Why cant people accept the fact that some people dont need a drop tested scope?

[180ls1]

Just people being people. Same dude criticizing Leupold will drive a Chevy/Dodge/Ford when there is a mountain of evidence Toyotas are more reliable. Far more than the Leupold evidence in the far corners of the internet.

 

[SDHNTR]

Just people being people. Same dude criticizing Leupold will drive a Chevy/Dodge/Ford when there is a mountain of evidence Toyotas are more reliable. Far more than the Leupold evidence in the far corners of the internet.

Toyota doesn’t make a 3/4 ton +. Different tool for different jobs. But I understand the point you’re trying to make.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I think if the untested and/or often failing brand scope folks wouldn't constantly recommend their scopes and/or the warranty of their scopes to new folks without the potential durability caveat to make an informed decision this wouldn't be a problem. The market place was fleeced for years (and MANY are still very naive) and I know I'm pissed about money I wasted cause all the group think replies recommending brands with strong advertising campaigns. I find it extremely comical that those on here demanding more of a scope now that we know the difference were referenced as the "rokslide sheep", you want sheep just ask for a scope recommendation somewhere and get flooded with recommendations of brands that demonstrably fail.

Everything has its place. I have cheap scopes on the kids 22lrs, they are plinking with them, if a scope dies then so be it. On the flipside I've wasted time, money (scopes themselves, ammo, gas), and had hunts screwed up by questionable scopes.

 

[Tod osier]

The new Leupold thread got me thinking. A person says their Leupold works fine for their purpose and someone else just cant let it go. Why?

I can't let it go out of my love for my brothers that I want to have better than I did.

I can't because I was once that guy and I wish I knew better.

I wish I had the information to know that they are unreliable, I wish I didn't spend so much on them only to sell them at a loss, I wish I didn't waste all that ammo touching up my zero, I wish I didn't fail to progress as a shooter because I spent such a significant amount of shooting time touching up my zero and then wondering why I couldn't hit where I should once adjusted.

I wish that I didn't gut shoot the first caribou bull that I ever shot because of one.

I wish that I didn't watch my son shoot and loose his first buck because of one that failed.

 

[kodyshriver]

For me it’s pretty simple—I bust my butt for very few opportunities at animals that I’m interested in killing. It’s beyond frustrating when you do your part, only to have your equipment fail ( like I have experienced with a vx5 or cheap vortex ).

Why wouldn’t people want to make an informed decision when making a purchase, in order to minimize that frustration? Isn’t more data a good thing?

I could care less what someone else buys, but if I’m under the assumption that people on this forum are mountain hunters that fall down scree slopes, why not encourage a discussion about scope reliability?

Maybe it just comes down to whether or not you’ve personally been bitten by zero-loss.

 

[180ls1]

Toyota doesn’t make a 3/4 ton +. Different tool for different jobs. But I understand the point you’re trying to make.

Yeah, I had a ram 2500 5.9 Cummins supposedly "legendary". Sold at 225K, was acceptable. No where near my Toyota which has surpassed that mileage with FAR fewer issues.

Next truck may very well be a Dodge again one of the domestics. "No solutions, only tradeoffs."

 

[realunlucky]

The entirety of purpose of @Formidilosus drop test is for you to recognize the short comings of popular equipment which should motivate people to test thier own equipment so it performance can be evaluated to see if it truly meets expectations.

What I personally find annoying is this group of Rokslider's who just parrot everything Formidilosus says without engaging in any of the tremendous efforts he does to test AND THEN Document the entire process.

Calling for someone to put up or shut up without being held to the same standard makes your argument seem petty.

This is just how I see it from the sidelines.

Edited to remove my quote of BjounF16 as this was a generalized statestatement not intended for him individually

 

[isItFallYet]

And? your point? I tripped and fell on top of my Nightforce scope and then shot it to confirm it was still zeroed and it was. This is an example of arguments or responses that fail out of the starting gate, because of poor grammar and/or incomplete/incoherent. Versus mine, where I state I abused my Nightforce and checked it afterwards and it was fine.

Read the context of my response. Someone asked if people drop their rifles often: I answered the question based on experience and to add data. In doing so, I was attempting to remove bias.

Tell me how my response was incoherent and displayed poor grammar!

Edited, so Im not attacked by grammar nazis.

 

[Jimbee]

I used to think constantly chasing zero was normal. I now know better. And I know better than to engage in this never ending back and forth, but here I am.
Peace, out.

 

[BjornF16]

OBE

 

[Team4LongGun]

The entirety of purpose of @Formidilosus drop test is for you to recognize the short comings of popular equipment which should motivate people to test thier own equipment so it performance can be evaluated to see if it truly meets expectations.

What I personally find annoying is this group of Rokslider's who just parrot everything Formidilosus says without engaging in any of the tremendous efforts he does to test AND THEN Document the entire process.

Calling for someone to put up or shut up without being held to the same standard makes your argument seem petty.

This is just how I see it from the sidelines.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

EXACTLY. This is what gets old folks, the parrots. There are about 6 of them that are relentless.

 

[Team4LongGun]

@Team4LongGun I too am beyond sick of every thread devolving - but this thread has been a good objective discussion I think. I’m not reading anyone going off the rails on here?

The OPs question of “why” people can’t just let luepold users be is interesting - the responses that are so incredibly dug in with no open mindedness are a plenty. There’s valid arguments on both sides, but the “prove it” calls on both sides are typically unanswered. The rub comes when your avid brand supporter calls everyone wrong and their scope is just fine - then they attack validity of field testing, which has been answered so many times. Which is met in turn with absolute rejection and a bit of tribalism. Both are frustrating in different ways. I like that stuff is getting tested but hate the absolutism that’s propagated as a result.

Great post-it hasn't gone off the rails, rather is a regurgitating of the many, many other threads from the same group of fellas.

You bring up excellent points, and I agree with you. I'm not here to inject my opinion, but simply keep thread "on topic". The topic was "why can't some leave it alone?"

Then after several posts and paragraphs arguing the same point, they say "I could care less what scope someone uses."..........

 

[Mike D Texas]

No one really cares unless they come here touting how great their scope has been, then the questions start.

No one is seeking out the fudds if they’re quiet.

Is this forum meant to be an exchange of ideas and educating platform?…or merely a marketing forum touting how great their crappy brand x is?

What difference does it make? If it works for them, then it works. End of story.

Those threads devolve so quickly because if someone comes in there with a different experience they are immediately chastised and basically called a liar.

As has been mentioned not everyone hunts in a manner where they need a bulletproof scope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Billinsd]

Someone asked: "Do a lot of people drop their rifles when out hunting? I've been hunting the coastal mountains of Kalifornia for 55 years and can't remember dropping my rifle."

He replied: "I’ve tripped over hellacious deadfall and landed on my scope/rifle multiple times."

Thanks for correcting me, that was a doozy. I apologize, I was waaay off and wrong! My apologies.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Because of what I read on here, I am interested in scopes that have a good showing in the drop test when I'm in the market for a new scope. How does their glass rate compared to each other or compared to options that didn't do well with the drop test. Are some manufacturers, without naming one, putting money in the glass and sacrificing internals?

I'd be interested in an optical comparison of scopes drop tested. How do they rate for end of day, first of day, image, etc.

There's a Leupold VX3HD on my rifle the past 2 seasons (which failed hard in the drop tests). It has not had an issue and to my eye has pretty good glass. Is there a comparison that someone has done or seen elsewhere that measures light that meets the eye through the scope, image, resolution, glare when shooting into a low sitting sun, that type of thing?

 

[isItFallYet]

The new Leupold thread got me thinking. A person says their Leupold works fine for their purpose and someone else just cant let it go. Why?

Confirmation bias. There have been a lot of studies on the subject.

 

[JGRaider]

In my mind, you have two choices:

1. You can buy a vehicle that is either not crash tested at all, unknown as to whether it’s tested, or has been tested and shown a tendency to fail.

Or…

2. You can buy a vehicle that has been independently tested and shown a tendency to pass and/or be a more reliable/safer vehicle.

Easy choice for me, especially when cost has been shown to be irrelevant.

#3.......buy one with the features and price you desire and try it out for yourself. No substitute for personal experience IMO.

FWIW, for the Toyota fanboys that brought it up......go buy the latest Consumer Reports auto issue and you'll find the new, redone Tundra to be very unreliable.

 

[Billinsd]

The entirety of purpose of @Formidilosus drop test is for you to recognize the short comings of popular equipment which should motivate people to test thier own equipment.
What I personally find annoying is this group of Rokslider's who just parrot everything Formidilosus says without engaging in any of the tremendous efforts he does to test AND THEN Document the entire process.

Calling for someone to put up or shut up without being held to the same standard makes your argument seem petty.

The drop tests don’t motivate me to perform destructive tests on my expensive equipment, because it’s expensive and I don’t want to wreck it and have to replace it. The drop tests are points on a curve to me and I watch and take notes of the tests and all the other fantastic data on this site!! Parroting is to repeat something without knowing what you are repeating. Many hunters do this, I strive not to. You don’t have to participate in the drop tests or do your own drop tests to understand them and what they mean and what Form means. Like me, for instance. I do not parrot if I tell people, that for instance Leupold rifle scopes are unreliable for dialing and holding zero after dropping. I am not parroting, because I thoroughly understand the drop tests and what Form has said. Do some parrot Form and the drop tests? Probably, however most probably are not parroting.

 

[Bearwhisky]

Because people are more concerned with what others are doing than they are with their own lives. Its a disease running rampant in todays society.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JGRaider]

What do you mean by “testing it”? I think that’s some people’s point. If it’s been hunted hard for multiple years, does that not count as “testing”?

Of course it does. It becomes data at that point, not an opinion.