Is it all Leopolds

[Choupique]

their association with the poacher

Ahhhh mannnnnnn. A 1-8 ATACR was my dream scope and now yall are telling me stuff that affects my dreams.

 

[FAAFO]

You can miss without the cause being a zero shift or a mechanical issue with the scope at all. Did he check and see a zero shift, and rule out the base/rings/stock? Or did he just get excited and miss?

Exactly. Just like the example gave above of two other guys missing rams. Lots of factors involved…

 

[FAAFO]

Why are you so obsessed with Nightforce? They make like maybe one model of scope that has a reticle worth using for hunting for me personally.

I have no obsession with NF. “ Like maybe” you read the thread NF has been brought up a lot. So it’s relevant to the conversation. I don’t own one for reasons stated above. That’s cool they make one reticle worth using for you personally.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I don’t care but find it funny how defensive guys get about how their opinion on luepold gets them worked up.

The only person in this thread getting "defensive" or "worked up" is you regarding Leupold, starting on post number 2.

 

[Axlrod]

This forum is hilarious.

Not until the MHG gets here!

 

[FAAFO]

The only person in this thread getting "defensive" or "worked up" is you regarding Leupold, starting on post number 2.

Riiiiight.

 

[Marbles]

There is a big difference between people who put themselves on an animal, then confirm loss of zero later, and a person with a guide who will let them take 3 pot shots at a ram with no follow up on what went wrong.

 

[Macintosh]

I don’t how much to read into the non durability of leupold. Is this across all models. I’m looking at the mark 5

This poll has a pile of responses. Based on the poll, about 60% of respondants have had a leupold scope lose zero, while about 30% have had theirs hold zero. https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-zero-retention-poll.347901/


The “cult” on both sides of the issue is simply those that get worked up because they put all this effort into their equipment, and either had it let them down, or choose to defend the decisions theyve made. People get butthurt arguing about cars, guns, fishing rods, tools, etc. Yawn.

The cost to me of choosing a trijicon over a leupold is approximately zero, so Im taking my chances there having had 3 out of my 4 leupolds repeatedly lose zero by over 1.5 moa, as confirmed by leupold warranty. I guess that makes me a cult member? Whatever.

 

[Nards444]

This poll has a pile of responses. Based on the poll, about 60% of respondants have had a leupold scope lose zero, while about 30% have had theirs hold zero. https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-zero-retention-poll.347901/


The “cult” on both sides of the issue is simply those that get worked up because they put all this effort into their equipment, and either had it let them down, or choose to defend the decisions theyve made. People get butthurt arguing about cars, guns, fishing rods, tools, etc. Yawn.

The cost to me of choosing a trijicon over a leupold is approximately zero, so Im taking my chances there having had 3 out of my 4 leupolds repeatedly lose zero by over 1.5 moa, as confirmed by leupold warranty. I guess that makes me a cult member? Whatever.

Thanks. Yeah I’m in the car forums and it’s same banter. Sometimes hard to just find truth in any of it.

This poll has a pile of responses. Based on the poll, about 60% of respondants have had a leupold scope lose zero, while about 30% have had theirs hold zero. https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/leupold-zero-retention-poll.347901/


The “cult” on both sides of the issue is simply those that get worked up because they put all this effort into their equipment, and either had it let them down, or choose to defend the decisions theyve made. People get butthurt arguing about cars, guns, fishing rods, tools, etc. Yawn.

The cost to me of choosing a trijicon over a leupold is approximately zero, so Im taking my chances there having had 3 out of my 4 leupolds repeatedly lose zero by over 1.5 moa, as confirmed by leupold warranty. I guess that makes me a cult member? Whatever.

Yeah I’m the in car forums as well and it’s the same banter. Hard to read between the lines. One thing about online though is like anything else you almost always see all the complaints for x truck or car and here scopes. None of the good ever.

I have Seen that poll as well but we’re talking maybe 150 people in that poll vs millions of scopes sold, that poll does nothing but prove there is a standard deviation from the norm which is expected in Any product. Take any product and x will be faulty. Question is, is leupold better or worse then any other brand. When we talk data, the set matters. I would guess leupold probably sells more scopes then them all combined in this thread, which will mean more failures.

With that said I’m looking at trijicon as well and might get that

 

[Flyjunky]

I have. Seen that poll as well but we’re talking maybe 150 people in that polll vs millions of scopes sold, that poll does nothing by prove there is a standard deviation from the norm which is expected in. Any product. Take any product and x will be faulty. Question is, is leupold better or worse then any other brand. When we talk data, the set matters. I would guess leupold probably sells more scopes then them all combined in this thread, which will mean more failures.

With that said I’m looking at trijicon as well and might get that

Here’s the problem though. How many of those millions are capable shooters to even detect a change in zero? How many of those millions are actually having to zero a rifle every year and just consider it a normal routine that it has to be adjusted from last year?

Capable shooters with capable gear are finding Leupolds to lose zero more often than standard deviation.

 

[FAAFO]

There is a big difference between people who put themselves on an animal, then confirm loss of zero later, and a person with a guide who will let them take 3 pot shots at a ram with no follow up on what went wrong.

 

[Nards444]

Here’s the problem though. How many of those millions are capable shooters to even detect a change in zero? How many of those millions are actually having to zero a rifle every year and just consider it a normal routine that it has to be adjusted from last year?

Capable shooters with capable gear are finding Leupolds to lose zero more often than standard deviation.

That’s a good point and it’s valid. Overall it’s still a very small sample of the pros saying they identified an issue. And yeah I’m sure a lot of guys would never have a clue you are right. Still going to say it’s hard to draw some real conclusions, I wasn’t there, was it the ammo, skill, mounts list goes on.

While it’s valuable to get some of this information and helps making an informed decision. And while I’m not discrediting what anybody says. 150 people and a guy drop tests a scope a few times, I just can’t find the gospel in it

 

[FAAFO]

It’s just fun to see guys get worked up over stuff that doesn’t matter.

Could we at least all find some common ground and just hate on vortex?

I’ve delayed my day enough. Gotta go finish packing out a moose. You boys have fun.

 

[Macintosh]

Thanks. Yeah I’m in the car forums and it’s same banter. Sometimes hard to just find truth in any of it.


Yeah I’m the in car forums as well and it’s the same banter. Hard to read between the lines. One thing about online though is like anything else you almost always see all the complaints for x truck or car and here scopes. None of the good ever.

I have Seen that poll as well but we’re talking maybe 150 people in that poll vs millions of scopes sold, that poll does nothing but prove there is a standard deviation from the norm which is expected in Any product. Take any product and x will be faulty. Question is, is leupold better or worse then any other brand. When we talk data, the set matters. I would guess leupold probably sells more scopes then them all combined in this thread, which will mean more failures.

Entirely true that leupold sells more scopes, and that you can find what you want online, but thats not what a poll like that says. If the poll’s only choice was “raise your hand if your leupy lost zero”, then yes, you’d expect to see a higher # of complaints simply given a higher number of scopes in the market. If that was what the poll was then yes, without “success” data it would tell you nothing more than that leupold sells a lot of scopes. But the poll’s choices DO show success data, at a ratio of two votes for failures for each vote for success. As a ratio it’s irrelevant how many scopes we’re talking about IF the 150 respondents represent a representative sample of leupold customers. That’s whats in question, is whether the 150 people who responded is proportionally representative of what YOU will experience. Maybe, maybe not. Whether it correlates with your personal experience after legitimately checking, as well as the objective info you have access to, thats different too.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

You can miss without the cause being a zero shift or a mechanical issue with the scope at all. Did he check and see a zero shift, and rule out the base/rings/stock? Or did he just get excited and miss?

That's true enough. Plus their reputation for reliability has allowed them to be complacent on their ATACR line especially. Low power tunneling in all of them except the 4-16, a clunky zero-stop system, the rotating eyepiece for magnification change, and image quality that varies from the 7-35 being excellent to the 5-25 being noticeably worse and others being in between. But until someone matches their durability it's kind of a moot point.

I wouldn’t call it a moot point. If you can’t see your target, it’s hard to hit it. Where do we draw the line on accepting unacceptable quality at price points?

One reason I’m sticking with Leupold on my main rifle is the clarity and eye box.

One reason I sold swfa is the murkiness of the glass.

One reason I got rid of my NF is the cluttered recticle.

However I love my nx8 and I want to see other nx8 lines than my 1-8.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

What someone that cares more than me needs to do, is find a hard number for data.

How many scopes are sold divided by how many fail to hold zero.

That data will determine if x is more reliable than y.
Until then we have information to consider but to call it a fact is actually an opinion.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

Entirely true that leupold sells more scopes, and that you can find what you want online, but thats not what a poll like that says. If the poll’s only choice was “raise your hand if your leupy lost zero”, then yes, you’d expect to see a higher # of complaints simply given a higher number of scopes in the market. If that was what the poll was then yes, without “success” data it would tell you nothing more than that leupold sells a lot of scopes. But the poll’s choices DO show success data, at a ratio of two votes for failures for each vote for success. As a ratio it’s irrelevant how many scopes we’re talking about IF the 150 respondents represent a representative sample of leupold customers. That’s whats in question, is whether the 150 people who responded is proportionally representative of what YOU will experience. Maybe, maybe not. Whether it correlates with your personal experience after legitimately checking, as well as the objective info you have access to, thats different too.

And there is really no way to confirm if the poll respondents are being truthful or just part of their cult.

 

[Formidilosus]

What someone that cares more than me needs to do, is find a hard number for data.

How many scopes are sold divided by how many fail to hold zero.

That data will determine if x is more reliable than y.
Until then we have information to consider but to call it a fact is actually an opinion.

Thats not required, and is not how that works. If you want to find out what the “best” is- say the diffence in 1% or 2%, then yes you will need a rather large sample size and rigerious testing. However, if you just want to find which is most likely to fail at a relatively low level, you don’t.
Holding zero is the most basic function of an aiming device. It does not take very many samples failing to know that there is a mechanical issue with a scope make/model. Just like you don’t have to crash test many samples of a car if a 30mph impact causes the motor to end up touching the back seats- one or two and you know that there is a base mechanical and design issue with all of them.

If you have 10 people randomly in a room and half of them have had Leupold repair failed erectors on scopes- it’s a very good indication that there is probably something wrong. Likewise, when those same 10 random people have had no, or one time NF repaired a scope, it’s probably a good indication that they are less failure prone. Of course this is a generalization and use cases certainly factor in.

 

[Macintosh]

And there is really no way to confirm if the poll respondents are being truthful or just part of their cult.

Exactly. I personally dont think 150 people are lying, ie not “being truthful”. So we are left with the imperfect info we have. Personally, my experience consistently aligns with both the drop tests and the poll. The fact that those three things all align makes my personal decision easy. If you have personal experience that doesnt align with the other info, well, its up to you to decide what the risks and rewards are and ultimately what to do with it, obviously that wont be as clear.

Of course, anyone that really has a problem with all this is also welcome to start their own counter-cult by showing that their leupold scope holds zero under harsh use by showcasing their own check using a transparent methodology. After all, talk minus action=zilch.

 

[Macintosh]

If you have 10 people randomly in a room and half of them have had Leupold repair failed erectors on scopes- it’s a very good indication that there is probably something wrong….

Is this “truthful” enough?