The New Leupold Mark 4HD?

[Shortschaf]

 

[Cameron.25]

Since people like to make ridiculous offers that nobody with any sort of life or value of their time would follow through on, I’ve got a more reasonable one for anyone to put their money where there mouth is.

Go to a NRL or PRS two day match with whatever rifle and optic you want to run. Before every stage perform the drop test with someone recording and then immediately shoot the stage in continuous video roll and let’s see how it plays out. If you guys truly have confidence in these drop test approved optics and confidence in the test itself it shouldn’t be an issue, right?

Im sure you would find a way to still disagree if someone did take you up on this. I dont think you can help it lol, keep it up though its entertaining.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Im sure you would find a way to still disagree if someone did take you up on this. I dont think you can help it lol, keep it up though its entertaining.

Not at all, prove the test is not flawed in an uncontrolled environment and prove that myself and all the other naysayers are wrong. If there is truly confidence in the test and confidence in the equipment then this should not be a problem. As I understand it some of these guys go to matches anyway so they’re already there.

I’m sure nobody is going to accept it, but it’s a reasonable offer and a reasonable attempt to settle this.

No, I’m not going to waste my time and money going to put an optic through a test that an actual optical engineer that knows how scopes work has said that any optic can fail it because it’s flawed. Prove the test is not flawed or accept the fact that others have the right to be suspicious.

 

[gbflyer]

More stupid ******* logic. People who make up shit to make themselves feel right are something else.

Yeah, I’m a total Leupold fanboy though and shoot nothing else. That’s why I ordered a Leica literally yesterday and last month a Zeiss LRP S3 that I actually sold a MK5 to buy because I hated the PR1 reticle and didn’t buy another MK5 instead because their illuminated tree reticles suck and that’s what I wanted for that rifle. Total fanboy shit.

No, I’m just not a retard.

Hey that’s a nice looking place to shoot!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TML75]

Serious question- how does the “actual optical engineer” test reliability in scopes?

 

[roosiebull]

I certainly hope the new Leupold Mark 4hd does not suck, but I wouldn't bet any money on them.

I’m actually on the fence now. It would be encouraging to see one of these pass, but then I would feel like I missed out on the complete meltdown of a few people when they don’t pass

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Serious question- how does the “actual optical engineer” test reliability in scopes?

If the “actual optical engineer” is doing field validation, reliability testing, and other tasks NOT designated for an engineer, there is something seriously wrong with how they run the company.

 

[bmart2622]

Not at all, prove the test is not flawed in an uncontrolled environment and prove that myself and all the other naysayers are wrong. If there is truly confidence in the test and confidence in the equipment then this should not be a problem. As I understand it some of these guys go to matches anyway so they’re already there.

I’m sure nobody is going to accept it, but it’s a reasonable offer and a reasonable attempt to settle this.

No, I’m not going to waste my time and money going to put an optic through a test that an actual optical engineer that knows how scopes work has said that any optic can fail it because it’s flawed. Prove the test is not flawed or accept the fact that others have the right to be suspicious.

Got it, youre not willing to prove your scope will pass but will continue to say it will

 

[Cameron.25]

Not at all, prove the test is not flawed in an uncontrolled environment and prove that myself and all the other naysayers are wrong. If there is truly confidence in the test and confidence in the equipment then this should not be a problem. As I understand it some of these guys go to matches anyway so they’re already there.

I’m sure nobody is going to accept it, but it’s a reasonable offer and a reasonable attempt to settle this.

No, I’m not going to waste my time and money going to put an optic through a test that an actual optical engineer that knows how scopes work has said that any optic can fail it because it’s flawed. Prove the test is not flawed or accept the fact that others have the right to be suspicious.

Who knows, maybe form or ryan or someone else will do what you suggest and show everyone. I hope they do it just to shut people up since you won't do it.

Im well aware you're not the only one thats suspicious of the tests, but I dont see the point of arguing with everyone on it so much, unless you just enjoy it.

 

[mj23polaris]

How to get hated on rokslide say

tikkas suck
Leupold makes the best scopes
the rokstock is ugly as sin

Noted

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

How to get hated on rokslide say

tikkas suck
Leupold makes the best scopes
the rokstock is ugly as sin

Noted

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

Classic Motorola user.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

How to get hated on rokslide say

tikkas suck
Leupold makes the best scopes
the rokstock is ugly as sin

Noted

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

I personally believe you are way off base on this.

Nobody is hating on anyone. It's just if you want to throw shade, put your money where your mouth is and step into the arena. If not, stop complaining incessantly.



And p.s. the goal of the rokstok was not to make a "pretty" rifle stock. (Which is just bizarre to have to say)

 

[Buzby]

If the “actual optical engineer” is doing field validation, reliability testing, and other tasks NOT designated for an engineer, there is something seriously wrong with how they run the company.

Right? The “optical engineer” would be designing the lenses. A mechanical engineer would be making sure they don’t come out of alignment. Someone else would be doing the field testing.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Got it, youre not willing to prove your scope will pass but will continue to say it will

If the test is flawed and any scope can fail it as I’m saying and others have as well, please explain to me what throwing another optic around and it failing would prove…

Prove the test. This should not be an issue and should be completely understandable if there is any true confidence in the equipment and procedures.

Who knows, maybe form or ryan or someone else will do what you suggest and show everyone. I hope they do it just to shut people up since you won't do it.

Im well aware you're not the only one thats suspicious of the tests, but I dont see the point of arguing with everyone on it so much, unless you just enjoy it.

I hope so too. I don’t want to argue over stupid shit but this comes up in literally any thread that’s not worshiping SWFA or NF people just parroting bullshit.

 

[mj23polaris]

I personally believe you are way off base on this.

Nobody is hating on anyone. It's just if you want to throw shade, put your money where your mouth is and step into the arena. If not, stop complaining incessantly.



And p.s. the goal of the rokstok was not to make a "pretty" rifle stock. (Which is just bizarre to have to say)

Lol my post was total satire/sarcasm. Maybe bc I have an android phone it didn't come off that way.

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

 

[Mschroeder40]

I hope so too. I don’t want to argue over stupid shit but this comes up in literally any thread that’s not worshiping SWFA or NF people just parroting bullshit.

You totally forgot about Trijicon

 

[Wyo_hntr]

Lol my post was total satire/sarcasm. Maybe bc I have an android phone it didn't come off that way.

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

I hate iPhones and am a fellow Android user. Perhaps my auto-sarcasm meter is not functioning properly...

 

[Axlrod]

If the test is flawed and any scope can fail it as I’m saying and others have as well, please explain to me what throwing another optic around and it failing would prove…

Prove the test. This should not be an issue and should be completely understandable if there is any true confidence in the equipment and procedures.





I hope so too. I don’t want to argue over stupid shit but this comes up in literally any thread that’s not worshiping SWFA or NF people just parroting bullshit.

Speaking of NF, their Tiger stripe hats are back in stock. I missed out last month when they were listed as limited edition. They are freaking cool and THAT ain't no bullshit!

NF Tiger Stripe Unstructured Mesh Back Hat - Nightforce Optics

This low profile, lightly structured, tiger stripe camo hat is perfect for the range or out in the field. Featuring no top button for comfort while wearing

www.nightforceoptics.com

 

[Cameron.25]

I hope so too. I don’t want to argue over stupid shit but this comes up in literally any thread that’s not worshiping SWFA or NF people just parroting bullshit.

You say that, but if you wanted to you could stop at any time. I find it odd that you want others to waste their time proving their methods of something they are already giving everyone for free, but you wont conduct your own testing and show us. Makes it seem like all you want to do it argue about it, and that you will just see more flaws unless you do this further testing on your own

 

[Mschroeder40]

@Axlrod thanks I ordered one.