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

[Macintosh]

Solid gold.........

35WhelenAI said:
Form quote: "Once you get into statistical relevant shot groups sizes (95% probability), very few hunting rifles are under 2 MOA".

Many here are panty-wadding about .5 MOA scope shift and their gun won't do 2.0 MOA at the bench. Factor in shooter error when the time comes to squeeze the trigger, and no wonder poster child scopes with .5 MOA shift kill a shit load of game in the field.


Most people aren't good enough shots to know if a .5MOA shift is shooter error, scope mounts, screws, bedding shift, ammo variability, wind, or whatever else. It's easy to blame the scope.

If that is the situation then fair enough—if we were only talking about .5moa shifts I would not care anywhere close to as much, and Id probably still own several. But I dont think thats the situation most people are talking about, and it was not MY situatiion. I had 3 out of four vx scopes that would inexplicably wander as much as 3-4 moa, frequently around 2moa, with nothing done to the scope, just easy trips to the range. Let me say that again—there was NO impact, not even a minor one, that could trigger a zero-check. When my 100-yard group is 3-4 inches off from where I left it after zeroing with a 10-shot group, even with a 3-4moa gun that is easy to see. It’s night and day with a 2moa gun, those groups dont even overlap. When I stack it on top of my wobble, thats a miss or a wound on a deer well inside 300 yards. Also, when I change NOTHING except put a different scope into the same rings and it instantly tightens groups (same ammo) and stops wandering, and then when I put the vx back in and it starts all over again…its easy to definitively say it was the scope.
I returned 2 of these to leupold and they acknowledged there was a problem with them, the most recent being just this past summer. One they replaced, the other they said they repaired. The first one I sold the rifle and scope before I realized what was happening. And the last I never had a problem with—I personally have owned a leupold scope that held zero for the couple years I owned it. (!!!). But with a 75% failure rate for me personally, confirmed with several hundred $ of my own ammo and double-confirmed by the company acknowledging there was a problem, why wouldnt I pay attention to a process that aligns with my experience, and why wouldnt I strongly recommend scopes that I havent had the same problems with?
@JGRaider @35WhelenAI —if you guys were in my shoes and had had those scopes fail like that, would YOU use or recommend them?

 

[CorbLand]

Nothing is special about a scope that holds zero. Even a leupold. Thats the minimum requirement to be considered a quality scope. The point is that for a decent number of people, some brands and models are more prone to losing zero for no apparent reason. Some people seem to have lightning strike 2, 3, 4 times in a row with leupold, vortex and some others, while they dont have problems as commonly with NF, trij, s&b, swfa and a few others, and where I have firsthand knowledge the eval results align closely with my experience on that. You buy any scope, you take your chances, this is simply a relatively objective way to stack the odds in your favor should you ever need or want a more reliable optic. It does not mean every leupold is junk, nor does it mean every nightforce is perfect. Why is this so hard?

Read this whole thread and this is basically what I was going to post.


When it comes to scopes I can do without the best glass, looks, feel, etc. What I cannot do without is it holding zero. Give me a 2X4 with a barrel and scope duct taped to it. As long as it can repeatably kill something at 500 yards, I will take it.

 

[Shortschaf]

Give me a 2X4 with a barrel and scope duct taped to it. As long as it can repeatably kill something at 500 yards, I will take it.

Best roast of the Rokstock to date

 

[JGRaider]

—if you guys were in my shoes and had had those scopes fail like that, would YOU use or recommend them?

No I would not. I sold the only Leupold I've eve had trouble with after they fixed it. Same goes for Swaro.

 

[wind gypsy]

I'm surprised there isn't an iron sight guy telling everyone to just get closer to the animals.

Which irons have been drop tested?

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

This is part of what I said in Post #16...and others have tried to make.

For the majority of hunters, who harvest game under 300 yards, a zero shift may not even be noticed.

When you step it out, as I did, one might begin to notice.

This would explain a lot of "my scope is rock solid". But that also why some might question a scope being "rock solid".

ymmv

It may also explain why to some the drop tests are interesting but ultimately inconsequential. And it may also explain why scopes other than the Form favorites are perfectly suitable.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

How far is a drop test? I drop my gun all the time, usually lean it on a tree and it falls.

Stop doing that, maybe?

 

[Reburn]

Most people aren't good enough shots to know if a .5MOA shift is shooter error, scope mounts, screws, bedding shift, ammo variability, wind, or whatever else. It's easy to blame the scope.

This is just a silly statement.

it would have to be a 9-mph sustained wind to move a bullet 0.5 moa at 100. If you can’t identify a 9-mph wind, take up knitting.

It’s not hard to torque down action screws. They make wrenches for this.

If you can’t shoot your gun without flinching 1/2" at 100 you suck, take up knitting.

Pic scope mounts are pretty easy to check torque on. Again, they make wrenches for this.

Ammo comes with the lot # on it.

That leaves bedding and the scope.

Not that hard to check out where the fault might be.

 

[CorbLand]

Best roast of the Rokstock to date

Is it a roast or is it affirming that while it’s ugly, if it functions, then that is what I and other people want?

 

[JGRaider]

This is just a silly statement.

it would have to be a 9-mph sustained wind to move a bullet 0.5 moa at 100. If you can’t identify a 9-mph wind, take up knitting.

It’s not hard to torque down action screws. They make wrenches for this.

If you can’t shoot your gun without flinching 1/2" at 100 you suck, take up knitting.

Pic scope mounts are pretty easy to check torque on. Again, they make wrenches for this.

Ammo comes with the lot # on it.

That leaves bedding and the scope.

Not that hard to check out where the fault might be.

Maybe not for internet badassses like you, but the vast majority have no clue where to start looking for problems. Seen it countless times.

 

[CorbLand]

Maybe not for internet badassses like you, but the vast majority have no clue where to start looking for problems. Seen it countless times.

Oops. Never mind. Reread that and realized I read it wrong the first time.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Maybe not for internet Arem Von Benedikts like you, but the vast majority have no clue where to start looking for problems. Seen it countless times.

This.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

I am not claiming to be an expert but I worked at a gun counter and I heard countless times from customers that scopes don’t hold zero and must be sighted in each year.

Did you ever ask them how they ascertained that it wasn't a gun/stock/platform issue? They may have even changed ammo.

The bottom line is that the casual shooter, most shooters I'd say, aren't a reliable source for determining that the scope is the source of a shift.

 

[MuleyFever]

This is just a silly statement.

it would have to be a 9-mph sustained wind to move a bullet 0.5 moa at 100. If you can’t identify a 9-mph wind, take up knitting.

It’s not hard to torque down action screws. They make wrenches for this.

If you can’t shoot your gun without flinching 1/2" at 100 you suck, take up knitting.

Pic scope mounts are pretty easy to check torque on. Again, they make wrenches for this.

Ammo comes with the lot # on it.

That leaves bedding and the scope.

Not that hard to check out where the fault might be.

And I see you one up'ed the silliness.

I bet the majority of people dont even think twice about a 2" group at 100 yds before going hunting. I see it all the time with targets left behind at the range the week before deer season. They would have no clue if their scope was introducing a 1/2" variation as they see it as acceptable and wouldn't even investigate.

My wife is a 2" group shooter in most feld situations. I know this because I make her practice before any hunt so I know what her limitations are. She missed her first animal this year. She panicked when she forgot to flip the safety off. She chambered another round and made the follow up shot in the vitals. She isn't taking up knitting any time soon.

 

[Reburn]

Maybe not for internet badassses like you, but the vast majority have no clue where to start looking for problems. Seen it countless times.

Problem is most guys think that their scope functions correctly.

This.

Careful there bro. Dont want start with personal attacks you will get a time out.

 

[CorbLand]

Did you ever ask them how they ascertained that it wasn't a gun/stock/platform issue? They may have even changed ammo.

The bottom line is that the casual shooter, most shooters I'd say, aren't a reliable source for determining that the scope is the source of a shift.

I edited my post because after posting it, I reread it and realized that I originally read JGs post incorrectly.

If you have dealt with the general public for long enough...I didnt even trust half of them to tell me where the bathroom in the store was, let alone them determine what caused an issue with their gun. I actually agree with @JGRaider on this.

I will say though that in the nearly ten years I worked there, the thought that you could actually get a scope that had a high likelihood of holding zero over years of use is so far out of the realm of peoples thought, its actually astonishing.

 

[Reburn]

And I see you one up'ed the silliness.

I bet the majority of people dont even think twice about a 2" group at 100 yds before going hunting. I see it all the time with targets left behind at the range the week before deer season. They would have no clue if their scope was introducing a 1/2" variation as they see it as acceptable and wouldn't even investigate.

My wife is a 2" group shooter in most feld situations. I know this because I make her practice before any hunt so I know what her limitations are. She missed her first animal this year. She panicked when she forgot to flip the safety off. She chambered another round and made the follow up shot in the vitals. She isn't taking up knitting any time soon.

Most guys think that they are the problem. They dont think their equipement is the problem because they think it functions as it should.

There is a difference between field positional shooting and checking zero off a bench or prone.

Im not the bad guy because I advocate for a scope to function as advertised.

 

[jimh406]

I don't think a 2" group is a bad size for many shooters. Once you add the difference between shooting on a lead sled compared to field conditions, I'm not sure it even matters.

Nope, I don't sight in with a lead sled or have an issue with people who do.

 

[Ratbeetle]

I can appreciate what the tests are trying to accomplish, but for me I just don't see much value in a test of one particular example when that isn't the example I'm going to be using. Run 100 through the same battery with the same results and you have something.

Of course I get that's not practical, so If a guy puts any value in these drop tests at all, he'd be much better served to run his own scope through a similar test than to assume his scope is going to perform like the single example tested...good or bad.

 

[JGRaider]

Most guys think that they are the problem. They dont think their equipement is the problem because they think it functions as it should.

There is a difference between field positional shooting and checking zero off a bench or prone.

Im not the bad guy because I advocate for a scope to function as advertised.

Not in my experience of guiding at least 160 hunters over a 16 year period. Can't count the times a guy misses an animal a time or three and immediately starts blaming the scope. We go shoot it, and its dead on where it should be. The hunter has nothing to say after that. And if you think most people know how to read wind you're really kidding yourself.