Has anyone done a drop test on Leupold Vx5hd?

[Marbles]

Not quite sure what you mean here. All I was getting at is I don't feel it's "ridiculous " to evaluate a scope , to some extent anyway based on someone's experience in the field taking game over a lengthy period of time. No doubt lots will disagree with me as I said I agree to disagree.

Also fwiw if I took a fall hard enough to crack the stock on my rifle I would be shooting way more than one single shot to verify that there wasn't a problem, but that's just me. I have a deep respect for the Animals I hunt and feel I owe it to that animal to be as competent as I can

@Macintosh got the general idea, but he drives a Jeep, so I don't trust anything he says. (Edit: or is the Jeep driver @mxgsfmdpx sorry if I miss labeled you Macintosh).

If a scope shifts up to 1 MOA between shots, and the shooter and gun can consistently hold sub 1.5 MOA, that gives a 2.5 MOA impact area, well withing the vitals of a deer at 200 yards, and likely within the vitals going out to 400 yards. So, does that shift matter?

6 weeks and 700 to 800 shots ago, I was a 3.5 MOA shooter for prone shots from field rests (and had a personal hard limit of 200 yards on game in perfect conditions). Now I would say I'm a sub 1.7 MOA shooter, with most ten round groups being under 1.2 MOA and some 3-5 round groups sub 0.5 MOA (which demonstrates how inadequate such groups are, but now I'm getting off topic and thinking of another poster who brags about never shooting anything other than cold bore shots). Anyway, until very recently, a scope that danced by 1 MOA would have been insignificant for my ability to put shots on game, and if I did miss because of the scope, I would have blamed the shooter. Within my MER, worrying about the shift is pole vaulting over mouse turds.



What follows is why I still cared. It is for the general reader and not directed at you.

One, while I could not spot a shift, if the internal can shift easily, then it is possible they shift significantly more than 1 MOA. A neighbor has a story were he was missing caribou on easy shots. From riding in the 4x4 his scope was off about 15 MOA, bore sighting was enough to show it had shifted. No, I don't know the scope he was using, and yes he still uses that scope and thinks it works well.

Two, I had hopes of becoming a better shooter, and to do that I needed equipment that did not mislead me.

 

[Marbles]

Here is what I see in my mind when someone says Jeep:

 

[Balderdash]

I couldn't possibly disgree more. 6x puts you in the ballpark of just 9-16ft FOV at 50 yards. So you're gonna attempt to shoot a bounding whitetail through thick timber or an elk for that matter with just that small of view? Nope that's insanity and couldn't recommend to someone I hate.

It's far more doable than you'd think. For tracking deer in the snow in heavy cover, we used to practice shooting at rabbit clays with rifles. Even a 8-10' FOV leaves a lot of space around a deer sized target. It largely comes down to technique; practice keeping your eye on the target and bringing the gun up to it. You'll topple close deer like grouse, even with a 6x.

If you start by looking through the scope and then trying to find the target, it will be a longer than necessary process even on 2x.

 

[bigmike23]

It's far more doable than you'd think. For tracking deer in the snow in heavy cover, we used to practice shooting at rabbit clays with rifles. Even a 8-10' FOV leaves a lot of space around a deer sized target. It largely comes down to technique; practice keeping your eye on the target and bringing the gun up to it. You'll topple close deer like grouse, even with a 6x.

If you start by looking through the scope and then trying to find the target, it will be a longer than necessary process even on 2x.

You're using vocabulary such as doable, techniques, practice, to force yourself to use an inferior tool for the task at hand. There's no reason with the mountain of excellent scopes out there to force yourself to get better with an inferior telescope. I maintain that's unacceptable fov for the vast majority of shooters out there. The big majestic animals we pursue do not walk through the woods in a steady pace or straight line. They zig zag and run and walk in unpredictable ways and paces, often in thick cover as well. That kind of FOV doesn't pass the sniff test. This is just a few examples of what I experienced this year as well as a majority of Eastern hunters.
Does that mean using a 1-5 scope limits you to closer shots? Absolutely not. 5x scope is more than sufficient to take game at 300 all day sitting on the powerline

 

[bigmike23]

Anyway I'll end it here. Going way off OP topic

 

[ResearchinStuff]

Man, you hunt some really open eastern areas, most of my spots are tighter than that. I killed a deer at 10 yards with a swfa on 6x this year, zero drama, watched the impact through the scope. That's the beauty of a low recoil suppressed 223 for hunting. In the past I've killed running deer at <20 yards with a 4.5-15 scope on 4.5, turns out that scope at 4.5 had less fov than the swfa 6x.

 

[Macintosh]

@Macintosh got the general idea, but he drives a Jeep, so I don't trust anything he says. (Edit: or is the Jeep driver @mxgsfmdpx sorry if I miss labeled you Macintosh).

Man…as long as we’re derailing an already off-topic thread, the only thing I dont really like about my silverado is the dim stock headlights….anyone got a solution that doesnt involve rewiring the whole vehicle?

 

[JGRaider]

This is @JGRaider schtick. In almost every thread, he brings up: COVID vaccine, Form no longer hanging out in other forums, his trusty Leupold, and/or Africa. Then he’ll sprinkle in some extreme exaggeration of what you said, combined with ignoring any question you ask. Rinse and repeat.

Wow, it will really ruin your day to know how well our Arken EP4's and Athlon Cronus, Ares and Helos scopes are doing .

 

[atmat]

Wow, it will really ruin your day to know how well our Arken EP4's and Athlon Cronus, Ares and Helos scopes are doing .

Please, tell me more about its use in Africa.

Fixed 6 is perfectly fine for squirrel hunting. It's an awful choice for big game hunting. Deer are quick animals. A 6x choice is awful for a deer who comes bounding along through mtn laurel or scrub oak at less than 30 yards away who is under no obligation to stop for you to make a shot. He's moving along looking for a doe or on a doe and you're trying to get him or find him with that small of a FOV. Bad situation to be in..

It was also on my 223 deer gun for a long time. I never had an issue with it, even at shots as close as 20 yards.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Saying scopes work because you can kill game with them is ridiculous.

If someone puts a scope on their gun for the purpose of killing game, and they kill game, the scope worked.

 

[sndmn11]

Here is what I see in my mind when someone says Jeep:
View attachment 675127

I'd drive that

 

[roosiebull]

Classifieds. I spend my time commenting elsewhere

You better never mention where, or you may lose your safe space.

 

[atmat]

If someone puts a scope on their gun for the purpose of killing game, and they kill game, the scope worked.

To play devil’s advocate, would you still make that argument in either of the following situations:

Scenario 1: The scope loses zero, shifts horizontally, and you shoot the game animal in the gut instead. It dies within a day but you don’t recover it. In this instance, the game was killed. Was the scope adequate?

Scenario 2: Your scope shifts 4MOA. You kill your next animal at 50 yards. But you normally shoot animals at 300 yards. Do you still trust your scope for your next shot? In this scenario, game was killed. Is the scope still adequate?

 

[JGRaider]

To play devil’s advocate, would you still make that argument in either of the following situations:

Scenario 1: The scope loses zero, shifts horizontally, and you shoot the game animal in the gut instead. It dies within a day but you don’t recover it. In this instance, the game was killed. Was the scope adequate?

Scenario 2: Your scope shifts 4MOA. You kill your next animal at 50 yards. But you normally shoot animals at 300 yards. Do you still trust your scope for your next shot? In this scenario, game was killed. Is the scope still adequate?

LOL......hypotheticals are always fun and a waste of time, since they are hypotheticals.

Oh.....never taken any of those other scopes mentioned to Africa, just the VX6, 6 times.

 

[atmat]

LOL......hypotheticals are always fun.

When someone makes an absolute statement, hypotheticals can easily disprove it.

Oh.....never taken any of those other scopes mentioned to Africa, just the VX6, 6 times.

There it is. That’s two squares on the bingo card.

 

[JGRaider]

No they can't. Hypotheticals are fiction. No idea what your reference to the bingo cards thing is though.

Or we could play hypotheticals all day long......if you fall and break both arms, do you think you'll still be able to accurately shoot your NF scoped rifle?

 

[atmat]

No they can't. Hypotheticals are fiction. No idea what your reference to the bingo cards thing is though.

Or we could play hypotheticals all day long......if you fall and break both arms, do you think you'll still be able to accurately shoot your NF scoped rifle?

There are reasonable scenarios and unreasonable scenarios with which to play hypotheticals.

But I’ll humor you and say, no, if I broke both arms I’m not worried about a scope holding zero.

The ridiculous scenarios you propose are straw man arguments, which is why folks think you say ridiculous things.

The bingo cards is in reference to the things you mention seemingly endlessly.

 

[JGRaider]

It's only ridiculous to you and a few others evidently, especially if you haven't BTDT. You just seem to whine about it twice as much as everyone else. Also you asked about my scopes, I answered. Pretty simple.

 

[Tom-D]

The sad thing is that as long as people argue the fact that there leupold scopes work fine without actually testing the limits to see if it really does leupold has no reason to revise there product to make it better. Which is shame because on paper there scopes have some of the best options out there . Thats what lured me in when iv heard plenty of times before they alway lose zero and witnessed a total failure first hand 1 time i thought “come on such a big well known company it must be a 1 in a million issue”. I then sold a perfectly good nightforce because i wanted something lighter for carrying got leupold vx5 and in a few months was already experiencing shift in zero i never had before.

 

[atmat]

It's only ridiculous to you and a few others evidently, especially if you haven't BTDT.

I’m not saying it’s ridiculous to pose scenarios with injuries. I’m saying it’s ridiculous to combine it with scope ruggedness conversation.

You just seem to whine about it twice as much as everyone else. .

Haha oooookay, buddy. You’re right.