Is it all Leopolds

[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.

 

[z987k]

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

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.

I don't think I'd ever pull a scope that has proven to be excellent. Run it!

 

[Dobermann]

Wow. Thats pretty damning. I always wondered what those guys were seeing as far as failure rates.

Frank and Marc used to post data of tracking tests they'd do with scopes in classes. Might still be on the Hide, but might not - I remember Frank saying in one of his podcasts that he was getting some blowback for having published the data.

 

[Schmo]

Have I had a Leupold fail? No, but I haven’t owned one. At the current rate, I’m not buying one either. Too many guys on here have reported failure for me to take a chance. Not sure how that qualifies as a cult, but whatever. I’d really really like for Leupold to be a solid option. I’d love to be running a Mark 4 or Mark 5, but I can’t and won’t trust them currently. I strictly buy scopes that have passed the drop eval. Maybe that’s extreme, but that’s not cultish. I’m simply trying to minimize my chances of failure. I currently run Trijicon Tenmiles. They’re proven. I’m just wrapping up a Montana hunt. Zeroed the rifle at home in Arkansas. Took two flights here, and confirmed zero once in town. Still dead on. It’s bounced in the truck, been hiked with, dialed for shots, and is still on. I assume that after I land at home and get to the range, that it will still be on. That gives confidence. When I pay good money for non-res tags, pay to travel, and miss work, I need my equipment to function properly. I’m not willing to take that chance with Leupold, because I’ve seen too much DATA to think otherwise.