Riflescope debate

[Reburn]

My rifle, cart on the right side, getting ready to go four miles up an old logging road that gets progressively worse, by shanks mare. Pulling the cart, decades of it. Leupold scope, Redfield base and Leupold rings. What am I doing wrong? It's never lost zero? Even with bumps and bruises during the season once we get into camp. Washboard roads in a truck in a case is a concern? Sure was a great day to haul in the camp. Wish they were all like that.

View attachment 508347

Next morning two elk on the cart, ready to haul out. Nice to have a great son as a hunting partner to help with the work.

View attachment 508348
My son's first elk and as he takes it apart.
View attachment 508353

View attachment 508349

My elk taken cleanly with the gun, hauled in on the cart in a case, with a questionable scope (Leupold) that has made that same trip for decades. Must be living right because my son's rifle was brought up the same way to camp.

View attachment 508350

May we ask the normal distance of the animals taken and if you dial?

 

[Sled]

Guys , I know I said I was out , but I'm back . I only go on guided hunts , I stay in a lodge and I'm way too old to sleep on the ground , much less climb up the side of a mountain or pack a camp in 7 miles .
I think 500 yards is the extreme maximum for me taking a shot , most of my shots have been under 200 yards . Not counting the Elk I've taken with a bow .
When I say I take two rifles , I leave the spare in the lodge . In all my hunts , I've fallen once and I did break the quiver off my bow , but still took a cow with it .
My favorite was the person who said - That Elk deserved better than being shot with a plastic scope - I laughed out loud at that , like the Elk cared how it was killed , LOL
It's only hunting , nothing life or death .
It is amusing to see how some of you jump to conclusions .

I've eviscerated an antelope from a scope that lost zero on a rough road. It was in a thick padded case and stowed under my back seat. That won't happen again.

 

[35WhelenAI]

May we ask the normal distance of the animals taken and if you dial?

Thanks for the post. Distances have been from 80 yards to 345 yards and I do not dial. Apologies if I missed something with respect to dialing being a requisite to the overall theme of this thread.

Bottom line, it's unfortunate and disastrous for the animals when a scope or scope system, for whatever reason loses its ability to take the animal cleanly.

 

[Southern Lights]

A ride on a quad can send a scope out of zero. Bouncing in truck same. Falls happen for various reasons and can be as simple as tumbling off the back of a vehicle when unloading a case. Weather changes can cause seals to fail, etc.

I run NF SHV 3-10x42 on several rifles. 10X gets me to 750m without trouble on 8" steel plates. On animal coloured targets I'd want more magnification or move a little closer to get more accurate aiming, but those scopes all dial repeatably and accurately. More important, they have never shifted zero on me and are sold at a fair price for the quality. Weight is reasonable also for the ruggedness.

I called up NF and asked how they test the SHV scopes for QA before shipping and was it similar to the NXS torture tests where they beat on them. The techs said that all SHV scopes are hit about and tested after impact like the NXS before they ship. I thought what they told me was in error, so I called again and spoke to another tech and asked the same question and got the same answer. I don't know of any other company testing their scopes in this manner for each one that goes out the door. It's pretty amazing if true and explains why they have such a low failure rate.

 

[Reburn]

Thanks for the post. Distances have been from 80 yards to 345 yards and I do not dial. Apologies if I missed something with respect to dialing being a requisite to the overall theme of this thread.

Bottom line, it's unfortunate and disastrous for the animals when a scope or scope system, for whatever reason loses its ability to take the animal cleanly.

Just trying to determine how you use your scopes.

The dialing question was asked as dialing a scope that has lost zero can show issues faster.

A scope can lose zero and you can still kill an animal with, it the two statements aren't mutally exclusive.
An elk is a big animal. Would you have noticed that the bullet landed 1.5" different from where you actually aimed. Especially if that point was within your wobble zone.

2x Leupold Mark 5 Field Evaluations

This is a field evaluation of the Leupold Mark 5 3.6-18x44mm and the Leupold Mark 5 5-25x56mm. These scopes were brought to me from Ryan Avery for evaluation. The ammunition used for the 3.6-18x was Federal 168gr GMM, and for the 5-25x was Hornady ELD-M Match 168gr that was purchased by Ryan...

rokslide.com

Lets talk about these Leupy evals. They did lose zero. Both. However at 100 yards on an animal noboy will likely notice. At 200 yards on game sized animals like elk in the field probably wouldnt notice.

How is it so many scopes "always work for me" yet as a culture hunters need to check and adjust their zero before season. Even the outdoor writers say you should do this.

Let me tell you a short story about 7 years ago. I have a aero 6.5 grendel with a match grade barrel on it. When I bought the gun it had a vortex pst viper on it. I ran every kind of 6.5 grendel ammo through it and couldnt get it to group better then 2". I emailed and called and annoyed the barrel manufactor until I was blue in the face that their barrel was the problem. They had me take it to a gun smith, have it scoped, check the crown, recrown the barrel. Eventually they conceded to send me a new barrel. Which they did but it took them 18 months. I put the gun back together and frankly have never shot it. I often wonder was it the scope that was causing me all the problems. I took the scope off when I took the barrel off and sold the scope. A loose zero is a failure too. That vortex could have been wandering its zero 0.3 mils. Thats why the proof group size on the evals is so important.

 

[Long Cut]

Here’s my .02 for those that care....

Bought a Bushnell Nitro, sighted in then placed on my back seat and drove home. Interior lens cracks somehow just sitting on my back seat.

Replacement Bushnell arrives. Sight in, kill a buck with it in November. Season progresses and I shoot at two does in late December. Turns out my scope was off and I was shooting over 2” high @ 100 and 6” right. I had to dispatch one of the does up close due to my negligence and equipment failure. The other Doe was tracked for ~600 yards to no avail.

I don’t have time to check the zero on my rifles weekly...
I grab my gun, climb a tree and climb down. A truck or ATV ride in a case is the worst my equipment will see here in Georgia.

Having those experiences makes me seek out quality rings and scopes. Having to dispatch a paralyzed doe at 3’ away is a horrible feeling I don’t plan to experience again.

That’s why I’m thankful for guys like Form.

 

[cmahoney]

I know there are probably a few people on her that haven’t seen this. I’m waiting for similar demonstrations from the other manufacturers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

There is the element of not knowing with precision did the bullet land where it was aimed on an animal, agree all the way. It's a different game to hunt with shots under 350- 400 yards the norm vs deliberately shoot an animal on the far side of 400+ yards.

My experience is set it and forget it scopes. With the size of an elk vital zone, I can understand how some error may not be readily apparent. I don't have the pictures to show but that rifle has taken mule deer and whitetails out to 250 yards on many occasions and bullets land where they are supposed to.

It's a good discussion and good reminder on keeping an open mind as to why having options is good. Peace of mind for a hunter should be that they will make a humane kill, each person knows where that is for them.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

I have been a regular on hunting forums for about 2 decades. 10 years ago, I very rarely read of any kind of scope failure. When the drop test started making headlines, suddenly stories of scope failures became commonplace. Take what you read about scope failures with a grain of salt. Some folks are a bit creative with their writing.

 

[CRJR45]

I have been a regular on hunting forums for about 2 decades. 10 years ago, I very rarely read of any kind of scope failure. When the drop test started making headlines, suddenly stories of scope failures became commonplace. Take what you read about scope failures with a grain of salt. Some folks are a bit creative with their writing.

I wonder how many bad shots get blamed on scope failures .

 

[Ryan Avery]

I have been a regular on hunting forums for about 2 decades. 10 years ago, I very rarely read of any kind of scope failure. When the drop test started making headlines, suddenly stories of scope failures became commonplace. Take what you read about scope failures with a grain of salt. Some folks are a bit creative with their writing.

Lots of people asking a lot more of their scopes over the last 20 years too.

 

[stevevan]

A

Lots of people asking a lot more of their scopes over the last 20 years too.

s far as the original list of choices. TRACT!!!!

 

[Reburn]

I wonder how many bad shots get blamed on scope failures .

I wonder how many bad shots ARE scope failures.

 

[Macintosh]

I have been a regular on hunting forums for about 2 decades. 10 years ago, I very rarely read of any kind of scope failure. When the drop test started making headlines, suddenly stories of scope failures became commonplace. Take what you read about scope failures with a grain of salt. Some folks are a bit creative with their writing.

Of course—It went from my single experience, to now my experience correlates with a somewhat objective test. That’s exactly why I started talking about it, because it became clear to me it wasn’t just a couple fluke failures.

 

[KenLee]

My rifle, cart on the right side, getting ready to go four miles up an old logging road that gets progressively worse, by shanks mare. Pulling the cart, decades of it. Leupold scope, Redfield base and Leupold rings. What am I doing wrong? It's never lost zero? Even with bumps and bruises during the season once we get into camp. Washboard roads in a truck in a case is a concern? Sure was a great day to haul in the camp. Wish they were all like that.

View attachment 508347

Next morning two elk on the cart, ready to haul out. Nice to have a great son as a hunting partner to help with the work.

View attachment 508348
My son's first elk and as he takes it apart.
View attachment 508353

View attachment 508349

My elk taken cleanly with the gun, hauled in on the cart in a case, with a questionable scope (Leupold) that has made that same trip for decades. Must be living right because my son's rifle was brought up the same way to camp.

View attachment 508350

I believe the older Leupolds were very dependable on not losing zero. The newer ones seem questionable in dependability, but certainly better in glass quality.

 

[fwafwow]

A

s far as the original list of choices. TRACT!!!!

I don’t understand this post. Tract does not agree with the testing.

EDIT - I got the several ongoing scope debates confused. I do now understand your post. But my second sentence still stands.

 

[Long Cut]

I wonder how many bad shots get blamed on scope failures .

I wonder how many wounded animals are due to shitty scopes and/or rings.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I believe the older Leupolds were very dependable on not losing zero. The newer ones seem questionable in dependability, but certainly better in glass quality.

From experience, that would be true for me. Dead nuts reliable.

I put on a VX3HD 3.5-10x40 last year. Went with it for the upgraded glass over the VXII 3-9x40 that had been on 20 years. The HD is better glass in lower light. Spotted a deer at faded light with binocs on a hillside about 220-ish yards based on having ranged the area when I set up. The scope was much better in that light than the binocs, even though the binocs allowed me to see it in the first place. Would never have seen it with the naked eye.

Time will tell, however, I will most likely use it as a set and forget for MPBR purposes as the rifle it is on is not going to see work beyond 350-400 yards. Since Leupold doesn't offer that scope in anything but CDS, it's part of the deal. I'll keep a watchful eye for problems with maintaining said zero.

 

[KenLee]

I wonder how many wounded animals are due to shitty scopes and/or rings.

Probably 2% as many as from shitty shooters.
I'm not judging, as these days I'd be one of those shitty shooters over 400 yards

 

[Longdraw]

Hard to beat a Night force scope. They are extremely rugged and reliable scope but might need to dig in to the pockets a little bit