Scope Evaluation passed models?

[JGRaider]

I now appreciate having scopes function as intended. I thought it was normal to require many shots to get a scope to settle on a zero. Wrong. I had a VX3 that lasted well over 1000 shots on a sharp recoiling rifle, and made quite a few trips. It did finally stop functioning. It took quite a bit if shooting to diagnose the scope was moving around internally. I had a Leupold fixed 6 with dials that seemed more random than anything. I really wished that scope was better as loved everything else about it. I’ve owned very few Vortex, but they have needed the warranty. I came back from an elk hunt and I do not recall the scope ever being dropped but it was off quite a bit. Why accept these things?
I do not think the drop tests are gospel. I do think they begin to indicate which will likely have more or less issues. No scope or brand is 100%, but some sure seem a lot better than others. Buy what you want and either trust it, or test it to gain your trust, and go hunt.

I agree. There's a thread over on TX Hunting Forum that shows a NF with a canted reticle. NF said it would take 6 weeks to get it fixed. I guess they have scopes to fix like everyone else.

 

[atmat]

No, the vast majority of them kill animals, not some of them.

I’m sure they will. Tell me more about the continents you’ve hunted.

 

[JGRaider]

I’m sure they will. Tell me more about the continents you’ve hunted.

Nah, you can read all about it over on 24HCF. Formid used to post there, not sure why he doesn't any more?

 

[Tl15]

The personal back and forth is detracting from the thread. Can we put that aside?

 

[ElPollo]

Again, this is where the real world data comes in. If scopes failed from a truck ride by the literal tens of thousands, because that’s the numbers we are talking across a nation of hunters, how did anyone ever kill an animal? I mean, to hear some on this board tell it, I shouldn’t be able to kill a whitetail past 200 with a non Trijicon or SWFA optic, right? Look at Leupold and Vortex. They failed miserably from basically a stiff breeze, but they’ve killed a heck of a lot of animals. Somehow this math isn’t adding up?

Ask yourself, have I, or anyone I know ever lost a zero or an animal to a bumpy road? If the answer is no….well…maybe the best conclusion is that YOUR use case just doesn’t push an optic to that point. Then you can count yourself lucky to embrace a much wider array of optics possibilities. Not everyone will have that use case, but you’re not them and don’t need to buy to solve their problem.
That said, I would NEVER buy another VX-Freedom again. I actually have had those fail from truck rides and I was not amused.

Not saying that you can’t kill deer with your scopes. Just saying, that if you are doing anything like what I do, there is a high likelihood that they are going to lose zero at some point. Honestly, it’s happened to me enough that I cannot explain why it hasn’t happened to you. My guess is that it has and you explained it away as a flier or that guns need to be rezeroed after you travel. Shit happens. If it hasn’t happened to you yet, it doesn’t mean it won’t. I honestly don’t think my SWFA super chickens are impervious, but it takes a lot more to knock them off than the scopes I used to use.

 

[ElPollo]

Nah, you can read all about it over on 24HCF. Formid used to post there, not sure why he doesn't any more?

If you like posting over there, don’t let me stop you from doing so. Life is short.

 

[JGRaider]

Agreed. The vibration from riding in vehicles seems to have been the biggest issue for me. And I’m not talking side by sides or 4 wheelers either. I’ve had a bunch of scopes lose zero just from riding in my backseat with my dog I n the truck during the quail season. Like 3-5” at 100. Quail season for me is hundreds of miles a month on wasboarded desert roads, crossing washes or arroyos, sand dunes and rocky ridges. It’s why oil companies in the Permian Basin have to replace their trucks every couple of years. I’ve lost zeros on Leupolds, Vortex, Nikons, and Primary Arms scopes in the last five years or so. Since I switched to the SWFA super chickens a few years ago, I haven’t lost zero once.

Funny you mention the Permian Basin and those roughasss washboard roads. That's exactly where I live and have hunted the better part of the last 30 years. Scopes have never lost zero, even in my truck bouncing around. Could happen tomorrow, but I doubt it. Come to think of it, I've only wrecked 3 scopes.....a Swaro A 3.5-10x42, a VX3 4.5-14, and a Pentax Lightseeker 3-10x42.

 

[Tl15]

Not saying that you can’t kill deer with your scopes. Just saying, that if you are doing anything like what I do, there is a high likelihood that they are going to lose zero at some point. Honestly, it’s happened to me enough that I cannot explain why it hasn’t happened to you. My guess is that it has and you explained it away as a flier or that guns need to be rezeroed after you travel. Shit happens. If it hasn’t happened to you yet, it doesn’t mean it won’t. I honestly don’t think my SWFA super chickens are impervious, but it takes a lot more to knock them off than the scopes I used to use.

I'm not sure if you intended to sound like a pretentious ass, or it was accidental, but you succeeded either way. I have a feeling you didn't even make it to the last two sentences of my post where I explicitly state I have had a VX Freedom fail from riding in the back of the truck, or you would have used it to bolster your own position. To imply that 1. My unknown optics have definitely failed because yours did, and 2. That I'm not intelligent and/or experienced enough to know that a scope or mounting system is likely compromised and at minimum needs to print a group when a shot is significantly off target is presumptuous and flat out arrogant.
My optics don't have problems holding zero because of MY use case. They generally live pretty cushy lives. I don't NEED bomb proof because they'll never see a bomb. This goes back to my position that every consumer needs to put the internet aside and first look at how THEY actually use their rifle. Hard use needs a hard riding optic. If you just take the thing out for hunting season and it travels in a halfway decent padded case, you don't need that. You're just settling for lackluster optical performance to solve a problem you don't have. I've got a Credo HX, I know its optical performance is DEEP in the mediocre lane. YOU, ElPollo, may need a bomb proof optic. Or, I could take a page from your book and say that because my optics haven't failed, your optics didn't actually fail either, and my guess is you didn't mount them properly and just explained it away as the scope being crap. I'm not trying to start an argument with you, I just would like you to see how that post comes off. I doubt you're actually that type of dude.

 

[Mr Drysdale]

I actually enjoy reading these type threads. I own and have mounted six Leupold scopes. All are 4.5-14 variants of the Vx 3. Calibers are 22-250, 260 REM, 6.5 PRC, 308 Win, 7RM and 300WM. I’m 66 years old and have killed my share of Whitetails, Mule Deer, Coyotes, Bobcats and a few Elk. Most shots are within 300 yards but my longest was 528 yards. I’m not interested in shooting anything at 1,000 yards. To my knowledge I have never lost or missed an animal due to scope failure. I have never used their warranty or had a need to. I don’t abuse my equipment but by no means baby it. I am completely confident with these scopes but understand that nothing is bomb proof. When and if it happens, I promise I will report it on this forum. Guess I’m just Lucky!

 

[ElPollo]

I'm not sure if you intended to sound like a pretentious ass, or it was accidental, but you succeeded either way. I have a feeling you didn't even make it to the last two sentences of my post where I explicitly state I have had a VX Freedom fail from riding in the back of the truck, or you would have used it to bolster your own position. To imply that 1. My unknown optics have definitely failed because yours did, and 2. That I'm not intelligent and/or experienced enough to know that a scope or mounting system is likely compromised and at minimum needs to print a group when a shot is significantly off target is presumptuous and flat out arrogant.
My optics don't have problems holding zero because of MY use case. They generally live pretty cushy lives. I don't NEED bomb proof because they'll never see a bomb. This goes back to my position that every consumer needs to put the internet aside and first look at how THEY actually use their rifle. Hard use needs a hard riding optic. If you just take the thing out for hunting season and it travels in a halfway decent padded case, you don't need that. You're just settling for lackluster optical performance to solve a problem you don't have. I've got a Credo HX, I know its optical performance is DEEP in the mediocre lane. YOU, ElPollo, may need a bomb proof optic. Or, I could take a page from your book and say that because my optics haven't failed, your optics didn't actually fail either, and my guess is you didn't mount them properly and just explained it away as the scope being crap. I'm not trying to start an argument with you, I just would like you to see how that post comes off. I doubt you're actually that type of dude.

My intent was not to be pretentious or an ass. I just stated my experience. The point wasn’t that I or you needed a bomb proof optic. It was that unfortunately the scope manufacturers we all used and loved are mostly making powderpuff crap that loses zero from stuff like riding in the back seat of my truck. I’m not being anti brand either. I think the only reason my SWFAs aren’t powderpuff level scopes is that they were designed 30+ years ago. Back then I had a cheap ass Bushnell Scope Chief that went down the side of a mountain with me on an elk hunt in AZ. I landed on top of it on a rock that left a 1/4” divot in the rear ring. It stayed zeroed through that and stayed that way for years. Since then I’ve had scopes from four major manufacturers lose zero from what I used to occasionally do to make my daughter go to sleep when she was a baby.

I didn’t intend to infer you were unintelligent either. Assuming a lost zero was a flier and other excuses are things I’ve done over the years and that I hear others do all the time. Yesterday I was at the range and the guy next to me told me how surprised he was that his scope was still zeroed after sitting in his closet for a year… Like the damned thing was past its best by date or something… I think we all assume the companies and the engineers know better, so it must be our fault. But it isn’t. They mostly just suck at making dependable aiming devices. It’s pathetic that there’s only half a handful of companies that can actually do that.

On the issue of glass, you and I disagree. I hunted with a Walmart special 3-9x Bushnell Scope Chief for 25 years and never had an occasion during legal shooting hours across 11 states where that scope wasn’t sufficient to make any shot on game I ever tried. When it finally gave up the ghost, I upgraded to a scope with way better glass and a 30 mm tube for more light transmission that was regularly off 6-10” in some unpredictable direction at 200 yards. For me, a scope is first and foremost an aiming device. If it fails at that, I’m out. The reticle comes second. Dialing comes third… Yeah, reticles and dialing weren’t on my Scope Chief, but I’m not too old to learn… Weight comes fourth. After that, if all other things are equal, I’ll take the one with nice glass.

I appreciate that you are not trying to start an argument with me, and I’m not trying to start one with you. I was just expressing my frustration with an industry that can’t hardly make something that accomplishes the primary task it was designed to do. I honestly don’t care what kind of scope you use. If it works for you great. But I don’t understand the point of belittling people who are trying to test equipment, document issues, and ultimately get the industry to make better stuff.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Funny you mention the Permian Basin and those roughasss washboard roads. That's exactly where I live and have hunted the better part of the last 30 years. Scopes have never lost zero, even in my truck bouncing around. Could happen tomorrow, but I doubt it. Come to think of it, I've only wrecked 3 scopes.....a Swaro A 3.5-10x42, a VX3 4.5-14, and a Pentax Lightseeker 3-10x42.

Which scopes have “never lost zero” in 30 years of field use? Please list them here if you could.

 

[ElPollo]

Funny you mention the Permian Basin and those roughasss washboard roads. That's exactly where I live and have hunted the better part of the last 30 years. Scopes have never lost zero, even in my truck bouncing around. Could happen tomorrow, but I doubt it. Come to think of it, I've only wrecked 3 scopes.....a Swaro A 3.5-10x42, a VX3 4.5-14, and a Pentax Lightseeker 3-10x42.

I figured from several subtle cues that we were probably neighbors and likely wouldn’t get along well in a confined space. Good thing it’s big country.

My old scopes never lost zero either. But every scope I’ve bought in the last 10 years except my SWFAs wouldn’t hold zero even if they were wrapped in a foot of bubble wrap. Maybe I’m just hard on stuff or maybe it’s shit luck.

 

[JGRaider]

I figured from several subtle cues that we were probably neighbors and likely wouldn’t get along well in a confined space. Good thing it’s big country.

My old scopes never lost zero either. But every scope I’ve bought in the last 10 years except my SWFAs wouldn’t hold zero even if they were wrapped in a foot of bubble wrap. Maybe I’m just hard on stuff or maybe it’s shit luck.

Surely you didn't come to that conclusion based off of an internet scope thread.

 

[Mountainrancher]

Funny you mention the Permian Basin and those roughasss washboard roads. That's exactly where I live and have hunted the better part of the last 30 years. Scopes have never lost zero, even in my truck bouncing around. Could happen tomorrow, but I doubt it. Come to think of it, I've only wrecked 3 scopes.....a Swaro A 3.5-10x42, a VX3 4.5-14, and a Pentax Lightseeker 3-10x42.

Are you saying that in 30 years and multiple scopes you have never not even once had to adjust even a single click after initial mounting and zeroing not including load changes?

 

[Team4LongGun]

The personal back and forth is detracting from the thread. Can we put that aside?

All-great point, by an FNG. Most of you have been around longer. At some point, we have to have a discussion that is free of name calling and 5th grade nonsense.
Just because you don't agree, or your experience, or one you repost of another's experience is not one you subscribe to, doesn't mean the discussion is over.

 

[Laramie]

I actually enjoy reading these type threads. I own and have mounted six Leupold scopes. All are 4.5-14 variants of the Vx 3. Calibers are 22-250, 260 REM, 6.5 PRC, 308 Win, 7RM and 300WM. I’m 66 years old and have killed my share of Whitetails, Mule Deer, Coyotes, Bobcats and a few Elk. Most shots are within 300 yards but my longest was 528 yards. I’m not interested in shooting anything at 1,000 yards. To my knowledge I have never lost or missed an animal due to scope failure. I have never used their warranty or had a need to. I don’t abuse my equipment but by no means baby it. I am completely confident with these scopes but understand that nothing is bomb proof. When and if it happens, I promise I will report it on this forum. Guess I’m just Lucky!

Same here. I'll admit the scope threads on here had me considering a change on a recent purchase. I thought maybe their quality control had gone down or something. I decided to buy one anyways because they have treated me so well through the years. 6 hunts in over a lot of rough roads and one fall out of a side by side and it's still perfectly on zero. VX3 4.5-14. Maybe I got lucky again but I'm happy with leupold.

 

[ElPollo]

Surely you didn't come to that conclusion based off of an internet scope thread.

Nope. Multiple threads. But like I said, it’s big country and there’s plenty of room.

 

[Tl15]

My intent was not to be pretentious or an ass. I just stated my experience. The point wasn’t that I or you needed a bomb proof optic. It was that unfortunately the scope manufacturers we all used and loved are mostly making powderpuff crap that loses zero from stuff like riding in the back seat of my truck. I’m not being anti brand either. I think the only reason my SWFAs aren’t powderpuff level scopes is that they were designed 30+ years ago. Back then I had a cheap ass Bushnell Scope Chief that went down the side of a mountain with me on an elk hunt in AZ. I landed on top of it on a rock that left a 1/4” divot in the rear ring. It stayed zeroed through that and stayed that way for years. Since then I’ve had scopes from four major manufacturers lose zero from what I used to occasionally do to make my daughter go to sleep when she was a baby.

I didn’t intend to infer you were unintelligent either. Assuming a lost zero was a flier and other excuses are things I’ve done over the years and that I hear others do all the time. Yesterday I was at the range and the guy next to me told me how surprised he was that his scope was still zeroed after sitting in his closet for a year… Like the damned thing was past its best by date or something… I think we all assume the companies and the engineers know better, so it must be our fault. But it isn’t. They mostly just suck at making dependable aiming devices. It’s pathetic that there’s only half a handful of companies that can actually do that.

On the issue of glass, you and I disagree. I hunted with a Walmart special 3-9x Bushnell Scope Chief for 25 years and never had an occasion during legal shooting hours across 11 states where that scope wasn’t sufficient to make any shot on game I ever tried. When it finally gave up the ghost, I upgraded to a scope with way better glass and a 30 mm tube for more light transmission that was regularly off 6-10” in some unpredictable direction at 200 yards. For me, a scope is first and foremost an aiming device. If it fails at that, I’m out. The reticle comes second. Dialing comes third… Yeah, reticles and dialing weren’t on my Scope Chief, but I’m not too old to learn… Weight comes fourth. After that, if all other things are equal, I’ll take the one with nice glass.

I appreciate that you are not trying to start an argument with me, and I’m not trying to start one with you. I was just expressing my frustration with an industry that can’t hardly make something that accomplishes the primary task it was designed to do. I honestly don’t care what kind of scope you use. If it works for you great. But I don’t understand the point of belittling people who are trying to test equipment, document issues, and ultimately get the industry to make better stuff.

I appreciate that position, and like I said, I seriously doubted you were actually a jerk. It's one of those tough things about written communication. Too often arguments simply originate in how the other guy reads you in his own head.

I am right there with you in frustration that manufacturers are working so hard to cram in bells, whistles, and obnoxious turrets on these optics that they forget that it still has to reliably put you on target. I mean, look at how hard it is to just buy a basic hunting scope now. 20 years ago's tactical scope is today's under-featured "hunting" rig. In truth, we've only got ourselves to blame for this though. We all keep buying the crap.

With respect to optics, it's never really been a question of can this scope get me through legal hours. For me, I love a scope with great glass because when I park my face behind it, I love that first few seconds where I say to myself, "Damn that looks good...". When you think about it, that view through your scope is one of the biggest highs in a hunt. I don't remember many animals through my binoculars. I remember glassing and seeing them break cover, but what I remember most vividly is how they looked right before I squeezed off. When you tell a hunting story, who doesn't describe putting the crosshairs on the perfect spot and how the animal moved or got lost in cover and you had to wait for your shot. That whole narrative and memory is all told through your scope. Why not get that moment in HD 4k if you can afford it and the scope works for your purposes? That may sound weird to you or others, but it's something big for me. I've never claimed to not be an odd duck.

Lastly, I don't think anyone here has belittled anyone else, and the real testing is spearheaded by Form and that work is held as gospel. But, when it isn't put into context, it's gospel to a fault if you ask me.

 

[ElPollo]

I appreciate that position, and like I said, I seriously doubted you were actually a jerk. It's one of those tough things about written communication. Too often arguments simply originate in how the other guy reads you in his own head.

I am right there with you in frustration that manufacturers are working so hard to cram in bells, whistles, and obnoxious turrets on these optics that they forget that it still has to reliably put you on target. I mean, look at how hard it is to just buy a basic hunting scope now. 20 years ago's tactical scope is today's under-featured "hunting" rig. In truth, we've only got ourselves to blame for this though. We all keep buying the crap.

With respect to optics, it's never really been a question of can this scope get me through legal hours. For me, I love a scope with great glass because when I park my face behind it, I love that first few seconds where I say to myself, "Damn that looks good...". When you think about it, that view through your scope is one of the biggest highs in a hunt. I don't remember many animals through my binoculars. I remember glassing and seeing them break cover, but what I remember most vividly is how they looked right before I squeezed off. When you tell a hunting story, who doesn't describe putting the crosshairs on the perfect spot and how the animal moved or got lost in cover and you had to wait for your shot. That whole narrative and memory is all told through your scope. Why not get that moment in HD 4k if you can afford it and the scope works for your purposes? That may sound weird to you or others, but it's something big for me. I've never claimed to not be an odd duck.

Lastly, I don't think anyone here has belittled anyone else, and the real testing is spearheaded by Form and that work is held as gospel. But, when it isn't put into context, it's gospel to a fault if you ask me.

Not sure I understand the gospel statement. Using that term infers dishonesty, which I don’t see. I see a field test that tries to minimize sources of error and subjectivity. Any additional context is created by the reader. The results help me interpret some of the scope failures I’ve seen and experienced. I don’t see a cabal of conspiracy in this. I don’t even think the companies are making bad products on purpose. I don’t think they know any better. But like most people who are presented with evidence that is contrary to their beliefs, the first response is denial and defensiveness. Some will stop at that point, while others will use that evidence to evaluate their beliefs and adapt.

And no offense, but like I said we differ on the importance of high-quality glass in scopes. I see the glass as an aesthetic feature that is not required with respect to hunting. The issue is that it’s become the primary feature for many manufacturers, and the mechanical performance has suffered.

 

[Mike D Texas]

Are you saying that in 30 years and multiple scopes you have never not even once had to adjust even a single click after initial mounting and zeroing not including load changes?

I’m not speaking for the poster you quoted but his post did get me to thinking about a very similar experience.

My first gun and scope combo that I ever bought myself was a Browning BAR in 300 Win Mag and all I could afford for a scope was a Tasco 4-16x40 AO Duplex.

I bought that when I was 19 years old and I’m now 55 years old. So my math says that’s 36 years ago. That scope/rifle has been what I would call abused and has killed hundreds of animals.

The last animal I killed with it was shots at 436 yards (odd that I recall the exact range) and it was dead on.

So even though you weren’t asking me I can say yes, that particular $120 scope has lasted 36 years of teenager/young man abuse and has never lost zero. And funny enough it only weighs 15.5 oz (verified yesterday when repurposing on a Ruger 10/22).

So it begs the question, why do we pay the money we pay for scopes today and why are they so damn heavy?

The scope doesn’t even have finger adjustable turrets.

25 round group at 50 yards after zeroing on the 10/22 takedown with subsonic ammo.

Killed a raccoon at 100 yards last night that was trying to get in my chicken coop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro