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

[Clark33]

I take the drop tests into consideration, its good data/info to help me make a decision. But I also take other stuff into account. This is from 2022, "What the pros use". Before all the "they baby their equipment" comes into play, I look at this for 2 things. Tracking: PRS shooters dial A LOT... all the time. If the top shooters scopes didn't track they wouldn't be winning/placing consistently. Round Count: These scopes have seen a lot of rounds fired. The avg PRS match is 200-250 per weekend. Add in all the practice range time and multiple weekends a season, the round count gets high quick. If the scopes required constant rezeroing I doubt they would be popular with all the other options available.

Also, if you watch or compete in a PRS comp the rifles aren't all that babied, they're getting banged around on obstacles and barricades all the time while changing positions etc. The top two scopes used in 2022 both failed the drop test.

 

[isItFallYet]

I take the drop tests into consideration, its good data/info to help me make a decision. But I also take other stuff into account. This is from 2022, "What the pros use". Before all the "they baby their equipment" comes into play, I look at this for 2 things. Tracking: PRS shooters dial A LOT... all the time. If the top shooters scopes didn't track they wouldn't be winning/placing consistently. Round Count: These scopes have seen a lot of rounds fired. The avg PRS match is 200-250 per weekend. Add in all the practice range time and multiple weekends a season, the round count gets high quick. If the scopes required constant rezeroing I doubt they would be popular with all the other options available.

Also, if you watch or compete in a PRS comp the rifles aren't all that babied, they're getting banged around on obstacles and barricades all the time while changing positions etc. The top two scopes used in 2021 both failed the drop test. View attachment 660531

This is good data.

 

[Ryan Avery]

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?

Simple answer

It’s a forum on the internet! 5% of the people posting do what they claim the rest are full of shit.

I love the posts and the page views, though.

But seriously, the more you shoot and pay attention, patterns start to develop, and the drop test will begin making more sense to you. Now, will it matter enough for you to change your scope??? That’s up to you; like I’ve said, from the start, we report, and you decide. I already know what I’m using; I don’t care what others use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[isItFallYet]

This is good data.

But doesn’t account for bounces off of trees while your rifle is in a scabbard on a horse, or when you’re walking on scree and slip and fall (it happens to all of us).

Point is that we all choose a scope and hope for the best. Does it make sense for “you” to choose a scope that has been tested vigorously with drop tests? That’s for each of us to decide. Make a decision and own the consequences.

 

[jhm2023]

My thoughts on the matter, and it's worth exactly what you're about to pay for it I suppose. I've been using various Leupold scopes ever since I could afford to buy my own when I was 19. I really like them and to me the VX-5HD line is just about the perfect hunting scope(if it held zero), and I've killed lots of stuff with various Leupolds scopes. That said, all through the years of use of all of those scopes, having to re-zero my rifles was a fairly routine need. I've also had a vx-2 that couldn't hold zero for more than a couple of shots on a lightish 7saum. Growing up watching my grandpa and other older folks I cared for and trusted do the same, I thought that's just how it was and maybe the problem was in the ammo, rifle or some other unknown.. This was back when the roughest treatment a scope got from me was being taken to a treestand, so no drops or falls.

Fast forward almost two decades, more experience, boredom buying too many guns and scopes, nerding out on gun stuff and the fact that I now very much enjoy sheep and other mountain hunts that can be hard on gear. Every single Leupold scope (and Vortex) I've used has failed to retain zero at some point. I missed a nice ram on more than one stalk after falling on my scope and other random zero loss incidents that couldn't be explained even when they were never dropped. Given how hard a damn sheep hunt is, that missed ram caused me to really reevaluate my shooting setup. So, I switched to Trijicon Credo HX scopes for my hunting rifles, and it's the first time in my life I can pickup and shoot a rifle on any given day and it still be zeroed every single time I check it. Even after a rough 10+ days chasing sheep. The argument of, "I don't need a drop tested scope", seems silly to me if you hunt with it and wounding a animal is a possibility. As I eluded to in my rambling above, I've even had Leupolds have issues when the roughest use they saw was just walking to a treestand in the lesser 48.

I really wish Leupold would just make their existing line up hold zero. I'd buy VX-5s again if they did. Until then I'm enjoying my Trijicons as they have the features I want/need in a hunting scope and have so far, proven dependable for me. My buddies that have switched to Trijicon and Nightforce from Leupold and Vortex have also "seen the light" on scope reliability issues of their old scopes.

All that said, I'm also a firm believer in the rule of the three Fs. I f you don't Feed me, F*** me, or Finance me, then your opinion doesn't really matter to me. So, if no one is buying your scopes, ammo, tags etc. for you, then why should what they think matter? It doesn't, but sometimes its not a terrible idea to learn from the misfortune of others either. I just like to share my experience based thoughts on it for you to do what you wish with the info, thinking maybe if it helps just one person fill that highly prized tag, not wound an animal or generally be successful, then it was worth the effort to type it.

What ever you choose, good luck and go make memories with those you care about.

 

[Clark33]

But doesn’t account for bounces off of trees while your rifle is in a scabbard on a horse, or when you’re walking on scree and slip and fall (it happens to all of us).

Point is that we all choose a scope and hope for the best. Does it make sense for “you” to choose a scope that has been tested vigorously with drop tests? That’s for each of us to decide. Make a decision and own the consequences.

Correct

 

[sndmn11]

Simple answer

It’s a forum on the internet! 5% of the people posting do what they claim the rest are full of shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

So, you're saying there's a 5% label @fngTony can start handing out???

 

[isItFallYet]

 

[Ryan Avery]

So, you're saying there's a 5% label @fngTony can start handing out???

No, I like page views and posts. It has to be a 95% label... sounds better

 

[mustelid_master]

In my opinion, mechanical reliability is the most important factor when choosing a scope. And not to be a form leg-humper. The swfa line of scopes gaining popularity as a result of drop-testing is a relatively new phenomenon, especially in the hunting world. However, SS scopes have been a known entity in the LR world for years. Look at TiborsaurusRex's sniper101 videos on choosing a scope. Uploaded a decade ago. I don't think you're stupid for using a non-drop tested or "Form approved" scope. If you kill w/ it, awesome. Just dont make the assumption that a VX5 is the same, because it's not. It been proven, not only here, but elsewhere many, many times.

 

[isItFallYet]

Admins: Can I get my label changed from WKR to 5%er?

 

[Flyjunky]

Use whatever you want to use if it’s consistently working for you. Have fun and enjoy it.

The issue for me lies when your “use case” is used an argument for or against an optics ability to maintain its primary function under normal/regular field use.

Because of the info on this forum I've moved to NF only, and I appreciate the time/resources Form has put in to give us that info.

For most people "use case" (their field use) is how they evaluate a scope's ability to stand up to normal use and those cases should be included in any discussion, whether good or bad as it's another data point.

I’ve been lucky enough to shoot and hunt enough, and with enough people, that you start to see repeatable patterns with certain make and model rifles and scopes. So if somebody comes into a scope recommendation thread, touting that a certain make/model scope has been “great” for them; it potentially contradicts what I’ve seen on multiple samples over multiple years.

I would bet that there are more animals killed with Leupold scopes than most other scope companies combined. Does that mean the scope has held zero or dialed exactly what it should have, no it doesn't, but to that person the scope has performed as it should. Those are all use cases and data points that need to be taken into account. I have a NF NX8 that is 5 months old and never been off the range but it is at Nightforce right now because the parallax isn't working. So, in my "use case" I'm not to happy right now with NF and their "proven reliability", but it's only a sample of one. Although a friend of a friend had to send his NF back for a similar issue last year but his problem wasn't as drastic as mine is. In my personal experience, "use case", I've had a 25% failure rate with NF.

I’ve become more vocal on this forum regarding delivery systems that actually function as expected; and I’ll continue to let guys and gals know what my experience has been with certain optics under field use. Whether it’s a positive or negative outcome for the delivery system, I don’t really care. I’m interested in using what actually works and has proven to work for me; and I’ll continue to be vocal about what hasn’t worked.

Once again, you state you will use scopes that have proven to work for you. Those same people who are stating that Leupold are working for them should be given the same respect. In my experience (and that of a friend of friend) should I stop recommending NF because we've had problems with them? Of course not, the track record of NF is great and why I went with them but there are also tons of people who apparently haven't had problems with their Leupold and that can't be discounted as well.

That would be the main reason why I guess I “care” about what somebody else uses for a rifle scope and delivery system as a whole. It’s when the same few folks consistently come into threads recommending scopes that I, and many others have seen utterly fail on decent sample sizes. I will continue to make the argument against using those optics when being recommended to other hunters/shooters.

To me that’s a lot of what this excellent forum is all about. Helping other hunters understand what gear works and what doesn’t. Not everybody has the luxury of getting to shoot and use their gear very often, so recommendation threads here are important in my opinion.

I think one way we could avoid all of these threads is any time someone posts a question asking about a scope a MOD just posts a link to the scope testing thread and then they should close the thread down, no responses needed. Same way with rifle questions, a MOD just links the .223 thread, says the words Tikka/7prc and then shut it down. Lots of "trash" product discussions could be avoided.

With all that being said, I'm personally glad everyone has an opinion and insights that I might not have, it's how we all learn.

 

[fngTony]

Admins: Can I get my label changed from WKR to 5%er?

No

 

[KoolBreeze]

I drop test my VX5HD frequently this time of year. I pull the trigger and the deer falls, scope passed. That’s good enough for me.

 

[isItFallYet]

No

Weak!

 

[isItFallYet]

Let the memes commence!

 

[Ryan Avery]

I take the drop tests into consideration, its good data/info to help me make a decision. But I also take other stuff into account. This is from 2022, "What the pros use". Before all the "they baby their equipment" comes into play, I look at this for 2 things. Tracking: PRS shooters dial A LOT... all the time. If the top shooters scopes didn't track they wouldn't be winning/placing consistently. Round Count: These scopes have seen a lot of rounds fired. The avg PRS match is 200-250 per weekend. Add in all the practice range time and multiple weekends a season, the round count gets high quick. If the scopes required constant rezeroing I doubt they would be popular with all the other options available.

Also, if you watch or compete in a PRS comp the rifles aren't all that babied, they're getting banged around on obstacles and barricades all the time while changing positions etc. The top two scopes used in 2022 both failed the drop test. View attachment 660531

Dude!

They are babied and rezeroed constantly in PRS!

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Simple answer


But seriously, the more you shoot and pay attention, patterns start to develop, and the drop test will begin making more sense to you. Now, will it matter enough for you to change your scope??? That’s up to you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Let the memes commence!

Looks like memes are back on the menu boys!!!

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Admins: Can I get my label changed from WKR to 5%er?

#metoo