help me pick my next rifle

[Swampwalker]

Interesting conversation. And I have nothing constructive to add. Know nothing at all about this. But it's interesting.

 

[bowhunthard88]

I've been reading some scope tests done by the same guy on many models over at rokslide.

I'm not becoming convinced that many scopes (including high dollar) stink at holding zero and even if perfectly mounted the reticle moves around inside the scope. This guy is taking scope that cost around or over $1,000 and dropping the rifle 18 inches onto a foam pad and having the POI move like 6" to a foot sometimes.

I'm guessing a lot of variation day to day and even during the same day can be attributed to something as benign as your rifle slumps to the side in the sand bag and the scope hits a box of shells.

I'm doing to use his tests to replace my current scope with one that holds zero reliably.

Every one of my individual scopes, that I'm relying on, have been vetted lol. A rifle tipping over onto the ground has resulted in POI shifts! When in question, check and log info, rinse and repeat. Good plan for stacking the odds in your favor! My favorite scope for the money, is no longer made, and it still wasn't a "budget" scope...

 

[raisins]

Every one of my individual scopes, that I'm relying on, have been vetted lol. A rifle tipping over onto the ground has resulted in POI shifts! When in question, check and log info, rinse and repeat. Good plan for stacking the odds in your favor! My favorite scope for the money, is no longer made, and it still wasn't a "budget" scope...

I'm going to get a Trijicon Credo 3-9x40 for it. They are one of the few "simple" scopes under $1,000 that passed the test.

My new Leuopold model was tested by him and it failed horribly! I'll probably still test it by lightly banging it around with a gloved hand to simulate hunting use, if it passes that I might keep it.

Otherwise, I'll put it on my 17 HMR and get the Trijicon.

I feel I've already written this here, but the other brands I remember holding zero well were Nite Force, SWFA, and Meopta.

 

[bowhunthard88]

I'm going to get a Trijicon Credo 3-9x40 for it. They are one of the few "simple" scopes under $1,000 that passed the test.

My new Leuopold model was tested by him and it failed horribly! I'll probably still test it by lightly banging it around with a gloved hand to simulate hunting use, if it passes that I might keep it.

Otherwise, I'll put it on my 17 HMR and get the Trijicon.

I feel I've already written this here, but the other brands I remember holding zero well were Nite Force, SWFA, and Meopta.

I have a plethora of different optics, but this is one category that is constantly changing and the bottom one being bumped "out of bed" lol! I get pretty "abusive" (obviously not with metallic objects) with my optics to find their failure points or to know when I need to be worried about checking zero. The Weaver Super Slam and Tactical scopes have been very solid for me over the years, even though they're not necessarily the pinnacle of excellence.

 

[bigmike23]

I'm going to get a Trijicon Credo 3-9x40 for it. They are one of the few "simple" scopes under $1,000 that passed the test.

My new Leuopold model was tested by him and it failed horribly! I'll probably still test it by lightly banging it around with a gloved hand to simulate hunting use, if it passes that I might keep it.

Otherwise, I'll put it on my 17 HMR and get the Trijicon.

I feel I've already written this here, but the other brands I remember holding zero well were Nite Force, SWFA, and Meopta.

Interesting how different experiences are. My dad has Leupolds going back 30 years that are as perfect as the day he bought them. I have one on every rifle I own. Been flawless as well. They're Japanese glass, as good as anything else at the price point

 

[raisins]

Interesting how different experiences are. My dad has Leupolds going back 30 years that are as perfect as the day he bought them. I have one on every rifle I own. Been flawless as well. They're Japanese glass, as good as anything else at the price point

Supposedly the newer ones that aren't Mark 5 or whatever the top ones are don't hold zero well. And the CDS turrets don't adjust precisely for dialing and often don't return to zero if you buy one of the less expensive ones.

The Trijicon I'll likely buy is around $900 MSRP and that Leupold was like $500.

Folks that talk about these things online often talk about how Leupold has sharply declined in recent years. They were probably bought up like so many other outdoor companies buy a huge conglomerate.

 

[htimsds9999]

Looks like they are still privately owned

 

[bigmike23]

Supposedly the newer ones that aren't Mark 5 or whatever the top ones are don't hold zero well. And the CDS turrets don't adjust precisely for dialing and often don't return to zero if you buy one of the less expensive ones.

The Trijicon I'll likely buy is around $900 MSRP and that Leupold was like $500.

Folks that talk about these things online often talk about how Leupold has sharply declined in recent years. They were probably bought up like so many other outdoor companies buy a huge conglomerate.

I live an hr from Eurooptics. I've compared so much glass over the years and have spoken with their guys a ton of times. Almost all their employees are veterans and obviously super pro buying American products. I visited about 3 weeks ago looking at new scopes and the two guys I spoke to strongly urged me in the direction of European made glass. Not even high end glass. Just anything European made. They both felt the quality was much higher at any given price point than competing glass. I made it clear I was looking at Leupold stuff and both of them were clearly "meh" over the brand, so maybe there's something to them getting mediocre in recent years.

I have a tough time coughing up good money on a scope. I spare no expense with hunting gear, but just don't see the benefits of a high end scope. A 500$ VX3 will do everything and anything a better scope can do at a tremendous value. I've been hunting since I'm 7 at a private gun club with around 18 guys a year.
They are your classic zero scouting guys, sight in the week before opening with their 20 year old box of green Remington core lokts, and they all run tasco and Simmons scopes. And they stack em dead every year. Repeatedly, over and over.

 

[bigmike23]

Looks like they are still privately owned

The scopes are assembled, machined, and engineered in america, but they are not made in America. Most of their parts come from overseas and the glass is Japanese

 

[brydan]

Never really questioned the validity of the point, just questioning the application for the average hunter lol. For myself, I have shown zero variances daily, but not usually the variance that requires me to make a scope adjustment. If a hunter is happy with a 2.5" group and shoots a 3-shot 1" group at center, do the variances matter? If a 3 to 5-shot group can be consistently measured at 0.25" and a 10-shot group is consistently measured at 0.5" is the POI worth chasing daily by the variance? I used to shoot benchrest (competitively), tactical matches (competitively), and long range (800-1200 yds. as a precision hobby/varmint hunting); load and shooter variance play a big difference at long range, so ironing those out beforehand is part of the process... I also have detailed shot logs (per rifle) for daily zeros, loads, counts, cleanings, accuracy fall-offs, etc.

Sounds you've got everything down perfect. I apologize for wasting your time

 

[bowhunthard88]

Sounds you've got everything down perfect. I apologize for wasting your time

No wasted time, nor trying to argue, just trying to get your POV as to at what point it is applicable lol! Obviously the differences in POI will be visible with any three random shots within the max group spread, but by minimizing the group spread (or accepting of a larger group size) you should be able to effectively minimize necessary adjustments on a daily basis.

For example in the given 10-shot group that does need a POI adjustment, would you make a different 0.1MIL (~.344MOA) adjustment set for any random 3-shots? If the adjustments were 1/4MOA?

 

[brydan]

No wasted time, nor trying to argue, just trying to get your POV as to at what point it is applicable lol!

If your gun aggs .250” then the difference between a small sample and large sample is going to be very small. Besides, if you’re shouting enough groups to know your rifle averages that small that’s in effect your larger sample size. Very very few people have hunting rifles that shoot that well.

The larger the gun shoots the larger the potential variance between a small sample and large. That’s why I don’t agree that this isn’t applicable to the average hunting rifle, from what I’ve seen it’s more applicable.

To use the earlier example of a 2.5” rifle shooting a single 1” 3 shot group. How do you know that one group is “in the center” of the 2.5” large sample group? Within that larger group the impacts are random. We don’t know if those three shots are from the center, high low, left or right. The larger the dispersion of the rifle, the further a random 3 shot sample can be from the center

 

[bowhunthard88]

The larger the gun shoots the larger the potential variance between a small sample and large. That’s why I don’t agree that this isn’t applicable to the average hunting rifle, from what I’ve seen it’s more applicable.

I would say from the standpoint of POI, you are absolutely correct! I would also say that I find that the average firearm hunter (in my area anyway) is way more accepting of those "flyers"... If they shoot a 1 or 3-shot group and it's close to the POA, they're done, and they accept anything within 4" of POA hahaha!

Here's two 3-shot groups (benchrest concept of "corner shooting" for consistent POA) on steel with two different rifles at distance. Obviously two different calibers!