Tract scope opinions

[Nhenry]

I’m going to be buying a new scope for my 280AI build pretty soon. Want something I know will be reliable day in and day out. Not worried about weight because the rifle I’m building is lighter than I intended anyways.

Came across a review on youtube from Ron Spomer about this scope:

TORIC UHD 30mm 2.5-15X44 SFP Illuminated T-Plex Dot Hunting Rifle Scope

Featuring fully multi-coated SCHOTT high-transmission (HT) glass and extra-low dispersion (ED) lens, which make up TRACT’s advanced Ultra High Definition (UHD) optical system. This TORIC 30mm 2.5-15x44 features a Second Focal Plane Illuminated T-Plex reticle that provides the hunter with the...

tractoptics.com

I know that good ol’ Ron doesn’t have the same standards of scopes that this forum has, though.

If someone asked about this scope before, sorry.

For the record, I know that Tract is a sponsor(?) of this forum, but I would like to hear what people have to say anyways.

 

[Bubblehide]

Check the scope testing results (stickies) in the long range hunting forum here on Rokslide.

 

[nobody]

One was drop tested and it failed, I believe there was a saga attached to it as well when it came to Tract’s response to the testing. Not sure on the details.

Aside from that, I wouldn’t buy one sheerly because Tract seems to me to be just another “me too” brand, riding the direct to consumer model that Maven has had success with. I’ve only ever seen their optics in YouTube videos or in advertisements on websites and forums, never seen a single product from them in actual use on the range or in field in multiple states and multiple tags and seasons. Never a scope, bino, nothing.

At that price and for similar specs, I would buy a Trijicon Credo 2.5-15 a thousand times over. No question.

 

[BjornF16]

Read through this field evaluation. There is a corresponding Q&A thread as well.

You should consider SWFA, NF, Trijicon and S&B Klassik

Tract Toric Ultra HD 3-15x50mm Field Eval

This is a field evaluation of the Tract Toric Ultra HD 3-15x50mm. This scope was sent to me from from Ryan Avery for evaluation. It was sent to him from a forum member. The ammunition used was Hornady Black 168gr AMAX that was purchased by Ryan. The 20 round proof group was just over 1.1 MOA...

rokslide.com

Tract Toric UltraHD 3-15x50mm Q&A

This is the Q&A for the Tract Toric Ultra HD scope. Eval here

rokslide.com

 

[Nhenry]

I appreciate it, fellas

 

[Nhenry]

One was drop tested and it failed, I believe there was a saga attached to it as well when it came to Tract’s response to the testing. Not sure on the details.

Aside from that, I wouldn’t buy one sheerly because Tract seems to me to be just another “me too” brand, riding the direct to consumer model that Maven has had success with. I’ve only ever seen their optics in YouTube videos or in advertisements on websites and forums, never seen a single product from them in actual use on the range or in field in multiple states and multiple tags and seasons. Never a scope, bino, nothing.

At that price and for similar specs, I would buy a Trijicon Credo 2.5-15 a thousand times over. No question.

Lighter, reliable, same zoom, still a good eye relief. I appreciate your advice. Thanks

 

[nobody]

Lighter, reliable, same zoom, still a good eye relief. I appreciate your advice. Thanks

Emphasis on the word in bold above. Everything else is secondary or even tertiary. Weight, zoom ratio, eye relief, and glass quality LITERALLY don’t matter if it isn’t reliable and won’t hold zero or track.

Come back and let us know how you like that Credo, sounds like it’s right up your alley.

 

[Bado20]

I have the 2.5-15x44 FFP Toric UHD scope and the short of it is the glass and features are great but the scope doesn't hold zero under impacts. Clear glass, adjusts correctly and returns to zero under regular use, the FFP reticle is simple and works well, turret lock is good and all of the adjustments are smooth and well dampened. However, I had my rifle fall off a 4.5 foot high ladder onto river rock and the scope shifted zero 1.3mils. Rezeroed, no issues, then a couple months later the rifle was in a quick release sling on my pack and the release popped and it fell to the ground, probably a 3 foot fall. Zero shifted 0.4 mils that time. Bummer because it is pretty close to my ideal hunting scope if it could hold zero under hard use.

 

[Nhenry]

Emphasis on the word in bold above. Everything else is secondary or even tertiary. Weight, zoom ratio, eye relief, and glass quality LITERALLY don’t matter if it isn’t reliable and won’t hold zero or track.

Come back and let us know how you like that Credo, sounds like it’s right up your alley.

I've come to the point where reliability and eye relief are my biggest factors. I could do with a fixed power optic and be completely happy if it holds zero and has good eye relief.

I'll probably be ordering that Credo at some point soon. Will let y'all know.

 

[Nhenry]

I have the 2.5-15x44 FFP Toric UHD scope and the short of it is the glass and features are great but the scope doesn't hold zero under impacts. Clear glass, adjusts correctly and returns to zero under regular use, the FFP reticle is simple and works well, turret lock is good and all of the adjustments are smooth and well dampened. However, I had my rifle fall off a 4.5 foot high ladder onto river rock and the scope shifted zero 1.3mils. Rezeroed, no issues, then a couple months later the rifle was in a quick release sling on my pack and the release popped and it fell to the ground, probably a 3 foot fall. Zero shifted 0.4 mils that time. Bummer because it is pretty close to my ideal hunting scope if it could hold zero under hard use.

That's exactly what I wanted to hear. Thanks for the candor.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

The thread about Colorado keeping OTC for residents petition got me thinking. All you people who keep advocating your “right” to hunt Federal land as much and as inexpensively as residents might just be shooting yourselves in the foot. Forget about the fact that residents pay all year for the infrastructure in the State that allows you to access the Federal land. Forget about how the cost of living may be lower for those living there. Forget about the fact that the laws and rules have been litigated and settled for years and years.
The thing that could happen and what you should be concerned about is the Federal Government giving the land to the States. or selling it off to private interests which is what can happen if the Federal Government divests itself of the land. There are a lot of politicians just salivating at the chance to do just that. If it happens, you will no longer be able to access the land for free and will pay dearly to do it.
Just be careful what you wish for.

Rant over ………………..

Lighter, reliable, same zoom, still a good eye relief. I appreciate your advice. Thanks

Trijicon is honest about their eye relief too. Many manufacturers are creative with their numbers.

 

[Rock-o]

I bought one Summer 2021. Mounted it, but still have never used it. A friend was over recently and wanted to check it out. He asked to see the lighted reticle. Either the battery died or it's broke. I'll report back after trying a new battery.

 

[Nhenry]

I bought one Summer 2021. Mounted it, but still have never used it. A friend was over recently and wanted to check it out. He asked to see the lighted reticle. Either the battery died or it's broke. I'll report back after trying a new battery.

Lemme know how it goes

 

[Rock-o]

Lemme know how it goes

@Nhenry, the battery died. All is well after replacing.

 

[HandgunHTR]

I have the 2.5-15x44 FFP Toric UHD scope and the short of it is the glass and features are great but the scope doesn't hold zero under impacts. Clear glass, adjusts correctly and returns to zero under regular use, the FFP reticle is simple and works well, turret lock is good and all of the adjustments are smooth and well dampened. However, I had my rifle fall off a 4.5 foot high ladder onto river rock and the scope shifted zero 1.3mils. Rezeroed, no issues, then a couple months later the rifle was in a quick release sling on my pack and the release popped and it fell to the ground, probably a 3 foot fall. Zero shifted 0.4 mils that time. Bummer because it is pretty close to my ideal hunting scope if it could hold zero under hard use.

What is it mounted in (rings and base) and how was it mounted (did you lap it in)? Did you confirm that the change in POI was due to the scope or was it because the scope moved in the rings?

While I enjoy reading the various drop test threads on these forums, the fact that it isn't conducted on scopes that are mounted exactly the same way each time (i.e. same rings, same lapping procedure, using calibrated torquing tools, etc.) means that there are just too many other variables that can introduce POI shifts after impacts for me to give 100% credence to the tests or other anecdotal evidence I see in them.

 

[nobody]

While I enjoy reading the various drop test threads on these forums, the fact that it isn't conducted on scopes that are mounted exactly the same way each time (i.e. same rings, same lapping procedure, using calibrated torquing tools, etc.) means that there are just too many other variables that can introduce POI shifts after impacts for me to give 100% credence to the tests or other anecdotal evidence I see in them.

Not sure where you've missed it, but the tests always occur as follows:

• Same exact test rifle (Tikka 308 permanently bedded into the stock)
• Same rail (picatinny rail permanently bonded to action)
• Same rings (Nightforce Titanium Extreme Rings)
  • All rings are mounted with 65 inch pounds (IIRC) for ring to base connection, then ring caps are torqued to 18 inch pounds. If the scope fails, it is re-mounted and torqued to 25 inch pounds on ring caps.

Plus, prior to starting the test, the rifle is proofed by shooting a 30 round group with the baseline optic (Nightforce Mil-Spec) to prove the platform functions as it should. Then after the fact, it is re-proofed to show the loss of zero is occurring in the optic and not the rifle system.

So they ARE mounted exactly the same way every time, with the same procedure, on the same platforms, with the same components, using the same tools. Some scopes fail, some don't. That's why so many of us have latched onto the tests. If it was obvious there were other inconsistencies (such as the ones you mention), most of us would likely dismiss them. But when you eliminate as many variables as possible and can truly narrow it down to either A) something physically breaking, or B) the optic, it lends credibility to the tests.

 

[Axlrod]

What is it mounted in (rings and base) and how was it mounted (did you lap it in)? Did you confirm that the change in POI was due to the scope or was it because the scope moved in the rings?

While I enjoy reading the various drop test threads on these forums, the fact that it isn't conducted on scopes that are mounted exactly the same way each time (i.e. same rings, same lapping procedure, using calibrated torquing tools, etc.) means that there are just too many other variables that can introduce POI shifts after impacts for me to give 100% credence to the tests or other anecdotal evidence I see in them.

Well as was shown above, they are mounted the same. But as in ALL scientific trials, in order for it to be so, the trials must be repeatable by others using the same process as the original trial. So you can get all the criteria used in the drop eval. and repeat it yourself.

 

[Bado20]

What is it mounted in (rings and base) and how was it mounted (did you lap it in)? Did you confirm that the change in POI was due to the scope or was it because the scope moved in the rings?

While I enjoy reading the various drop test threads on these forums, the fact that it isn't conducted on scopes that are mounted exactly the same way each time (i.e. same rings, same lapping procedure, using calibrated torquing tools, etc.) means that there are just too many other variables that can introduce POI shifts after impacts for me to give 100% credence to the tests or other anecdotal evidence I see in them.

It was mounted with weaver bases and MDT Premier Low rings. The rings weren’t lapped, bases were torqued to 30 inch-lbs and loctited, ring base screws were torqued to 65 in-lbs and loctited, ring screws were torqued to 18 in-lbs and not loctited. I couldn’t see any movement or indications of movement of the optic either time it lost zero and there were no ring marks on the scope. All screws were degreased prior to mounting.

I’m not claiming my experience was a scientific test. All I know for sure is that when I mount my NF the same way it doesn’t lose zero when it gets similar knocks.

 

[Chicken155]

I have four tract scopes. Although I’ve never dropped them from any height except from sliding out of the truck, in the case, or falling off the ladder on the stand. They have been thrown around inside the back seat and in the bed of a truck. They have all held zero without any problems. One of them has a custom turret and it has been reliable.

 

[ropeup79]

I think the one that was tested was a 3-15 1 inch tube not the 2.5-15 30mm.