Scope Evaluation passed models?

[fwafwow]

I "test" mine every time I go into the field in one way or another. I sure don't need to take it off and send it to some stranger to get internet approval. That's a ridiculous think to ask IMO.

@JGRaider and @Mike D Texas - maybe the benefit is to the broader hunting and shooting community? If there are other scopes that are just as reliable, I’d like to know. And someone saying theirs is just as good isn’t quite the same as it being tested. The only way any scope gets tested is by someone sending one in.

If you are in the camp or of the view that the tests don’t help, or are invalid, then this seems like a thread to ignore.

 

[Mike D Texas]

@JGRaider and @Mike D Texas - maybe the benefit is to the broader hunting and shooting community? If there are other scopes that are just as reliable, I’d like to know. And someone saying theirs is just as good isn’t quite the same as it being tested. The only way any scope gets tested is by someone sending one in.

If you are in the camp or of the view that the tests don’t help, or are invalid, then this seems like a thread to ignore.

Again my example is a 36 year old scope that no longer available so what benefit would it be for anyone?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[270quest]

I am probably going to get some hate for this post, but this is just my experiences. The made in Japan Zeiss V4 line of scopes (Specifically 4-16x44 and 4-16x50 models) have been nearly bomb proof for me over the last 3-4 years. Exceptional optics, have dialed hundreds of rounds from 0-800 yards and they have always returned to zero. They have been dropped, banged around, scratched, and still have performed in the field.

The 4-16x50 model has set on my lightweight 7 rem mag that has taken close to 20 games animals alone. This scope has been borderline abused as has the rifle (this is my no nonsense killing tool) and has not missed a beat. This scope is mounted in Zeiss Pic rings on a tikka superlite.

Prior to the V4, I had great luck with the 3-9x40 conquest and still look for LNIB ones on the open market. To my mind this may be the best set and forget scope out there for under $5-600.

This is not to say Zeiss may not have their issues, and not saying my V4s are in the same league as say a Nightforce or Schmidt Bender, and I have not used a V6 or V8 or Victory level optic from Germany - but the Japan V4s have provided me solid, repeatable service that has helped me kill a bunch of game animals.

I will putting a 4-16x50 on my 22 creedmoor when that comes to fruition.

 

[amassi]

Again my example is a 36 year old scope that no longer available so what benefit would it be for anyone?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It isn’t


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[amassi]

I am probably going to get some hate for this post, but this is just my experiences. The made in Japan Zeiss V4 line of scopes (Specifically 4-16x44 and 4-16x50 models) have been nearly bomb proof for me over the last 3-4 years. Exceptional optics, have dialed hundreds of rounds from 0-800 yards and they have always returned to zero. They have been dropped, banged around, scratched, and still have performed in the field.

The 4-16x50 model has set on my lightweight 7 rem mag that has taken close to 20 games animals alone. This scope has been borderline abused as has the rifle (this is my no nonsense killing tool) and has not missed a beat. This scope is mounted in Zeiss Pic rings on a tikka superlite.

Prior to the V4, I had great luck with the 3-9x40 conquest and still look for LNIB ones on the open market. To my mind this may be the best set and forget scope out there for under $5-600.

This is not to say Zeiss may not have their issues, and not saying my V4s are in the same league as say a Nightforce or Schmidt Bender, and I have not used a V6 or V8 or Victory level optic from Germany - but the Japan V4s have provided me solid, repeatable service that has helped me kill a bunch of game animals.

I will putting a 4-16x50 on my 22 creedmoor when that comes to fruition.

I think this is the biggest misconception
No one hates your optic choice (except maybe vortex, JK …sort of)
Use what you like, how you like. Strangers in the internet don’t hate you for supporting zeiss


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tl15]

I am with Marbles on the use of gospel, but am not offended. Honestly, I couldn’t follow your arguments and determine if you were for or against testing. Maybe that’s just electronic communication. Either way, I didn't feel insulted, and no need for apologies to me.

I appreciate that. I’m all for the field evals. I even volunteered one of my VX5HD’s to get even more data on the almighty gold ring. Unfortunately there is only one Form, and hundreds of scopes. Maybe one day we can figure out a way to have multiple testers to blow through models quicker. I just got a Steiner Predator 8 that I would love to see tested as well. It would be interesting to see if it lives up to the Steiner toughness reputation.

 

[fwafwow]

Again my example is a 36 year old scope that no longer available so what benefit would it be for anyone?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I don’t know what scope (or how many scopes) you own, and since @amassi already said no one wants you to send in an heirloom, I didn’t think it was necessary to repeat that point.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

I appreciate that. I’m all for the field evals. I even volunteered one of my VX5HD’s to get even more data on the almighty gold ring. Unfortunately there is only one Form, and hundreds of scopes. Maybe one day we can figure out a way to have multiple testers to blow through models quicker. I just got a Steiner Predator 8 that I would love to see tested as well. It would be interesting to see if it lives up to the Steiner toughness reputation.

Test them yourself. The protocol is posted

 

[Tl15]

Test them yourself. The protocol is posted

It’s a tough crowd here. All that would happen is if it fails, Leupold loyalists would say I was too rough and did it wrong. Conversely, if it passes with flying colors, Leupold haters would say I was too easy. Best to leave it to the man himself. I know that’s what I would want in a review.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

On the flip side, knowing how it works in someone else's bedding and rings doesn't tell you anything about how your compete system works.

 

[Mike D Texas]

I don’t know what scope (or how many scopes) you own, and since @amassi already said no one wants you to send in an heirloom, I didn’t think it was necessary to repeat that point.

I suppose I misread your post. I thought you were asking why don’t we send them in for testing.

As for how many and what scopes I own, I own several from several different manufacturers.

Some of them pass the “tests” some don’t and some just appear to down right hated on this forum.

For the type,of hunting I typically do these days, none of them have presented any issues.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[JGRaider]

It’s a tough crowd here. All that would happen is if it fails, Leupold loyalists would say I was too rough and did it wrong. Conversely, if it passes with flying colors, Leupold haters would say I was too easy. Best to leave it to the man himself. I know that’s what I would want in a review.

I don't see why it matters who does this drop test. It can't be that hard, can it? As far as what the response is, who gives a rip? The hero worship on this board is downright laughable.

 

[Tl15]

On the flip side, knowing how it works in someone else's bedding and rings doesn't tell you anything about how your compete system works.

Totally valid.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Really 0 hate towards leupold… I really really wish that the all american scope company was putting out scopes that more often than not held zero. I want to love them, heck if I could find an old mark4 I would get one. But until they change their product to meet what I consider pretty low standards (ie hold zero consistently) I’ll spend my money else where

 

[Colfaxent]

Can someone post a link to the Form test results for all scopes. Tia

 

[Mountainrancher]

Can someone post a link to the Form test results for all scopes. Tia

Rifle Scope Field Evaluations

rokslide.com

 

[GreyBeck]

Which are min 10x zoom or more and under 20oz?

 

[Macintosh]

Which are min 10x zoom or more and under 20oz?

Not many, but (and I hate to be blunt) it will take you all of 5 min to click the link in the post directly before yours, skim the post titles to see magnifications, and from there the weights are usually within the first few moments of the eval. It’ll take someone longer to look and answer you than it will for you to look.

 

[GreyBeck]

Being blunt is appreciated. I did read most. I didn’t see one FFP and there was one 10x that was ~9oz. Point was the durability and features many want come at the cost of weight. Given the brutality of these tests it’s not surprising. A list of “passed” with weight would be helpful for quick reference.

These field tests are suited for the guy that is pack hunting/traversing ground where falls are more likely and common. Where the equipment is used, abused and not pulled out of a case just prior to shooting. Those pack hunting care more about each ounce.

These tests are a great resource albeit not perfect. An optic manufacturer (one that passed every test) should be proud to organize the data in a spreadsheet. Would probably boost sales. Had I found this resource (all the tests) earlier I probably would have ended up with a different optic and saved 10-18oz.

 

[fwafwow]

Being blunt is appreciated. I did read most. I didn’t see one FFP and there was one 10x that was ~9oz. Point was the durability and features many want come at the cost of weight. Given the brutality of these tests it’s not surprising. A list of “passed” with weight would be helpful for quick reference.

These field tests are suited for the guy that is pack hunting/traversing ground where falls are more likely and common. Where the equipment is used, abused and not pulled out of a case just prior to shooting. Those pack hunting care more about each ounce.

The amount of "abuse" that can cause a problem is less than what I would have expected.

These tests are a great resource albeit not perfect. An optic manufacturer (one that passed every test) should be proud to organize the data in a spreadsheet. Would probably boost sales. Had I found this resource (all the tests) earlier I probably would have ended up with a different optic and saved 10-18oz.

It would be great if the manufacturers participated in any way, especially for funding. As for organizing the data, there is a current thread on that topic.