Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Friction vs Click adjustments

I rec'd a Leupold M8 6x42 a couple weeks ago and was a little surprised to find it has friction adjustments on it. I've only had a couple cheap .22 scopes w/ friction adjustments so maybe I don't give the system enough credit.

Anyway, what are the pros and cons of friction vs click...or does it really matter?

Thanks!

Not able to give a learned reply on the relative merits. As a user I prefer clicks for the precise nature. But have owned a couple with friction adjustments, and they were no problem. Kept their settings fine. I am sure the big L will be well made in that respect. I do think big L should offer clicks on anything they make by now. I do not know of any advantages to friction style adjustments.

If its use doesn't compromise your purposes for the scope, I wouldn't sweat it though.

It certainly doesn't compromise the use of the scope. I'm putting it on a rifle for hunting and range use to ~300yds. The only "inconvenience" I can think of is that I'll actually have to look at the adjustments when I'm dialing it in...not an issue at all.

I really prefer click adjustments. However, the only time the friction dials come into play for me is when sighting in. I never really am sure how much I've changed poi with frictions when making an adjustment, so I may have to shoot an extra bullet or two to get it zeroed. For Michigan's swamps, once I zero, I leave it where it's set.

Don

I much prefer click adjustments,and I see no reason why all scopes are not made with them.

the former leupold vari-x ii scopes were all friction and leupold built their reputation on that scope, and others. I have have a m8 6x42 with friction that I could easily sell and replace with a friction model. I cant think of one good reason to do so.

my m8 6x36 friction scope bump around on my 4 wheeler year in and out and shoots point of aim. I have never resighted it since the original mounting.

and the other side of the coin for me is that many years ago I shot an entire season of high power hunting rifle silhouette using a 3 X 9 compact Leupold with friction dials and never had a problem.

In reality, friction adjustments if reliable are much accurate than clicks. They are infinitely adjustable, instead of being trapped in click-units that may or may not measure .25" or 1 centimeter or whatever.

I have owned a pile of friction-adjustment scopes (not just Leupolds) and as long as you pay attention to where the little lines are on the dials, they work fine. The latest FX 6x42's however, have clicks.

On my first trip to Africa, some years ago, my PH's main rifle was a Sako .375 H&H that he also loaned to many clients. He had filed notches edge of the adjustment dials of hthe rifle's Leupold M8 4x, where HIS settings were, so that after the rifle had been sighted-in for a client's use, the scope could be returned to his personal setting. He said it always went right back....

JB

I have a Leupold 2.5x Scout Scope that has the friction type adjustments on my Marlin 1895G. I've shot a number of really heavy .45/70 loads with it, and it's held zero perfectly.

If you are going to just zero and then leave it friction type adjustments work perfectly fine.

If you shoot two or more types of ammo with different zeros, or you move the scope between two rifles and have settings for each then Click adjustments are very nice.

To me the most important item is a scope that holds a precise zero. As I leave mine set I could use either type of adjustments. I probably prefer click adjustments and have never had a situation where I couldn't get a good zero because it was inbetween clicks. However, I would prefer a stabel friction adj scope over a click adjustable one that moves about.

I know that some people value "tracking" a great deal and/or having adjustjmnets that are exactly the size described by the manufacturer but I can deal with poor tracking etc. To me that only costs me a few extra shots at sight in.. better to have scope that is still on 20 days and 100 miles of carry into a tough season.

There are some excellent remarks in this thread. Especially from my Alberta friend Stubblejumper...his comments get right to the heart of the matter. However, I do not agree with Mule Deer's comments. He states: "In reality, friction adjustments if reliable, are much accurate than clicks." This has not been my experience.

As Noknees has stated, if you are going to zero a scope and leave the settings as they are for years, a friction adjustment works fine. Most of us have used the old M8's and Vari-x 2's over the years when the friction adjustments were the "norm". Today however, I can only recall 2 Leupold scopes that use the friction system, the Leupold Rifleman and VX-1 series. That sends a clear message. If the friction system was more accurate than the click system, then why has most every manufacturer (including the vast majority of the Leupold line) switched to click system? Do they use friction adjustments on VX3 or Mark 4 Leupold scopes? No. You'd think they would if they were in fact more accurate.

I remember talking about this issue years ago with a very knowledgeable gunsmith. He told me that in Western Canada, friction adjustments were not a good idea. Everyone knows Canada gets very cold weather at times and the air, even in summer, is often extremely dry on the western prairies. The friction rubber o-ring pads this system utilizes dry out. That means they get hard and brittle over the years (just as car tires do) and when the zero point stays in one spot, the rubber disk develops a slight dimple on its surface. This is fine if you don't change the scope adjustments but if you need to make a minor adjustment, the irregular surface does not make a POI change an easy or exacting task.

Fortunately for all of us, most all manufacturers, yes, even my cheap $50 Bushnell 22 scope, uses the click adjustment system. I sincerely hope to see the friction system completely eliminated from the Leupold line up very soon.

Friction adjustments dry out and then don't work/hold up well ? I dunno about that. I've spent alot of time in places like Death Valley, and the low deserts, to say nothing of California's very hot central valley hunting with friction adjustable scopes. They adjust and hold adjustments just fine, in spite of their exposure to lots of hot days at 100 plus and humidity below 10%. One of them, BTW, has been in service since 1982.
Don't let anyone tell you that click adjustments will work better. I haven't seen it.
I do understand that if you use them alot, i.e. change adjustments alot, then over the years they will wear out faster than a click style adjustment will. But I've noticed that those of us that change back and forth much use either target or tactical adjustable knobs. Clicks of course. E

The friction adjustable Leupy's are notorious for thier imprecise adjustments.These adjsutments (as many can attest) will often not change the POI when adjusted and another adjustment move them too much. They are certainly not an advantage. I have never found them to have an infinite adjustment as JB mentioned,I have found them to be imprecise when sighting in,but stayed put fairly well...

E, nothing ever goes wrong with any of your Leupy's.Hell in front of your eye's thy are = to or better than Nightforce,S&B,and US Optics.Well all know that..........

Back in the 1970's the better quality, more expensive scopes tended to have friction adjustments and the lower priced Weavers and Japanese scopes had clicks. I didn't feel a need for click adjustments until I started shooting highpower silhouette which required frequent elevation adjustments. For a while I used a fixed power Leupold with friction adjustments for competition. It wasn't ideal but it worked; it would dial up my elevations from my 200 meter zero and it would return to zero with no problem. Friction or click are both OK in a good quality scope.

Funny, I've found that mine work just fine and do allow infinite adjustment settings.
I can't help but notice that you "expensive scope addicts" are always telling us how much better your expensive scopes are. But, rarely, do we get any examples as to how they are better or what it is that they do better.
I'm still waiting.
I always hear, instead, how crappy my Leupolds are and, therefore, your much more expensive scopes work better because, as it turns out, they do what my Leupolds have done for me for years.
Very interesting. E

I don't understand all the confusion over "friction" adjustments. ALL scopes have "friction" adjustments, as in the O-ring seals that seal the adjustment screw as it projects from the scopes turret. The only difference with "click adjustment scopes is that a small ring with calibrated serrations is installed in the top of the turret housing in which a small spring loaded ball bears to give detent stops to the adjustments. Leupold's "friction" adjustments are as accurate as the person turning the adjustment dials. Lined up with a mark on the turret housing and repeatedly realigned with that same mark gives the exact same adjustment accuracy and repeatability as any click detent adjustments that also repeatedly line up with some incremental marking. The only way ANY adjustments will be innaccurate would be to have runout or lash in the adjustment turrets micrometer threads. Any runout or thread clearances, and the scopes adjustments won't be accurate, click detents or not.

I don't currently own any Leupold scopes, but I would not hesitate to buy another, and the "friction VS clicks" matter would not have any influence whatsoever on which I'd buy. I consider it a non-issue.

I also do not understand the fixation upon giant heavy military/tactical/benchrest scopes in this forum. I have never seen a soul in my entire life with a monster sized two pounds weight Nightforce or US Optics scope on a HUNTING rifle, aside from this forum board. That is something else that is irrelevant, I don't care if a two pound sixteen inch long three inch diameter tactical/military scope has better optics or adjustments than a Leupold hunting rifle scope that is ten times more appropriate to use on a HUNTING rifle.

The Leupold/Eremicus hatred being displayed on this forum is making it the laughingstock of the internet. People on other boards are talking about it, and I don't mean in a complimentary fashion. There is a small faction of people on here who are intent upon belittling the most popular biggest selling scope company on the planet and promoting esoteric little used ridiculously innappropriate overpriced optics. It's gotten so bad that only a few people on here are brave enough to mention Leupold, they will immediately be set upon and berated by this small bunch and told that all Leupolds are junk, won't hold a setting, bad glass, poor light transmission, blah blah blah. Bull pucky.

Perhaps you missed this;


jwp475
Campfire Guide


Registered: 04/24/05
Posts: 2019
Loc: Las Vegas,Nv.

Online
Originally Posted By: oulufinn

I wonder if when a scope that the BR guys are using "fails", is it an increase of group size to sub .1's to +-.15's that they notice (I plucked those numbers outta thin air, I don't know what their group sixes even are, as a rule)?

This could explain why so many of us who hunt with the Leupolds just don't see all of these failures. I know I'd NEVER see that kind of a difference when shooting groups with a hunting rifle, as I don't match prep my brass or do really any of the prep they do to get the unbelievable groups that win their matches... Just a WAG on my part in this "discussion"...


You are exactly correct in your assumption.. They fail in small degrees... I had a 1/4 MOA 22-250 (Leuppy 6.5X20) that started shooting at best 3/4 moa and at first I thought that it was the barrel,so I was about to have it rebarreled.Just for grins I changed scopes and it became a 1/4 moa rifle again [Quote]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the replacement scope was a 4200 Elite,Hardly a high dollar scope



To all Leupolds are not bad scopes and they are not as GREAT as E try's to make either. We are trying to present another side to this. If E didn't try to make them out to be something that they are most definately aren't then there would be no need to reply.........

E's position is that Leupolds are, far and away, the most popular scopes for many uses for good reason. E

[quote=Phillip_Nesmith
I also do not understand the fixation upon giant heavy military/tactical/benchrest scopes in this forum. I have never seen a soul in my entire life with a monster sized two pounds weight Nightforce or US Optics scope on a HUNTING rifle, aside from this forum board. That is something else that is irrelevant, I don't care if a two pound sixteen inch long three inch diameter tactical/military scope has better optics or adjustments than a Leupold hunting rifle scope that is ten times more appropriate to use on a HUNTING rifle. [/quote]

Try some of the Long Range Hunting sites and you will see that the tactical style scope rule for hunting............

-----------------------------------------------------------
Maybe this post by E will help with your understnading;
If not there are many more
---------------------------------------------------------

Campfire Kahuna

Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 6828
Loc: Placerville,CA,USA

Online
OK, Matt. Tell us how much brighter and how much better you can see and shoot with an S&B on a hunting rifle than you can with the same class of Leupold scope. Tell us how much better they can be relied upon.
S&B and Nightforce make extra beefy variable tactical scopes. Leupold doesn't make their tactical, variables scopes like that. I have yet to see any test data that shows that they hold up better than Leupolds, either from heavy, sharp recoil or from simple knocks in the field. Do you have such test data ? E