Missing Rifle Scope Features?

[Sled]

My apologies for the delayed responses, and thank you to everyone who tagged me to keep me updated.
We stand behind the quality of our products, which is why we offer a lifetime guarantee on the workmanship that we do. I think there may have been some confusion in regards to testing being covered under warranty, a mechanical failure from use is different than purposeful abuse to see at what threshold an item fails.
These responses about drops and failures or survival are helpful to us and we appreciate the feedback we get.

JW,
Can you please clear up whether or not your scopes are tested for impact by you or any other agency?

 

[SDHNTR]

JW,
Can you please clear up whether or not your scopes are tested for impact by you or any other agency?

And exactly how they are tested? Can you please be specific? Any video content showing your tests? What are the standards? 1000 G forces? OK, what does that mean in the real world as it relates to rifle scope impacts. I can’t imagine a drop from a couple of feet onto a padded mat constitutes anything near 1000 G forces, yet it is tanking multiple reputable brands of scopes.

Thanks for having the guts to respond. I look forward to additional clarity. I own one of your scopes, and like it so far. I would love to have the confidence to buy more.

 

[ljalberta]

My apologies for the delayed responses, and thank you to everyone who tagged me to keep me updated.
We stand behind the quality of our products, which is why we offer a lifetime guarantee on the workmanship that we do. I think there may have been some confusion in regards to testing being covered under warranty, a mechanical failure from use is different than purposeful abuse to see at what threshold an item fails.
These responses about drops and failures or survival are helpful to us and we appreciate the feedback we get.

Could you clarify if, as a Tract user, we should expect to have mechanical failures should we accidentally drop our rifle in the backcountry from say, 18"-36" in height on either the rifle's side or the top of the scope? Or, if generally, such an accidental drop should occur, can we expect to the scope to retain zero and have no mechanical failures?

While a lifetime warranty is great, it does the end user no help should the rifle suffer a drop or impact while hunting. A mechanically sound design however, does help the end user in such a situation.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Could you clarify if, as a Tract user, we should expect to have mechanical failures should we accidentally drop our rifle in the backcountry from say, 18"-36" in height on either the rifle's side or the top of the scope? Or, if generally, such an accidental drop should occur, can we expect to the scope to retain zero and have no mechanical failures?

While a lifetime warranty is great, it does the end user no help should the rifle suffer a drop or impact while hunting. A mechanically sound design however, does help the end user in such a situation.

Oh for the love of caca All this drop crap is getting downright ridiculous. It's going to depend upon too many factors for him to be able to answer that question. It is possible, if not probable, that you will experience a zero shift if you drop your rifle and a turret impacts a hard surface, no matter what scope you use.

 

[BjornF16]

It is possible, if not probable, that you will experience a zero shift if you drop your rifle and a turret impacts a hard surface, no matter what scope you use.

Well, apparently the odds are lower for NF…

 

[SDHNTR]

Oh for the love of caca All this drop crap is getting downright ridiculous. It's going to depend upon too many factors for him to be able to answer that question. It is possible, if not probable, that you will experience a zero shift if you drop your rifle and a turret impacts a hard surface, no matter what scope you use.

We just want to know by what standard this particular manufacturer of scopes is testing their product for impacts. It’s a perfectly fair question.

 

[Formidilosus]

Oh for the love of caca All this drop crap is getting downright ridiculous. It's going to depend upon too many factors for him to be able to answer that question. It is possible, if not probable, that you will experience a zero shift if you drop your rifle and a turret impacts a hard surface, no matter what scope you use.

Not even remotely true. And to be blunt- those who haven’t done the drops themselves are speaking from a complete position of ignorance. There at least half a dozen forum members that have watched me drop, or dropped Nightforces themselves from 5-8 high on very hard ground. Mounted per standard, not one has has even a tenth mil shift.

 

[sndmn11]

The whole point is quickly figuring out the ability to hold zero for a lifetime of normal use. Dropping is just the expedited means of predicting this.

 

[Sled]

Not even remotely true. And to be blunt- those who haven’t done the drops themselves are speaking from a complete position of ignorance. There at least half a dozen forum members that have watched me drop, or dropped Nightforces themselves from 5-8 high on very hard ground. Mounted per standard, not one has has even a tenth mil shift.

This is probably for another thread but I'd be interested to know the short list for reliability. I've seen a lot of spreadsheets on tracking but haven't seen much on drop tests.

 

[Formidilosus]

This is probably for another thread but I'd be interested to know the short list for reliability. I've seen a lot of spreadsheets on tracking but haven't seen much on drop tests.

Look at the top of the long range forum.

 

[ljalberta]

Oh for the love of caca All this drop crap is getting downright ridiculous. It's going to depend upon too many factors for him to be able to answer that question. It is possible, if not probable, that you will experience a zero shift if you drop your rifle and a turret impacts a hard surface, no matter what scope you use.

Great username. Made me chuckle.

I hardly think an 18" drop, or even a 36" drop is ridiculous. Call me butterfingers, but I've let the rifle take a few spills in my time. I, like others here, would like to minimize the probability a zero shift if I drop my rifle. It appears some scopes and companies have done that well, while other scopes come with a much higher probability of a zero shift. If a company wants to say that they aren't focussed on that, and they don't design their scopes to hold zero through such an impact, that is great. I'm sure many shooters will still purchase their products for other reasons. I personally am looking to minimize my chances of a zero shift and will spend my money accordingly.

 

[realunlucky]

Great username. Made me chuckle.

I hardly think an 18" drop, or even a 36" drop is ridiculous. Call me butterfingers, but I've let the rifle take a few spills in my time. I, like others here, would like to minimize the probability a zero shift if I drop my rifle. It appears some scopes and companies have done that well, while other scopes come with a much higher probability of a zero shift. If a company wants to say that they aren't focussed on that, and they don't design their scopes to hold zero through such an impact, that is great. I'm sure many shooters will still purchase their products for other reasons. I personally am looking to minimize my chances of a zero shift and will spend my money accordingly.

But you failed to do your own testing of your equipment so were you really interested in proving what works and what doesn't?

 

[ljalberta]

But you failed to do your own testing of your equipment so were you really interested in proving what works and what doesn't?

Pretty simple to jump on someone else's band wagon.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Absolutely I never tested any of my scopes in past years for zero retention. I think Forms posts and testing over the last year has really shifted my approach to optics.

I suppose you can call it jumping on someone’s band wagon. I call it learning.

I have replaced a Leupold VX-R and VX-3i and a Vortex HS with 2 Bushnell LRHS 3-12 and an SWFA 10x42 this year. I look forward to dropping each of them when I get a chance.

 

[SDHNTR]

But you failed to do your own testing of your equipment so were you really interested in proving what works and what doesn't?

We shouldn’t have to do our own testing when spending our own money! The company should have already tested their products!

I buy cars that have been crash tested prior to purchase. Scopes should be no different.

 

[sndmn11]

We shouldn’t have to do our own testing when spending our own money! The company should have already tested their products!

I buy cars that have been crash tested prior to purchase. Scopes should be no different.

How else would you know if your scope works?

How many companies can you buy a scope from that do not advertise as being reliable/durable/tested? How many can you trust in saying that? "Rugged"', "reliable", "long haul", are used by Vortex to describe their LHT, did it work out?

There is no scope testing standard(s) like there is NHTSA for car crashes.

Here is a quote from one of the stock manufacturers I talked to about this.

"I can tell you that nearly all the scope manufactures that run across that video will be running for the hills. I’ve had the opportunity to see first hand some of their stress testing and can tell you that your video is illustrating one of the most feared tests. Naturally pending overall rifle weight, there is a lot going on in that optic in regards of things moving around. "

Draw your own conclusion from that, but mine is there's a high chance manufacturers know what happens internally that causes zero loss and choose to overlook it.

 

[BjornF16]

We shouldn’t have to do our own testing when spending our own money! The company should have already tested their products!

I buy cars that have been crash tested prior to purchase. Scopes should be no different.

I think what realunlucky is getting at is testing the rifle "system"...how we put together the components.

Did we get good components? Did we degrease and tighten correctly?

I never paid attention to those things like ljalberta. Form's posts have challenged my approach and thinking.

But, yes...I agree with you as well. Scope manufacturers should be correctly testing their products as, apparently, NF does.

I'll be drop testing my setup as well. My concern is the hard as concrete clay at the local shooting range...

As far as scope "manufacturers" deeming these 18"/36" drops onto a pad as "abuse"...well, I guess I'll spend my hard earned $$$ elsewhere...

 

[ChrisAU]

Twice in my hunting life I've had a rifle sling break and rifle hit the ground. First back in 2013, cheap Bushnell. It did not hold zero. Last time was just a couple months ago, with Trijicon Credo and it did hold zero. I also had a hard stop in my truck about a month ago, and my rifle in a soft case slammed into the back of my front seats and then onto the floor. Held zero. I can't tell you how many times a rifle propped in a corner, or against a tree, has fallen on me. I also like to drag my rifle around in Jet Sled in a swamp. Up and over logs and brush. Its a rough ride. This testing is valuable to me, zero retention and durability have been my #1 for a few years now after seeing the light. The testing here is validation.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Well, apparently the odds are lower for NF…

Two things. When have NF been dropped on hard surfaces in a controlled test? In the test Form does, they are not dropped on a hard surface. From a scientific standpoint, the sample size in Forms test is too small to draw any conclusions. I am not saying that his test has no value. My point is that the value that is being placed on them has reached a point of absurdity. That absurdity results in ridiculous questions like Alberta asked Tract.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Not even remotely true. And to be blunt- those who haven’t done the drops themselves are speaking from a complete position of ignorance. There at least half a dozen forum members that have watched me drop, or dropped Nightforces themselves from 5-8 high on very hard ground. Mounted per standard, not one has has even a tenth mil shift.

5-8 Feet? On rocks?

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Great username. Made me chuckle.

I hardly think an 18" drop, or even a 36" drop is ridiculous. Call me butterfingers, but I've let the rifle take a few spills in my time. I, like others here, would like to minimize the probability a zero shift if I drop my rifle. It appears some scopes and companies have done that well, while other scopes come with a much higher probability of a zero shift. If a company wants to say that they aren't focussed on that, and they don't design their scopes to hold zero through such an impact, that is great. I'm sure many shooters will still purchase their products for other reasons. I personally am looking to minimize my chances of a zero shift and will spend my money accordingly.

If you haven't seen the Fartrell Cluggins skit, you have to watch it.

"Or, if generally, such an accidental drop should occur, can we expect to the scope to retain zero and have no mechanical failures?"

This is the comment that I was critical of. There are too many variables for Tract or any other manufacturer to be able to answer that question.

If someone wanted to conduct a CONTROLLED test with real value, then a device that would impart controlled measurable impacts to the turrets (or other parts of the scope) would have to be made.

I may be wrong on this but it appears to me that when Tract and other manufacturers test scopes, they test it with a machine that replicates recoil forces. Those are the forces that scopes are designed to withstand.