Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Leupold Responds with a Special 24HourCampfire Exclusive

I wanted a little time to digest it. Watched most of it again.

Frankly, I just don't see what was accomplished.

The big question is/was/has been regarding tracking, adjustment, and zero retention. That's what everybody tuned in to see. And I just don't think guys who are having those issues got much satisfaction from Leupold's remarks. Leupold clearly stated that any such issues are not due to their scopes inherently, which is not a wholly surprising position. I got the distinct impression that, except maybe for some part of their 0.2% return rate, they attribute such issues to other external factors, including operator error.

So, again, was that what this whole event was about?

Best thing to come out of the exchange is Leupold's offer to call them if you are having trouble. I would take them up on that.

But what do I know?

That was just plain sad. They could have easily said that they shared our concerns and would be actively looking into any problems that might arise.

At least they were honest though--they don't see a problem with their product and do not plan on looking into any suggested changes (at least until they lose enough market share to make it required).

And to think, the tracking "fix" would only require them to spec a stronger, better quality spring at maybe an extra $10 per scope. No redesign even needed. I think that the consumer would gladly pay that extra price for a scope that didn't wander and moved when adjusted.

They lost customers tonight.

I was glad they myth busted all the exaggerated claims about it taking six trips to Leupold to get a scope fixed. “Generally, they’re fixed by the third time a scope is returned... It never takes six times.”

Sad... but is was all predictable

Thanks for trying to make this work Doug. You did all you could

I never expected Leupold to admit to any problems, but their little 30 minute spiel was downright sad.

Form, as quoted earlier, was spot on....

Did anyone get the impression the guy on the right, with the bear shirt, would have sooner been cleaning toilets with the janitorial staff than in on the Q&A.

Did they? Fugging fugg!

Indeed.

I just watched it again, as I was multitasking during the original airing. This time I took a few notes which are posted below. The technical discussion was nonsense.

Early on they show a slide labeled ‘Myth 5’ which appears to illustrate that a 0.4% deviation in adjustments at 100yrds. ensures 0% deviation in adjustments1000 yards????? I have no idea what this was about.

Regarding scopes that have been back 6, 7 times, Dane, who’s been with Leupold for three years stated, “l’ve never seen a scope come back six times and have a problem. Generally by the third time it’s in here, uh, we’re firing it, uh, we’re doing jumping jacks drills, uh, we’re doing box drills...”

A few quotes from Nick...
“I don’t know exactly what ‘beefed up’ means”
“I’m not an engineer, I’m just a marketing guy”
“Are your take down screws in the stock nice and secure?”
“We’re not accusing anyone of being wrong or anything like that.”
“We’re not gonna produce a product that doesn’t work—doesn’t track.”
“We’re gonna geek out on all the engineering stuff, all the stuff that’s over my head.”
“If it goes on a rifle, it comes out of this factory (the one in the US)”

Damn Doug, you get my respect...

He clearly states that he does the tours in the first minute and it's kinda weird you'd dispute this.

I spent a whole slug o' money sending Leupolds back that never tracked or held zero only for them to give a clean bill of health.

Once I switched to SWFA all the accuracy problems went away.

I would have liked to have heard what they had to say about that, but they were too busy telling me about their expensive machinery that makes tour guides and service dept guys think they actually track and hold zero.

Doug, Thanks

You gave them an opportunity to address issues with their products. They failed.

Can you see my finger nail turning white?

That erector isn't moving.

Can't make this schit up.

Exactly. Angular subtension is angular subtension, whether at 100 yards or 1000. That visual aid is nothing but a marketing tool, with no basis in science.

I also loved the “repeatable and accurate” comment about their adjustments that may have slightly incorrect increments. Maybe they missed the countless posts describing the “Leupold shuffle”? So much for repeatable and accurate.

That video was simply a marketing tool that said “There is nothing wrong with our scopes, there is something wrong with you guys.” Kind of a crappy marketing approach, if you ask me.

Hah, that cracked me right up, too. As if him pushing with his fingers replicates the impulse the rifle places on the scope (let alone any bumps, falls, etc), and that if he can’t feel it move with his fingers, it must not be moving enough to shift zero at 100 yards. Priceless.

“Myth 5”.....Means you can’t properly sight a Leupold Scope at 100 yards...This is gonna be a shocker to the Set & Forget it guys.

I was impressed with the “mushy dials” explanation that means the erector is still doing its job...That I call 100% BS on.

I’ve had several VX6 and VX3i that when dialing up adjustments using CDS it felt like the knob was very loose, mushy and wobbled inside the turet. This would cause minor issues having to play the adjustment guessing game, 1/4 click would provide 1/2” or more in adjusment the other direction...Back and forth. Somtimes a good knock on top of the turret made me feel like in was supposed to help knock the erector into place...😎

Wow....just watched the first 12 minutes and that was enough. They have a tracking problem. There's no question about this or doubt. I've sighted enough Leupolds in that 'REQUIRE" at least 3 shots to tell where the adjustment is going to finally settle in.....I'd blame it on me, the rifle, the mounts, or anything else except by moving to SWFA, Nightforce, or S&B the same setups adjust on the first shot....exactly.

Form really nailed it when he said they'd not admit to any problems and weren't interested in fixing things.

I WANTED to support Leupold...but after watching the following is my decision:

1. I'll never buy another Leupold unless it's proven they fixed tracking, return to zero, and zero retention. The first 12 minutes of that made it clear that they and I speak a different language. What I've seen REPEATEDLY they call a MYTH. From that I know that I can't put faith in anything they say. I'll consider it proven when Form signs off on one...

2. I'll keep on supporting CameraLandNY. Hat's off to Doug for setting this up.

Reminds me of back in 1995 when Ford Motor Company told me that there was no problem with their brakes when dang near every single vehicle
Came back in with pulsating braking cause by warped rotors. They told me us that the problem was the way people braked and we needed to retrain
The customer to lightly pump the brakes and not to apply a steady stream of pressure. I told them to get fckd and I wasn't running a driving school.
If they wanted to tell people who been driving with no problems for 30-50 years that they dont know how to drive then they could do that themselves.
We knew what the problem was and they knew what the problem was but the fix was not going to happen so they laid it off on the drivers. I basically told them they should design a system based on the way people drive. I replace rotors and pads on every single vehicle that was under warranty and sent Ford the bills. They paid everyone of them.

Anyone that expected they were going to admit there are problems with their products is delusional. That's simply not how one survives in the corporate world.

Way back when in the days of Quality programs, the mantra was, "Quality means meeting customer expectations, not goodness". IOW, as long as the customer thinks he's getting his money's worth, it's a quality product. As long as enough people keep buying Leupold stuff based on reputation and tradition, there's no incentive for them to make any changes. As has been said repeatedly here, they know all about the stuff they sell, and are sticking to the program. Maybe there's a bunch of secret scurrying around in their engineering department working on the problems with their stuff, but I kinda doubt it, and ain't taking any expensive chances when there's plenty of other good products to choose from.

Thanks to Doug and all those who endured the presentation and produced the Cliff Notes version for the rest of us.

That was very cringe-worthy. Good to know 3rd time is the charm.

It looks like the Leupold debate is over. Put a fork in it. Where will the Optics Forum turn next?