be to use robust removeable rings, toss the scope in the rings by itself, the remount it, check/reset the zero, and then do the box and accuracy tests. That should test the robustness of the optic, if maybe not the zero retention of the whole shebang, which is subject to the variances you describe.

Yeah, beating on the scope alone would be better....I'm not big on trusting removable rings and don't have much experience with them. I'm mainly using Seekins rings and pic rails now.

I guess beating on the scope alone will help identify what failed; in the case of the scope alone it almost always has to be the scope. But we don't carry the scope alone into the field. We carry them mounted on a rifle. Dropping the rifle with the scope attached is a more real-world recreation of an accidental drop of the system. But, as someone pointed out, if there is a zero change we can't be sure (at the time) if it was the scope, the rings, the mount, the action screws or the bedding that was damaged in the drop and subsequently caused the change in zero..

I have read all of the posts on here, and it seems the Tract scopes seem to hold up well, and any bad
talk is suspect.

That means, case closed.

For the bashers, move along.

Case closed?

Hardly...... the Tract Response never even made it into the field for a real workout because it was such a piece of schitt.

Trevor is Tract’s rep here.... he signed up specifically to promote Tract Optics, and provide some “support”. Their product couldn’t even begin to hang with known optics, in a “test” performed by a guy who’s experience and willingness to test stuff has gained him some solid credibility on this site.

Trevor, and Tract Optics , have been ducking and dodging real answers on said test for months now.... which actually says a lot.

I honestly think Tracts biggest problem on this site is their rep. He claims to be part time and really busy. It's pretty odd he starts a new thread to address issues and vanishes again. When you pull up his profile, he was last seen a few minutes after his post, which was a few minutes before Prairie Goat's post. Based on this, he hasn't read the first post on this thread.

Their marketing guy sucks, period. I'm not under playing the value of the voice of a company or condoning his performance. But Tract is just starting out and perhaps they need to modify some of their support staffing. Keep in mind, Trevor is not a design engineer or the person you will deal with if you have a warranty issue with their product.

There are questions here on Form's test on the Response, which are valid. There are also some good reports on the Toric line from some pretty reputable people on this site. It is possible that Tract has every intention of making all of their scope lines to withhold the same amount of recoil, but perhaps do not have something quite right with the design or manufacture of the Response. The Response is not made from the same manufacturer as the Toric, Turion, or Tekoa.

I am eager to hear about the test from Tract as well, but I doubt you will get the answer from Trevor. I have spoken with John LaCorte on several occasions with different questions, and he seems both very knowledgeable and eager to answer questions. I recommend calling him with questions, just as you would with a majority of the other scope manfactures.