Scope Zero Dependability?

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

For me My only complaint with NF scopes is there is too much Turret stuff going on..
Even Leupold's VX-5HD 1.5x5 has a CDS reticle gotta pay extra to have that turret capped
For normal hunting ranges I don't need to dial anything or adjust parralax..
For normal hunting ranges ... Give me 2 small capped unobtrusive turrets and a duplex reticle and I'm good

@zephyr
You and I must read the same play book. Simple does me and has done for a long long time. My old fixed 4x40 Rhino scope for 30 dollars back in the late 70s served me well for years on my old 303 until I discovered variables. Even now they spend 95% of time on 3 or 4 power so is it really any better than my old 4x.
I know I'm a dinosaur
Bob

 

[gbflyer]

That rok slide test is ridiculously biased, I don’t do turret dialing scopes and that test is all about messing with the dials and dropping them to check tracking
I love Burris brand and leopold and have never seen a failure
my m70 .300 had a Burris that traveled from the equator to the arctic circle for 25 years
I don’t do Swarovski or Zeiss except for spotting scope so have nada to contribute about them on a rifle

How so? He has tested several set and forget scopes too. You should read the standards for the test.

 

[Inline6]

@S-3 Ranch
I'm like you. I detest those turret dialing thingys. If I wanted to twiddle something while hunting I would twiddle my thumbs.
They may be alright for those used to them like target shooter and long range guys that like dialling in for a shot but not this black duck.
It would be just my luck I would be dialed in for say 600 yards and forget to reset the zero and a once in a lifetime trophy appears at 150. Then miss it by a mile because I didn't reset my scope.
The ranges I shoot at I don't need all the bells and whistles.
I want to be able to put rifle on shoulder, pull trigger and go pick up game.
A mate has one of those new fangled dially, parallax, target turret scopes with bubble level and the whole shebang. By the time he is set to take the shot he doesn't have to pull the trigger. The bloody animals die of old age first.

All my scopes hold zero and all have for years. The only time I play with them is when I change loads which is very rare. Yes I have dropped rifles but then check zero before hunting again. My scopes aren't expensive but mid range meopta and Zeiss along with a couple of budget scopes. All serve my needs well.
If I damage one while out bush to the point I can't use it I don't care as I always carry a spare scope incase Murphy pays me a visit, dang even took a spare scope to Namibia just in case. So far I've never needed it. Plus where I hunt I usually take 2 rifles incase one fails. So never an issue.

I don't begrudge people that like all the bells and whistles and high dollar optics but they are just not for me and my needs.
I'm just a basic unit that likes to keep things simple.
Bob

It is like anything else in life, if you practice it will be second nature. I would rather dial my elevation and know it is correct, than just hold and get close.

I do understand what you are saying and it 100% is a valid concern. I have personally dialed the scope the wrong way (before they had zero stops), forgot to dial back to zero, forgot to adjust from one target to the next, ect. In a match under a clock you put pressure on yourself. The good news is, it has been a very long time since that has happened to me. It is a habit, I pickup my rifles, confirm it is on zero. It is just building up good habits, nothing to get worked up about. My goal is to try to learn something new everyday. Do my best to take full advantage of technology every chance I get.

 

[poco]

How so? He has tested several set and forget scopes too. You should read the standards for the test.

I looked for the test standard and couldn’t find it.
however the test is set up ? i still believe the test is geared towards folks who are primarily extreme range hunters / 500-1000 yard ( which IMHO is unethical hunting)
as is the long running post that a 77gr TMK .223 is sufficient for elk , moose , bear
which Formidabise the tester is a proponent of.
I don’t buy scopes with turrets and am more interested in how tough one is
my Burris signature has literally been bounced down 100’s of thousands of miles on highways & 10’s of thousands of miles of 2 track rock roads while sitting on top of my .300wm .
what scopes can take being bounced around & shot on 35- 70 lbs or recoil rifles is more important to me I guess

 

[Wyfox]

Not sure if this link will work, nightforce test vid

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[gbflyer]

I looked for the test standard and couldn’t find it.
however the test is set up ? i still believe the test is geared towards folks who are primarily extreme range hunters / 500-1000 yard ( which IMHO is unethical hunting)
as is the long running post that a 77gr TMK .223 is sufficient for elk , moose , bear
which Formidabise the tester is a proponent of.
I don’t buy scopes with turrets and am more interested in how tough one is
my Burris signature has literally been bounced down 100’s of thousands of miles on highways & 10’s of thousands of miles of 2 track rock roads while sitting on top of my .300wm .
what scopes can take being bounced around & shot on 35- 70 lbs or recoil rifles is more important to me I guess

The standard is there. No linking allowed here for whatever reason. Not my house so not my rules.

 

[Alaska Luke]

The test is not really about dials or fancy stuff. It's about whether a scope can hold zero after a series of controlled drops onto a padded surface from 18 inches then 36 inches. One individual does the tests. Maybe they are full of it but several other members of that forum vouch for them and apparently one buys ammo for the individual who does the tests. Not my circus but no one besides Nightforce and Trijicon seem to claim their scopes are designed to survive side impacts. No one else provides an objective measure of what a scope can handle before it loses zero or breaks completely.

 

[Safari Dave]

The SWFA's are the cheapest (and ugliest) of the 3 brands that consistently hold zero with the RS tests.

My son has snagged two SWFA scopes for a good deal in the past week and can, easily, get more than retail for both, because of stupid high demand.


I REALLY don't want to abandon my American-made Leupolds or my European scopes, but I'm having a hard time defending them them against my son's arguments about holding zero and durability.


Hell, I'm a scientist!


I'm at the point of trying to defend American patriotism, and superior glass of German or Austrian optics, but does that even matter if the scopes won't hold zero after a 16 hour flight or a 27 hour drive in the back of a pickup truck????

 

[OxfordTheCat]

This 3x Weaver I bought in 1972 has been through hell including going end over end down the mountain on my horse ten years later. It still holds zero. Didn't cost me a thousand bucks either.
View attachment 578271
View attachment 578272

I ended up with a pair of K2.5s on my rifles for the same reasons @Ontario Hunter, "old school" big steel tube, but makes it pretty bomb proof.

As an aside, if you ever do have any issues or the seals decide to give up the ghost after 50 years, a pair of the former Weaver employees bought out the stocks of parts when they folded up, and have set up shop in OK.

For ~$125 CAD, can have the scopes refurbed to 'factory' condition: Seals replaced, reticles changed if desired, refilled with nitrogen and resealed for the next half century, or at least until maybe the next fall down a down a mountain!

 

[lockingblock]

Leupold builds to a pricepoint.

It’s like Kia- Value is the goal and that translates to Kia upgrading the interior features of their cars one grade higher than peer cars For the same price. Unfortunately, Kia offsets that expense with engines that have poor wear characteristics and dated transmission designs.

Leupold knows that they use lower grade glass and coatings. They can’t compete on mechanical adjustments or durability. So, they have outstanding reticles, light weight, programs to engrave you personal caps matched to your rifle, power/size options that don’t exist elsewhere, and excellent CS…at a price below the Euro competition. They also market hard on podcasts and magazines.

None of that is new. It’s been their business model forever. Leupolds don’t track, often don’t return to zero, have sloppy turrets, diopter adjustment shortages, and lose zero on impacts. Go shoot a 50 click box drill…50 up & shoot…right 50 shoot…down 50 shoot…left 50 and you should be back at original zero. I’ve never seen one that did it perfectly…all adjusted laterally when adding or removing elevation. Most didn’t fully return to zero.

If you want a best quality optic, it’s got Schott glass in it…Zeiss, S&B, Leica, Swarovski. Nightforce is different, but has a similar performance based model based around absolute rugged durability at the price of size and weight…but they are probably the most durable optics outside of an ACOG.

Nightforce came up with an ultimate durability version for their military optics- they permanently assemble them with high strength glue. They can’t be disassembled or serviced…but nothing comes loose internally. In testing, the machines that vibrate the optics couldn’t beat the optic. Only NF did that…and only on their military models.


The guy is question is a jerk…but he is correct on Leupold optics.

 

[Clodo Ferreira]

Hi,

My most dependable scopes are two fixed power Zeiss:
1-Zeiss Diatal DA 4x32 bought new in 1972. Still in use in my Mauser-Werke 1935 7x57. Non centered reticle and not truly sealed. Its optics has nothing to envy to a new 4x scope. NOTHING. This scope has survived incredible knocks and so...
2-Zeiss Diatal ZA 4x32 T*. The first Zeiss centered reticle serie, started in the 80´s. Is in my .375 H&H Winchester pre 64 (1954). Also had many "bumps" and many 375 full power shots. Still like new.
I think any GOOD modern fixed low power scope, very scarce right now, would be a reliable one.

Best!

CF

 

[gbflyer]

Leupold builds to a pricepoint.

It’s like Kia- Value is the goal and that translates to Kia upgrading the interior features of their cars one grade higher than peer cars For the same price. Unfortunately, Kia offsets that expense with engines that have poor wear characteristics and dated transmission designs.

Leupold knows that they use lower grade glass and coatings. They can’t compete on mechanical adjustments or durability. So, they have outstanding reticles, light weight, programs to engrave you personal caps matched to your rifle, power/size options that don’t exist elsewhere, and excellent CS…at a price below the Euro competition. They also market hard on podcasts and magazines.

None of that is new. It’s been their business model forever. Leupolds don’t track, often don’t return to zero, have sloppy turrets, diopter adjustment shortages, and lose zero on impacts. Go shoot a 50 click box drill…50 up & shoot…right 50 shoot…down 50 shoot…left 50 and you should be back at original zero. I’ve never seen one that did it perfectly…all adjusted laterally when adding or removing elevation. Most didn’t fully return to zero.

If you want a best quality optic, it’s got Schott glass in it…Zeiss, S&B, Leica, Swarovski. Nightforce is different, but has a similar performance based model based around absolute rugged durability at the price of size and weight…but they are probably the most durable optics outside of an ACOG.

Nightforce came up with an ultimate durability version for their military optics- they permanently assemble them with high strength glue. They can’t be disassembled or serviced…but nothing comes loose internally. In testing, the machines that vibrate the optics couldn’t beat the optic. Only NF did that…and only on their military models.


The guy is question is a jerk…but he is correct on Leupold optics.

I have been thinking about this a lot. Your statement regarding NF and their bonding process is awakening. There are some good gluing products out there today, and yes they would render disassembly for repair impossible. Is this inside knowledge? I’m not doubting at all, quite the opposite. Thanks for the insight if you’re not BS’ing us.

 

[lockingblock]

Their commercial optics generally are not built that same way, but still use things like silicone to adhere and seal while being more serviceable at the factory level.

NF optics are generally over built in terms of ruggedness. Its why they are often a bit heavier. That said, they work reliably and are super consistent. I like them a lot.