Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Tract Toric UHD T Plex 3-15x50

There’s a smidge more to it than that. A lot of members will take what some say as gospel and make a buying decision only to be disappointed in what they get.

Many times the true performance of an optic is overrated - not because someone is lying, but rather the conditions where they use their optic isn’t the same as another member.

Mechanics either work consistently or they don’t, and shouldn’t care where you are. Glass clarity is a different story.

🦫

Of course being on the inna net Dug can claim any comparison he wants as we all know , no one lies on the inna net .

I'll be doing a similar comparison this weekend and see what I prefer. Will compare Toric UHD, Tract Response, Optika 6 and NF SHV. I've yet to do this side be side with these, so curious what I'll prefer. Wish I had a Leupold MK5 to compare as well as I'm interested in one of those next.

A fellow isn't allowed his own opinions based on experiences without being called a liar?

I did a little comparison of my own this week after reading this thread. Here's what I thought.
Conditions where overcast / cloudy and late afternoon. I'm 50 years old and color blind. My deficiencies are in the brown and green hue's.
Had 4 rifles with the following scopes on them. This seemed a fair comparison to me,
Tract toric 3-15x42
Nightforce shv 4-14x50
Zeiss Conquest v4 4-16x44
Vortex razor hd lht 3-15x42.
Looking at a target at 100 yards all 4 could see the finest of lines and read the small writing on the targets. At 100 yards there wasn't a lot of difference in clarity but differences in color tones. The razor had the purest view really clean and clear not much off color. The Nightforce was also really crisp as well with very little color differences. Next the zeiss had a little bit of a reddish hue to it. I hadn't notice that before. The toric had a little bit of a greyish hue to it which I had also never noticed before. All where still very usuable.
Next had same target at 300 yards. After some fine tuning I was able to get all 4 where I could read the writing but the thin lines for the 1" squares had disappeared in all but the Vortex razor. The off color hue were much more noticeable on the Zeiss and toric and now had a little bit of an off whiteish color to the nightforce. Lastly I moved them over to a well casing 10"x24" at 500 yards. The sun was getting ready to set and it was pretty dark. There were no visible differences in the 4 as to being able to clearly see the well casing. It hit it with all 4 rifle's first shot. All 4 would easily be useable to kill a deer or pig size animal at dusk. The Vortex clearly held an edge as it got later and started to get dark. Surprisingly though all 4 were useable at 500 yards a half hour after sunset. One last note the reddish hue of the ziess disapeared as it got later. The toric was the first to start getting getting dark followed by the zeiss and nightforce with the razor being put away and still being usable.
Don't know if this will help anyone else but thought I would put it out there.
Conclusion all 4 scopes will work great way past legal shooting light. My eye's did prefer the razor best.
Another note as I also had 2 different range finding binos with me. Leica geovid 3200.com and sig kilo 6K.
The leica's were better in low light optically than all the rest by far when I was leaving at dark they would still range the well casing and I could see it fairly well. The sigs I couldn't make it out but was still getting ranges around it.

You make a good point here. All of those scopes had glass that was perfectly adequate to take an animal at 500 yards and through legal shooting light. That needs to sink in.

To that end, all of those scopes have glass that is plenty good enough. So at this point the comparison should shift to mechanics and reliability. If all have glass good enough, why are we even hung up on glass? Why are we picking nits with the meaningless nuances and subtleties of glass qualities. Why aren’t we analyzing instead which ones will retain zero and track reliably? That’s what matters. This thread is focusing on the wrong qualities for a gun scope.

Because after reading your detailed analysis, one might surmise that the Vortex is the best scope. But is it? Will it retain zero after impact? And track and RTZ as it should? Because if it doesn’t or won’t, it’s certainly not the best scope of that bunch. Draw your own conclusions.

I appreciate the analysis, but the sooner we get over glass as consumers and start demanding what really matters, the sooner we’ll have more quality scope choices.

this statement stuck with me over the years....
scopes are aiming devices and not to be used as binoculars

Give me a fuggin break. The vortex LHT tracks as good or better than any scope that he compared. I've had 3 and literally raped the turrets for several years. Never lost zero, never not tracked. All of the above scopes he compared to will lose zero when dropped on their side from 3' or higher. Not many scopes on the market will withstand that, and if the scope does, the mounting system/bedding system of the rifle will not. In fact, all four of the scopes he compared work quite well and have "nice glass" to boot.

It's obvious to anyone who shoots more than their mouth, that TRACT is over-rated. Just because you haven't compared them side x side like many others, doesn't make it "not so".

Your reality is your reality, and a fuggin $200 Leupold VX2 has "good enough" glass to shoot a deer up until legal light ends.

Is the TRACT good enough.......yep.

Is it "better" as many claim that others in the price category. Not a fuggin chance

I wonder how many bash the sh*t out of their binoculars. Wonder how well they would withstand being dropped 3' multiple times? Particularly if attached to an 8lbs rifle?

I think those who accept shI*tty glass quality in a scope, must not enjoying shooting much. Aiming device or not, I don't wanna be looking through a toilet paper roll with [bleep] stains on the glass. I think, I'll accept the fact that my scope might be a "precision optical device" and treat it as such. Much the same way I treat my rifles, with care. Quality glass and quality mechanics............there are a lot of options in the $700 range and up. Some are better than others. Unfortunately, the only way to know what suits you better than another is to "try them all". Some of us delight in the quest in doing just such.

Anyway, to parrot the OP. The Toric isn't top of the line for the money.

Thanks for the review. Seems in line with what I've found myself, having owned all of those scopes. I'm 39 years old and NOT COLOR BLIND..........so it's interesting that you still came to the same conclusions. Particularly the Zeiss having a reddish hue........YEP, also not that great of resolution. Toric being "Bluish" or Grey I agree, and would ad more of a "black ring" around the image than the others. Razor LHT has pretty damn good color and glass. I find the VX5HD 3-15x44 to have even better contrast than the Razor LHT and mechanics are the same. I've converted to VX5HD 3-15x44 (Blashemy I know)..............for my light rifles. They don't track or hold zero though, I just like the glass quality..........................

Cool, your jets there pal. You are making some pretty far reaching assumptions. I am not a fan of tract. I don’t even like the Toric that I have. My only point is that we see so many of these reviews and comparisons that focus entirely on the glass qualities. I don’t get it. To me, it’s simply way down the list of considerations. But if glass is what’s most important to you, rock on with your bad self. I wish I had known when I was attempting to sell my Swarovski scopes!

Yes and no.

Take tracking out of the equation. The OP was asking/explaining his perception of the glass. I doubt many experienced hunters or shooters use their scopes as binoculars. I know, I don’t.

But, I’ve lost count the times I’ve picked up game animals at first or last light with my bins, then immediately went to my scope to look at heads.

If you’re using an alpha glass scope. You’re seeing the same clarity in your scope as you would be seeing through alpha bins. But, I’m on the gun, holding tight on heads for bone.

If your scope glass qualities suffer in comparison to your bins, there’s a chance, in pub land hunts especially, that another hunter who’s using an alpha scope has already dropped the hammer on the bull or buck you were trying to decipher if it had horns through your binoculars, or while your trying to transition from your binoculars to your rife.

Ask me how many times I got schooled on this lesson in the field?

🦫

Where did the bad Tract scope inappropriately touch you?🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️.

Seriously who gives a crap what other people buy if that’s how they want to spend their money? I looked through dozens of scopes last weekend and some look great to me and some don’t. Some were super expensive and some were not. Everyone’s eyesight is different.

By the way I own one Tract scope and it’s on a 22.

Carry on. The optics forum is never not entertaining

What are some scopes that you like? Always curious what guys are using and pleased with.

Kaleb,

Here’s what I use and have found advantages for in competitive public land hunting.

NightForce NXS 3.5-15x50, NXS 5.5-22x50, SHV F1 4-14x50, Zeiss V6 3-18x50

Multiples of Zeiss V4’s. SWFA SS HD 5-20x50, Schmidt & Bender Klassik 4-16x50, Leupold VX5 HD 3-15x44, Leupold VX3 HD 4.5-14x40, Leupold VX-3 LR 4.5-14x50 and I recently sold my Schmidt & Bender PMii Police 4-16x50 to a buddy.

The NightForce scopes sit on all my “I give a shît” rifles for bigger game. The rest ride on various goat/deer guns or varmint rifles.

I would have bought NF Atacr scopes. I’m just not a fan of the 34mm tubes. Hence, the reason I parted ways with the S&B PMii.

🦫

Then why the F&ck are you replying to a thread about a dude who compared a Tract Toric 3-15x to other scopes and found it "less than the hype"

Jezzus..............

Just so happens the OP is correct, that's all Im' saying. When a bunch of nobody's claim that X is better than Y..........you buy X, then find the contrary. It's nice to have some validation that your not as crazy as you thought you may be.

This isn't an opinion thread, tard. It's directly addressing the Tract Toric 3-15x. Do you own one? Have you ever...............yeah, I thought so.

Kaleb,

Here’s a few scopes I would like to tryout. Leupold Mark5 HD 3.6-18x44 35mm tube be damned. I still want to try one.

Vortex LHT Razor 3-15x42 and a Leica Amplus 6 2.5-15x50

I owned a March 1.5-15x42 for a short while. For whatever reason I couldn’t get the parallax to work well enough for my eyes. That aside, the March was a nice scope.

🦫

Hey Tard'..............I mean "pard". Where the Fugg did I state glass quality was the only and solely criteria in a rifle scope for ME. Your reading comprehension is as good as your "guessing". Far reaching assumptions land solidly home to those who can smell your bullsh*t from a mile away. You ever owned an LHT? You ever owned a 3-15x Toric? How many times has your LHT lost it's zero from being dropped? How many times has your XYZ............passed any sort of test. Yeah, keep dreaming.
I've bought and sold more [bleep]*in scopes in the last year than you've peered through in your lifetime. It's RARE, but sometimes people actually have something of value to ad on this forum. Maybe you should take note. Learn to fugg*n read as well.

Swaro rifle scope glass sucks as much D*ck as their mechanics. You sound like someone who buys into the "name". Kinda like the Ziess TERA..............real fuggin nice scopes there......lauphing my as* off

Thank you