Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Drop test your scope?

Climbed to the top of an 8' blind. As I reached for the door I felt my sling slipping through my armpit. The rifle, wearing a Leupold 6x42, hit the ground horizontally, scope first, on a big flat Hill Country rock.

Proceeded to whack a doe in the head @ 150 yards.

Dropped my gun three times that weekend. Has never happened before or since.

I have not had such luck dropping zeiss rifle scopes, a Kahles will withstand a fall to the ground from your back a few times but not to a concrete floor.

I have drop-tested quite a few scopes over the decades, some even inside a rifle case, though none deliberately. Some stayed sighted-in and others didn't, though I have never seen a brand-pattern. I suspect mounts have as much to do with it as scopes.

.... and how they land.

Agreed, no pattern noticed here.

This might be the stupidest thing I've seen posted on the fire in 10 years. powdr

When I did my tests, I didn't drop my rifles very far, about a foot is all. It started out as me knocking them over when sitting via bipod, as I had had just that happen many times in the field.

My tests were done on a lightly padded shooting mat over concrete, which I think was my problem. The turrets would sometimes cut through the shooting mat and contact the concrete directly. This busted up the scopes and cut up my shooting mat, and I think put a lot more intense force into the optic than most field knocks. When I get back to this subject, I'll do it over dirt instead.

Like I mentioned, I never found any setup that was impervious to zero shift doing that, but that was before I had an action with an integral rail. I will say, of all the stuff I tested, a Bushnell DMR mounted on a rail that was epoxied on tested the best. That setup was on my comp gun for two years and remained my least finicky, most reliable setup.

Interesting...

I am inclined to follow powdr here - just like I leave the crash tests for my car to the manufacturers and independent laboratories...

To be insitefull, test would have to be:

- repeatable,
- measurable,
- of suffcient number for analysis for each combination of factors (like Scope brand, model, etc...)

I am sure, a regimene could be thoughtout to fit this, but doubt, I could do it on my time and dime (read scopes).

I fully go along with your signature line, Carl, though, just some thoughts on this from the top of my head.

My brother was Elk Hunting in Colorado with me and he had his 7 mm Mag leaned against a pine tree and the wind blew it over and the scope Obj Bell hit a rock and it broke part of the way from the scope body . I had to loan him my backup 270 for the rest of the hunt . The scope was a Leupold 3.5x10 VX-3. Leupold replaced the scope .

why do you say that?

This is something that I believe we all need to pay attention to.
I've never intentionally "drop tested" my mounted scopes. But I've lost count of all the times they have hit the ground hard. Went down once and literally fell on my upside down rifle. The old 4X B&L got a crushed elevation cap and nice ding on the front bell. When shot later that day, the rifle was three inches to the left. Turned out to be the front Ruger scope ring had come loose. The scope was almost perfect. It's still with me today.
Over the years of hunting with others in rough country, I've seen far more mount problems or failures than scope problems.
I also have an old 4X Leupold that has taken several hard knocks and falls. Then one day, while my rifle maker was testing the rifle by slaming the bolt, the reticle broke. That experience led me to believe that scopes do suffer from cumulative damage just like some have written.
I understand that some have done some less harsh impact testing. Try whacking the scope bell with the side of your hand a time or two, with the rifle in a vise, then shoot it. This has shown that scopes with small objectives tend to hold zero better than much larger scopes.
At any rate, I never go on a hunting trip w/o a complete spare rifle. Even with the toughest scopes and mounts, anything can break if stressed enough. E

old thread


Dug this one up

Why is that?







Sometimes. In general the scopes are never tested separately. When a rifle system is being tested for a contract it is just that- a system. The rifle manufacturers put whatever scope they want on their submission as long as it meets the specs on the contract. There have only been a couple of open competitions for just the scopes in the last 20 years.






Carl,

I remember when you were dropping yours. I hadn't bedded any of mine and you were seeing shifts with the same scopes I was and am using. Most my "testing" had been with good picatinny rings mounted directly to the receivers of M4's and SR25's, or on rifles that had bases with 8-40 screws with plenty of rust to help help hold them... grin.

After the last time we conversed about it, I started playing with a bunch of different setups on hunting rifles. The end result is that lots of scopes shift and lots of bases shift. We see basically no shift with NF and SWFA scopes up until truly stupid abuse when mounted with solid picatinny rings directly to an integral reciever rail and when ALL fasteners are bloody knuckle tight. That means action screws as well.

The same as above with good picatinny bases mounted stupid tight to normal receivers will see little (less than .2 mil) to no shift with the drops as in the video above.

When using "standard" rings/bases like Tally's, DD's, etc, with the same scopes it is not uncommon to see 2-4 MOA shifts from drops of 10-12 inches into grass and soft dirt. Not everytime, but often.


Everything comes into play when talking zero retention form hard use- fit of bases to reciever, type of bases, types of rings, quality and material or rings and bases, tightness of ALL fasteners, ring spacing, and of course what type of scope is used. Obviously the mounting system matters, but actually dropping scopes with different bases and rings and seeing the results is interesting.



The best favor one can do any scope is to maximize ring spacing and get it as low as possible.

As a general principle OK, but exceptions exist. For example, it's a good idea to keep the rear ring 3/4" or so ahead of the eyepiece on 6x Leupolds, lest you pop a reticle. Putting a ring right next to the power change ring on a 4-12x40 does it no favors either.

I have a funny story regarding drop tests. Back before I had good taste and believed in purchasing quality optics, I purchased a Simmons 3-9X40 with rings for $20.00 on clearance in a little hardware store in East Texas. I stuck it on top of my Remington 7400 and went out to sight it in. I could get it on target but 2-3 shots later, it would lose zero. Rings and bases were tight as could be, the scope was just Chinese junk.

Anyhow, walking back from the woods, the rifle proceeded to jump out of my hands and into a rocky creek bed about 12 feet below. Fortunately, it was unloaded, so it just sustained some pretty good bumps and bruises to both the scope and rifle. Well, I decided I'd see just how far it had knocked my zero off. Much to my surprise, the first shot was right on the X. The dang thing never lost zero again over about 40-50 rounds. I finally pulled it off and replaced it with a VX-IIc when I started getting better taste and a bigger paycheck.

Moral of the story: If you have a cheap Chinese Simmons that won't hold zero for schit, throw it down about 12 feet into some good Texas river rock. It will either break or work perfectly forever. Either way you'll be coming out ahead. *Results not guaranteed* haha

Russell
hpb_rst

Don't you mean Vari-X IIc?

Signed,
Leupold nomenclature police

The reticle issue with 6x Leupolds is a design quirk and as long as one watches not to over tighten the rings they will be fine. As far as the 4-12x Leupold they all can be like that and I'd just as soon not use a scope that is designed poorly to begin with.

Also had a Nikon Bolt crossbow scope that went scope first onto some solid rock. I had my x-bow leaned against the truck door (shoulda known better) while getting my boots on. My father in law came around the side of the truck in the dark and bumped it.

I passed on a decent doe that morning worried that my zero might be off and not wanting to risk wounding her. Later that afternoon, I checked it and it was still right on the money at 30 and 40 yards. I was really impressed. Score one for Nikon.

Russell
hpb_rst

Mathman, you're exactly right. It is a Vari-X IIc. My bad. Seriously though, do the folks at Leupold just sit around trying to figure out how to make their model nomenclature as confusing as possible.

Russell
hpb_rst

It has led to a number of misunderstandings (or even deceptions?) in buying and selling.