Okay, Glass is Glass......

I have been staring through lenses most of the time, most of my life. Once you get above a certain quality level, most human beings can't tell much difference.....at least I can't. Computer designed and ground lenses in top quality scopes like Nikon, Leupold, Swarofski, Sightron, Night Force, etc. are all far superior to what was available just a few years ago.

My question is about the mechanical aspects of the scopes. Who makes the most durable, dependable, and repeatable turret adjustments?

Has anyone ever done any comparison tests?

uj

Sure this will turn into a "ford vs dodge vs chevy" thread before long.

I have personally found my Vortex Vipers to be perfect as far as durability and repeatability goes. So much that I have replaced my Leupold and my Nikons with them.

Im sure there are much better scopes out there with better glass, but I could not ask for anything else out of these scopes for the amount they cost. I have seen much more expensive scopes with half the features.

My Burris's are now refurbished.

I always found certian scopes, I.E. Nikon, Burris, reticles are to big and obtrusive FOR ME.
I prefer Sightron over most due to value for money spent, but on my budget the Vortex Vipers get the nudge.
I really never got into Leupolds for the same reason I never got into Remingtons.

Here's a good read.
http://accurateshooter.wordpress.com...x50-lr-mildot/

".....I really never got into Leupolds for the same reason I never got into Remingtons."

??

uj

;D I just like to be different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pa Hog

;D I just like to be different.

---

YOU SUCCEEDED! :D ;D

I am very impressed with my IOR-Valdada.4-14X. Side by side the glass was better than my friends Leupy MK 4. And after 4 days of cranking up 98 clicks, back down, up 75, back down, up a 43 and so on PD hunting, it was dead on back at zero at 100yds. I have read some negative reports about IOR and repeatability, but mine was great. Windage knob got a good workout too.

My 1950's Weaver K3 is still ticking and looks crisp and clear....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uncle Jack

My question is about the mechanical aspects of the scopes. Who makes the most durable, dependable, and repeatable turret adjustments?

Has anyone ever done any comparison tests?

uj

---

I have compared most of the bigger names side by side and you are right it is hard to tell the difference at 100 yards or even 200 yards.

Where I see the difference is at 500 to 1500 meters. At those distances even the Bushnell Elite 6500 or the Vortex Viper series doesn't quite cut the mustard.

As for durability and repeatability these are the top dogs, listed in order of CLARITY / CONTRAST, best first, but not best for durability. I think they are all about equal on the durability / repeatability front. If my life depended on it, I wouldn't hesitate to choose any one of them and if I could afford it I wouldn't consider any other scope besides one of them.

Zeiss Hensoldt
Premier Reticles
Schmidt & Bender
US Optics
Nightforce
Leupold Mark 4 ( I almost didn't include these because they have such crappy reticles to choose from)

I didn't include the following that might warrant being on the top dog list but I left them out...for various reasons.
Swarovski -- never owned or looked through any of their higher end long range scopes, so I would just be going on what other people have said (They generally put them right in there between US Optics and S&B.

Vortex hasn't been around long enough to really say on a long track record durability. Their lower end scopes are not that rugged but the Razors are supposed be well built (they had better be for the price). IOR Valdada has some great glass but they are not as rugged as the ones above. I would never put an IOR

Nothing else I have seen would make it into the list but maybe I have missed something....

Serious benchrest shooters are the world's most picky scope users when it comes to mechanical durability/ repeatibility. The rich ones use March scopes or have something like a Leupold with the internals frozen and use adjustable mounts. Next down the line is Nightforce followed by Sightron(some are modified with lock screws in the turrets). Many budget shooters use stock Weavers which usually do very well unless you get a bad one.

Several of the serious experimenters have taken to modifying scopes to increase mechanical precision and repeatibility. It seems that all the scope brands ( except March) have occasional problems caused by some combination of poor design, sloppy assembly, loose tolerances. Mostly the problems don't affect the typical hunter or plinker, but do show up in the quest for that last tiny fracton of an inch. in group size at 200, 600 or 1000 yds.

RWO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RWO

Serious benchrest shooters are the world's most picky scope users when it comes to mechanical durability/ repeatibility. The rich ones use March scopes or have something like a Leupold with the internals frozen and use adjustable mounts. Next down the line is Nightforce followed by Sightron(some are modified with lock screws in the turrets). Many budget shooters use stock Weavers which usually do very well unless you get a bad one.

Several of the serious experimenters have taken to modifying scopes to increase mechanical precision and repeatibility. It seems that all the scope brands ( except March) have occasional problems caused by some combination of poor design, sloppy assembly, loose tolerances. Mostly the problems don't affect the typical hunter or plinker, but do show up in the quest for that last tiny fracton of an inch. in group size at 200, 600 or 1000 yds.

RWO

---

Nightforce scopes have been on the winning guns of more benchrest matches in the last few years than any other brand from what I have read.