Is it all Leopolds

[BBob]

You asked “is it ALL leupolds” No, clearly not ALL. But many of us have had bad experiences with them over the years. Which can then be replicated with a little testing. Then we go read about many other people experiencing the same thing. It’s not hard to understand why many people start to advise others who are serious about their gear to avoid the brand. If that makes a “cultist” in some people’s eyes, then they think critical thinking is a cult behavior.

I haven't read all of this thread but out of what I have read that's the best post. It sums it up perfectly and cordially. That post has been pretty much my experience with Leupold as well. I still have one, it somehow has not failed but many others did so those went away and I've been too gun shy to ever buy another.

 

[Jake Larsen]

It’s less than perfect but much better than “some random internet guys say leupold scopes won’t hold zero”. With no empirical evidence of their setups or the myriad of other variables that could be at play.

They shoot long range and are tough on equipment. I’d trust socom using leupolds for 25 years more than I’d trust some guy that obviously doesn’t like leupolds.

Empirical evidence of leupold issues HAS been produced. And some of us DO know how to set up a rifle property and remove the other potential variables. When I have a rifle with a leupld that won’t track on a simple tall target test and return to zero, then throw on a different brand and have the problem disappear…it’s the scope.

As far as hating Leupold - they’ve been my favorite scopes by far I’ve used. Awesome eye box, weight, form factor, glass clarity. Everything about them is dang near perfect, with the exception of MIL based reticles. I liked every one i owned way more than the Nightforce NSX I have on my rifles now. But you know what I dislike more than the 20oz Nightforce that doesn’t have the best eye relief or reticle? Missing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jake Larsen]

That doesn’t look great, but a number of things could cause that. I guess after you pull it, do the exact same test with the replacement and compare. But even that would just be a sample size of one.

Sample size of 1 x a LOT of other people who have experienced and posted THE EXACT SAME THING. For years. On multiple forums.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

Instead of nebulous terms and general non-specific statements to misrepresent what people are saying, let’s get specific- who exactly is a “hater” of Leupold? Name them. Then, can you quote them “hating” Leupold for some evidence?

Why don’t you go cherry pick some more data?

The only real thing you can do to address your concerns is mount it up and abuse the crap out of it. See if the zero shifts. If it doesn't, run it.

Only problem is the leupold I have mounted has endured the abuse. More than any drop test.

Granted only shoot about 100 rounds a year with my hunting rifle.

I shoot the shit out of my 22s (all have leupolds) and my ARs (just red dots or iron sights).

My hunting rifles is a box every other month or so.

 

[UpNorth89]

It still seems like many people believe their scope didn't fail because they successfully killed an animal. If you killed an animal even though your scope slightly lost zero it still failed.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

Yeah SOCOM hand selects stuff. Your standard sniper in an infantry company not so much.

Will say this though most weaponry components have been pretty good going back the last 20 years or so. Will also say with the acog most guys would be qualified snipers from 50-70 years ago.

I think people also miss terminology. Sniper means more then shooting its stealth, concealment, scouting etc. the army’s standard to to get the tab was fairly rigorous.

This isn’t to down anybody but the snipers we had I would say were good shooters, but wouldn’t necessarily say they were anything better at shooting then some of us and definitely wouldn’t look at them as an authority on anything. But I’m also talking basic infantry unit snipers, SOCOM guys I watched them and those guys are pretty good

Let’s not forget the designated marksmen that claim to be snipers.

Big difference between STA and line sniper.

For the record…I was not a recon Marine. Nor a sniper. I was just a combat engineer that went to sapper school.

I also am not a great shot. I just get it done.
I also want a light weight scope that won’t fail me.
I’m part of three cults currently. But none are the RokSlide cults.

In fairness, buy whatever scope you want. Be a part of whatever cult you want to be. Shoot whatever brand rifle you want to.

 

[JollyRoger]

Here is what my new mk4hd has done this month from just riding in the truck. Mine can not be trusted, getting pulled. View attachment 795180
View attachment 795182

Same lot # for the ammo? I only ask because I’ve seen some pretty big velocity differences between lots of ammo (143gr 6.5CM Norma Golden Target in my case).

 

[T_Widdy]

Same lot # for the ammo? I only ask because I’ve seen some pretty big velocity differences between lots of ammo (143gr 6.5CM Norma Golden Target in my case).

On 11-14 I had to break into my new lot. That’s why I shot a 30 shot group. All the lots I have had so far have been the same average

 

[wind gypsy]

So military snipers and professional long range shooters know less than you. Got it.

A friend of mine that is a pretty well known guy in the precision rifle industry told me a decade ago to skip leupold because of how many mk6 “work” scopes were failing when he was running the sniper school for for one of the green beret groups.

Last gen mk4 were notorious for failing. Particularly among former military snipers still in the precision rifle industry that know better beyond their issued equipment. Below is a quote from Frank Galli that’s something like a decade old. A few years ago when I was in one of his classes and a brand new mk5 failed to adjust and started ghost clicking, he repeated that he sees a lot of the mk5s failing still but not as much as the old mk4s.

 

[JohnJohnson]

And even pro PRS shooters in 2024 prefer scopes that don’t t hold zero I guess.

That's really not how things work for the PRS. Certain companies do more to sponsor top shooters than others. Leupold are pretty generous with their sponsorships (same with Vortex). With top ones having free scopes and even some travel/match fees paid for. Whereas Tangent Theta, second on that list with almost half the top 10 shooters, doesn't sponsor anyone at all that I'm aware of. ZCO is kind of an in between where they mostly don't do sponsorships but for a few guys they'll come to back room arrangements that save them a little money. Unsure on Nightforce's situation regarding PRS sponsorships.

Zero shift for PRS doesn't really mean as much as it does for hunters. You can re-zero your rifle before the match starts and from that point the scope likely won't be experiencing much abuse unless you manage to knock it into something. And you're shooting at steel while playing a game.

 

[Jake Larsen]

A friend of mine that is a pretty well known guy in the precision rifle industry told me a decade ago to skip leupold because of how many mk6 “work” scopes were failing when he was running the sniper school for for one of the green beret groups.

Last gen mk4 were notorious for failing. Particularly among former military snipers still in the precision rifle industry that know better beyond their issues equipment. Below is a quote from Frank Galli that’s something like a decade old. A few years ago when I was in one of his classes and a brand new mk5 failed to adjust and started ghost clicking, he repeated that he sees a lot of the mk5s failing still but not as much as the old mk4s.


View attachment 795214

Wow. Thats pretty damning. I always wondered what those guys were seeing as far as failure rates. Unfortunately for them, contracts are contracts, and rarely are they won by the best. Sound like in this case, Leupold is able to produce “most” not “best”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Marbles]

I think a lot of people don't understand statistics. A sample of one that fails is pretty bad, a sample of one that passes means relatively little. A lack of evidence (in this case of failure), is not evidence of no failure. However, a single failure is evidence of failure.

If I tell you that eating 2 ounces of polar bear liver made someone really sick, are you going to say "that's just a sample of one" and eat some polar bear liver?

Now, if I tell you there was a guy who killed a 750 pound Kodiak sow with a knife, are you going to concluded that a knife is a good bear defense weapon?

Anyway, seriously, use whatever scope you want, if a blister pack Tasco makes you happy, go for it. There is nothing but antidotal evidence to support the Leupold elitist who don't hunt with Tascos.

@Yukon Cornelius put the damn Leupold on your rifle and use it. You already spent the money, so double guessing now is pretty silly. You get to decide how much testing makes you happy with that specific scope. Now, arguing that Leupolds work, but being unwilling to mount one is to say you don't trust your own arguments. Hopefully it works well for you.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Why do you keep saying “cult”? It doesn’t mean what you think it means, and you’re using it as the word “racist” is used now.



cult /kŭlt/

noun​

1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
2. The followers of such a religion or sect.
3. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

But you already knew this…

 

[JohnJohnson]

Wow. Thats pretty damning. I always wondered what those guys were seeing as far as failure rates. Unfortunately for them, contracts are contracts, and rarely are they won by the best. Sound like in this case, Leupold is able to produce “most” not “best”

The military sniper worship we have in our country is reminiscent of Soviet WW2 propaganda (coincidentally, a lot of it is also based on lies much like Soviet propaganda). The best long range shooters we have in our country are civilian competition shooters. And the driving force behind innovation in long range rifles, chassis, scopes, bipods, equipment, etc has been the civilian competition shooting scene for the last 20+ years. The military has been playing catch-up for a long time.

 

[Jake Larsen]

The military sniper worship we have in our country is reminiscent of Soviet WW2 propaganda (coincidentally, a lot of it is also based on lies much like Soviet propaganda). The best long range shooters we have in our country are civilian competition shooters. And the driving force behind innovation in long range rifles, chassis, scopes, bipods, equipment, etc has been the civilian competition shooting scene for the last 20+ years. The military has been playing catch-up for a long time.

The best are definitely comp shooters. Who are all sponsored…and therefore run whoever’s scopes pay their bills and feed their family.

It’s a completely irrelevant point in this case however. The interesting data in this case is the fact that you’ve got very proficient marksmen/instructors using hundred if not thousands of scopes day after day, year after year. If there’s a problem, they’re going to see it. And as this guy wrote a 10 years ago, the failure rate was something like 5:1 or even 10:1. Someone in that position has no incentive to be biased. We’re still seeing the same issues 10 years later. Leupolds engineers “addressed” the problem a time or two publicly. Go watch it…Pretty damning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MuleyFever]

There was a poll here, mentioned in another post, where 32.1% said their Leupold held zero and 60.9% said they had a Leupold lose zero. Yet somehow those that say they had one lose zero are in a cult?

There are posts on many of these threads that say something along the lines of how its a Rokslide thing for people to say Leupolds fail. A simple Google search will present a front page of thread after thread on every shooting forum of Leupold failures.

Lots of people have Leupolds that work for them. Lots of people don't. The only question is are you willing to try one for yourself to see if it fits your needs?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

There was a poll here, mentioned in another post, where 32.1% said their Leupold held zero and 60.9% said they had a Leupold lose zero. Yet somehow those that say they had one lose zero are in a cult?

There are posts on many of these threads that say something along the lines of how its a Rokslide thing for people to say Leupolds fail. A simple Google search will present a front page of thread after thread on every shooting forum of Leupold failures.

Lots of people have Leupolds that work for them. Lots of people don't. The only question is are you willing to try one for yourself to see if it fits your needs?

No other brand gets guys so worked up on this site then when you say Leupolds fail at a high rate.

I think everyone wants the home team USA “made” scope with a huge following to do well. Or they justify the failures with rose colored glasses.

It probably feels like being a Dallas Cowboys fan from 1996 until now

 

[MuleyFever]

No other brand gets guys so worked up on this site then when you say Leupolds fail at a high rate.

I think everyone wants the home team USA “made” scope with a huge following to do well. Or they justify the failures with rose colored glasses.

It probably feels like being a Dallas Cowboys fan from 1996 until now

Most people will never even know their scope has failed. Its probably 80% or more of them go to eastern whitetails hunters that just don't shoot. I know because I was one of them for 20 years. I cannot even remember seeing someone shoot a 1" group back then. If you hit the middle portion of the target at 100 yards with your 3 shots you were ready for season. A box of ammo lasted at least 3 years. That what the majority of people do because they don't expect to have to shoot that far.

 

[AZ_Hunter]

I have a mk4HD I did a quick review on the optics forum here. So far it’s doing fine. I’m going out Sunday to shoot some more and see how it’s doing. I’ll lean it against my truck and knock over into the rocks or something and see what happens.

 

[nphunter]

Most people will never even know their scope has failed. Its probably 80% or more of them go to eastern whitetails hunters that just don't shoot. I know because I was one of them for 20 years. I cannot even remember seeing someone shoot a 1" group back then. If you hit the middle portion of the target at 100 yards with your 3 shots you were ready for season. A box of ammo lasted at least 3 years. That what the majority of people do because they don't expect to have to shoot that far.

That’s everywhere not just back east. Most people don’t shoot a box of ammo a year. Personally I shot way less than a box a year and most years don’t shoot at all because I mostly archery hunt. However I have shot a lot in the past and shoot well, my wife and kids hunt with rifles too.

I think all this zero moving is a little blown out of proportion. I’ve seen hundreds of elk killed with guns that almost only shoot at animals several only fire one bullet a year. My grandfather who is 92 has probably killed 60+ elk most with his old 30-06 he got back in the 50’s shooting ammo older than me with an old fixed power scope. My father shoots an older Leupold Goldring and has also killed over 50 elk with that rifle his previous scope was a high zoom tasco. Growing up we would go out and make sure our rifles were shooting 3” high at 100yrds and we were good to hunt. We’ve killed animals from 10-450 yards before range finders were mainstream and zero were killed with long range precision rifles.

I built a 280AI in 2013, spent a ton of time working a load and hitting steel at 1K with a midway vortex 5-15 mil dot HST and took the rifle on one unsuccessful hunt. Since my wife and boys have killed around 20 big game animals with that rifle from 20 yards to 350. Last year during the cold bore challenge I dug out the AI and shot it for the first time in a couple of years at a 600 yard 8” plate in a 20mpg crosswind my first day I adjusted the wrong way for wind and missed just to the edge of the target. The second day I held for wind and dead centered it, 600 the scope still has the same zero stop shims in it from 2013 and has never been adjusted. This year I missed both days at 600 but after the second miss I put two in a row on the plate. Maybe my zero was off of or maybe I just made poor shots since it was super windy again.

A few weeks ago I put 6 shots in a 12” circle at 600 yards after hitting every target from 100-600 with first shot hits. I checked my zero and it was off by more than I’d like and my groups were about 1.3MOA. I came back and got in here and ended up convinced I needed a new scope and ended up with a RS1.2 and am starting load development over. Honestly the rifle has been great and probably would have worked awesome for another 10 years and piled up a ton more critters. I’m sure it will be better with the new load and scope but probably not any better at what it was designed for. Hitting a 2MOA target at 500 is easily enough to kill a big game animal and most of the scopes in the drop test are not getting out of wack more than a MOA.

Anyway with the great tools we have today it’s easy to be a good shooter. My sister and her husband bought a brand new Ruger American one week before elk season this year I helped them zero it and sight in their new leupold. After it was zeroed we put the data off the ammo box into a drop app and she got first round it’s out to 400 on 10” steel targets and hit 400 3 times in a row her first time ever shooting a brand new rifle. We went out and she killed a 6 point bull using my shoulder as a rest and standing on a steep downhill shot with now cover around. The shot was 150 yards and could have been made with a 5MOA rifle.

I really think all off these drop test are irrelevant to 95% of hunters. I’m sure that’s why they are on the long range form. Even still for most people I believe most decent scopes will work well. It’s smart to check your zero every year before hunting and limit shots to what you’re confident in. Personally I think it would be fun to shoot an animal from a very long way but the hunter in me always gets close for a gimme shot.

It would be ideal to have a weapon that was 100% reliable all the time but the biggest factor in most shooting is the person pulling the trigger and for almost all hunting it really doesn’t matter. Shooting 2+ MOA is plenty accurate for most all hunting even at moderate ranges and most scopes meet that threshold easily.