Tract Toric UltraHD 3-15x50mm Q&A

[SDHNTR]

I disagree. I think transparency is key. They cared enough to show up to ask questions about what we wanted. I respect and appreciate them for doing so. I want Tract to succeed. Their CS is attentive and caring. Their glass is great. They are small enough to listen, care, and make changes that matter. I own one Toric and would buy more, but not until they answer some questions out in the open. IMO, they shouldn’t crawl into a hole and pretend this didn’t happen. Address it head on. They could turn this into a positive and sell a ton more scopes. The glass is half full.

If they have problems with the tests, fine! That’s surely understandable. Tell us so, and why. And more importantly, then show/explain what kind of impact tests of their own that they do instead, so we can have some confidence in their products. Because otherwise, the current appearance is they don’t do anything at all. Which is not a good look, and I surely hope not the case.

 

[Sled]

@Formidilosus 's test was well thought out and repeatable. While we as a company aren't happy with the results (and it has been forwarded to our R&D team for improvement), the test is quality, and we appreciate the thought that went into it.
We value the input on desires for new features and holding us accountable for our products.

I'm optimistic and encouraged by your reply. Thank you for posting it.

 

[stevevan]

I'm optimistic and encouraged by your reply. Thank you for posting it.

The test is interesting but not conclusive by any means. What can be concluded by testing a used (maybe abused) sample of one? Furthermore, this is one of Tracts budget scopes ( which is still a lot of scope for the $), I own a half dozen of the 30mm scopes which have given me top level performance.

 

[SDHNTR]

@Formidilosus 's test was well thought out and repeatable. While we as a company aren't happy with the results (and it has been forwarded to our R&D team for improvement), the test is quality, and we appreciate the thought that went into it.
We value the input on desires for new features and holding us accountable for our products.

That’s promising. Please keep us posted on what R&D improvements get made with regard to durability.

 

[SDHNTR]

The test is interesting but not conclusive by any means. What can be concluded by testing a used (maybe abused) sample of one? Furthermore, this is one of Tracts budget scopes ( which is still a lot of scope for the $), I own a half dozen of the 30mm scopes which have given me top level performance.

Budget scope? Huh.

 

[stevevan]

Budget scope? Huh.

I consider it budget What is it? $700 range? In todays optics market that is on the low end.

 

[PNWGATOR]

Tract has an opportunity to literally OWN the market if they’d listen and successfully design and build a ‘correct’ line of optics.

Build a Formidilosus line of scopes and be done with it.

 

[fwafwow]

The test is interesting but not conclusive by any means. What can be concluded by testing a used (maybe abused) sample of one? Furthermore, this is one of Tracts budget scopes ( which is still a lot of scope for the $), I own a half dozen of the 30mm scopes which have given me top level performance.

I agree on sample size, and I would expect few (if any) would disagree. But the fix for a larger sample size would most likely need to come from manufacturers. If that (or any) sort of durability testing is being done by manufacturers, I’m not aware of it. I searched at one point and found a snippet of a Leupold testing video, but there was no real info on the test or results.

I personally don’t think a lower price should dictate a worse outcome.

Would you be willing to send one of your 30mm scopes for testing?

 

[stevevan]

W

Tract has an opportunity to literally OWN the market if they’d listen and successfully design and build a ‘correct’ line of optics.

Build a Formidilosus line of scopes and be done with it.

What would you consider a "correct" line of optics? Interesting comment. I'm curious.

 

[DropTyne]

Form, thanks again for another test, your methodical approach, and the transparency to your process.

As Form mentioned, due to the heavy ring marks made prior to the test, we can't say the integrity of the scope is mechanically sound. Particularly since Tract offered to immediately replace the scope after discovering the torque values in their instructions were too high. Tract's willingness to make it right speaks well to the commitment to their customers.

Those are pretty significant marks, and who knows what is going on inside the tube. It would be great to see an inspection report to see if there is damage caused by the original mounts. I am saying this because it seems several here are quick to write them off as being an inferior scope. Until we see more data the results are inconclusive.

 

[stevevan]

I agree on sample size, and I would expect few (if any) would disagree. But the fix for a larger sample size would most likely need to come from manufacturers. If that (or any) sort of durability testing is being done by manufacturers, I’m not aware of it. I searched at one point and found a snippet of a Leupold testing video, but there was no real info on the test or results.

I personally don’t think a lower price should dictate a worse outcome.

Would you be willing to send one of your 30mm scopes for testing?

I believe in the old adage " you get what you pay for" and you can't get champayne at beer prices. Hell no I won't send you one of my 30mm scopes for testing. Their mounted on rifles and doing very well.

 

[fwafwow]

I believe in the old adage " you get what you pay for" and you can't get champayne at beer prices. Hell no I won't send you one of my 30mm scopes for testing. Their mounted on rifles and doing very well.

Ok. This may sound argumentative, but I’m not trying to be. At what price point (or range) should customers expect to get what they pay for and that includes the ability to withstand drops from 18”? And for the champagne class of scopes (maybe that includes some that have failed - and yes, the sample size argument is noted), what are consumers paying for and getting?

 

[SDHNTR]

in

I consider it budget What is it? $700 range? In todays optics market that is on the low end.

You said it was one of Tract’s budget scopes. It’s not, the Toric is one of their high end scopes.

 

[SDHNTR]

I believe in the old adage " you get what you pay for" and you can't get champayne at beer prices. Hell no I won't send you one of my 30mm scopes for testing. They’re mounted on rifles and doing very well.

That old adage doesn’t necessarily hold true in the rifle scope world. A $300 SWFA holds zero and a $3000+ Zeiss won’t and falls apart. Unfortunately, more money doesn’t always get you a better riflescope.

 

[stevevan]

in

You said it was one of Tract’s budget scopes. It’s not, the Toric one of their high end scopes.

No, it's the 1" tube model. You can get them for around + or - $700. Comparable to maybe Leupold VX3, etc.

 

[Sled]

The test is interesting but not conclusive by any means. What can be concluded by testing a used (maybe abused) sample of one? Furthermore, this is one of Tracts budget scopes ( which is still a lot of scope for the $), I own a half dozen of the 30mm scopes which have given me top level performance.

Here's another rough test example.

Tract Toric drop test part deux

Sam inspired me. Same scope, Tract Toric 2-10x42. Rings are Seekins 1", base is a talley (flat). Rifle and scope took a tumble last Saturday so I had to check zero. Zero was good at 100 so the drop this past week didn't hurt it. Backed up to 200 and dialed elevation and shot ...

www.24hourcampfire.com

 

[amassi]

W

What would you consider a "correct" line of optics? Interesting comment. I'm curious.

From what I've gathered
-Dependable
-Useable mil based ffp reticle with bold posts for low power use. Realistic wind brackets. Ie no need for 12 mils of wind hashes.
-Low power mag range that makes scopes friendly to get behind like 3-4x so a 4-16 and not a 4-32. Also makes parallax less finicky
- hold zero under use that most would consider abuse, but closely mimics real world use.

 

[stevevan]

That old adage doesn’t necessarily hold true in the rifle scope world. A $300 SWFA holds zero and a $3000+ Zeiss won’t and falls apart. Unfortunately, more money doesn’t always get you a better riflescope.

Yes, there is always exceptions. But I can assure you the chances of failure to a NF Actar are far less than a Leupold VX3 for example.

 

[SDHNTR]

No, it's the 1" tube model. You can get them for around + or - $700. Comparable to maybe Leupold VX3, etc.

Nope. The 1” is just one version within the Toric line. But not what was tested here, which was a $1000 scope. The Toric line also includes 30 and 34mm lines up to $1700. With a direct to consumer model with no wholesale markup, that $700 blows a Leupold VX3 away.

 

[stevevan]

Nope. That’s one model within the Toric line. But not what was tested here, which was a $1000 scope. The Toric line also includes 30 and 34mm lines up to $1700. With a direct to consumer model with no wholesale markup, that $700 blows a Leupold VX3 away.

That scope Retails on Tracts website for $794. Last month you could get one for with a 15% discount. The scope that was used in the test was that scope (used and questionably abused). An extremely poor one to test. In fact if it were me I would have refused to test it as any results would not be creditable. Statistics 101.