Scope Check

[ttfreestyle]

The test that they are doing I think is very important but there nor testing short range scopes.

About 50 to 75 percent of the guys I shoot short range br score with use the scope we are talking about, we have 2 of them as well.

 

[nakneker]

I spent all winter getting 2 custom ppcs built, it took selling alot of stuff(guns,equipment,etc) and my wife and I worked alot of overtime hours to make it happen. We put 2 top shelf scopes on them I had always wanted but hadn't been able to afford. If there is a chance there is a problem in this line of scopes I want to know. We are new to short range br and have enough to worry with while learning to tune, shoot, handle the gun properly on the bench,read flags, loading and so on. We need to know our scopes can be trusted so all this info has been very helpful to us as I'm sure it has been to others. Troy

Bingo

 

[Jet]

Well gentleman I have been reading the post at hand I am not going to get in a pissing Match with you guys on this subject but it is a no win situation I don't care if you agree or not PS I said again you guys are pissing up a rope an are going to cause a lot of problems with the manufacturers that you are posting about.

No need for a pissing match but I disagree with your comment. In the precision game we test everything. Bullets, powder, barrel, stocks, etc, etc. Almost everyone who has replied/commented on this subject from Tom, Alex, Donovan, Boyd, Matt, LHSmith, etc have posted information for years on their test results and I for one am grateful that they have and continue to do so. It appears scopes might need more testing then they have been receiving. I for one will conduct my own testing and will make decisions based on my results.

Good Shooting

Rich

 

[Mulligan]

I would need to see the report from your gynecologist first.

Tom

'Bout fell out of my chair!

 

[msinc]

NO. I 'd say the scope manufacturers are causing US a lot of problems due to shifting POA. Problems like loosing matches for which we have invested much more money than just the cost of the scope. If they claim their product holds zero......it better be 0.000 not +/- . The scopes are named Benchrest Competition Scopes. In Benchrest competition Matches are won and lost by 0.002" aggregate differential.

Mr. Smith, how dare we "cause problems" for anyone that takes our money with the promise that their {rather expensive} product is supposed to perform, but fails miserably. We should just let it go and pray, hope that the scope we pay dearly for doesn't shift too awful bad when we get it on our rifle!!!!!! Cause problems for manufacturers.........that's just crazy talk, oh, to be so lost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's American business...straighten up and fly right or go out!!! I wonder what scope company owns him!!!!

 

[ebb]

I would not have believed that there were shooters that want to blindly believe in a scope or scopes that they have no way to tell if it works or not. There must be 5 -10 new threads on this forum every week about my new rifle shoots like crap. The scope COULD be the problem in most of them. Yet we have shooters here that want to ignore the scope and blindly plod along with loads and primers and every other variable till they are ready to quite. And someone is worried about the manufacturers and their feelings. Ive sent scopes back 2 and 3 times and paid shipping only to throw away the scope and try some body else's junk. Most all of my guns have been set up with Picatinny bases, if Mike was making a checker that worked with a Picatinny base I would be on the list. I have long considered Ivey or similar rings and a frozen scope to get away from this problem.

 

[dkhunt14]

If you pay 2 to 3000 for a scope it should hold POA. I have sent scopes back that wouldn't hold and I got a letter saying they could not find something wrong with it. They told me it was my gun. Well the scope in question went from the patch on shot one off the bottom Of the target on shot 5 and was in the front bank, Shot 10 was back in the patch. That is about 5 feet difference. After I got my scope back, i didn't trust it and put it on my backup gun. Shot it in the shootoff and it did the same thing. Now it sits in a box on the shelf. I didn't want to pay postage and insurance the second time to be told nothing was wrong with it. They even sent along a collimator paper showing nothing was wrong. This scope was so bad it was obvious it was broke. Matt

 

[ttfreestyle]

I would not have believed that there were shooters that want to blindly believe in a scope or scopes that they have no way to tell if it works or not. There must be 5 -10 new threads on this forum every week about my new rifle shoots like crap. The scope COULD be the problem in most of them. Yet we have shooters here that want to ignore the scope and blindly plod along with loads and primers and every other variable till they are ready to quite. And someone is worried about the manufacturers and their feelings. Ive sent scopes back 2 and 3 times and paid shipping only to throw away the scope and try some body else's junk. Most all of my guns have been set up with Picatinny bases, if Mike was making a checker that worked with a Picatinny base I would be on the list. I have long considered Ivey or similar rings and a frozen scope to get away from this problem.

How do u test your scopes? I don't have a checker and wondered if there was a way other than having one.

 

[BoydAllen]

For most of us, switching scopes is a way to pin a problem down to a particular scope. If the problem goes away when you switch scopes, and comes back when you put the original one on.....The problem is that many are going by brand and price, and think that a scope being new affords some protection from these sorts of problems. If you missed the test (did not read it before the author took it down) the Sightron made one move and then settled. They make straight 36x scopes, and although the optics of the more expensive Big Sky version are supposed to be better, the turret/adjustment mechanism is probably the same. My point is that if you are having a problem with an expensive rig, investing in an inexpensive scope to help sort things out might be a good idea, given the scarcity of frozen scopes, and if you change your mind, as long as you do not mark the tube from improper mounting, you can get most of your money back. On the other hand, if you are in the process of buying a top end scope, you might consider that March makes scopes that have an excellent reputation for holding point of impact.

 

[msinc]

How do u test your scopes? I don't have a checker and wondered if there was a way other than having one.

Either you switch it out for another one that is known to be good to go or you put it on a Hood Scope Checker. I will say that in all fairness to scope manufacturers my experiences with scopes that would not hold zero has really been minimal over the years. I will also say that based on what I have witnessed, many accuracy problems get blamed on scopes and it was in fact something else.
All that said, a scope checker is a fantastic tool to have because like most forms of "investigation" when you are stumped and the going gets tough the best thing to do is employ the process of elimination. If I can positively rule out the scope then I am no longer spending time wondering or otherwise messing with that.
A scope checker is sort of like a borescope...you will positively know whether of not your scope is working, just as you will positively know if your copper fouling remover is any good and the barrel is really clean.

 

[JasonT]

Where is this test that everybody is talking about? If it can't be posted publicly, can somebody share it with me via PM?

 

[msinc]

Where is this test that everybody is talking about? If it can't be posted publicly, can somebody share it with me via PM?

I'd kinda like to see it myself...apparently, best I can extrapolate from this thread our esteemed colleague, Mr. Wheeler did some scope testing and had a thread on his findings. Best I can tell, he was testing some different scopes for ability to hold zero and found one that failed. He "asked to have the thread pulled" {I guess that translates to he deleted it} because he "didn't like the direction it was going in..."
I take it that this was an expensive scope and one or more fanboys were starting to get upset. Rather than blow fairy dust up their skirts and help them to feel better about it he closed the thread. Obviously, Mr. Wheeler is not a democrat.

 

[jlc204]

I'd kinda like to see it myself...apparently, best I can extrapolate from this thread our esteemed colleague, Mr. Wheeler did some scope testing and had a thread on his findings. Best I can tell, he was testing some different scopes for ability to hold zero and found one that failed. He "asked to have the thread pulled" {I guess that translates to he deleted it} because he "didn't like the direction it was going in..."
I take it that this was an expensive scope and one or more fanboys were starting to get upset. Rather than blow fairy dust up their skirts and help them to feel better about it he closed the thread. Obviously, Mr. Wheeler is not a democrat.

Found more than one...definitely an eye opener.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Dennis Adams just posted this on his FB page for those that want a scope checker in a pic version.

https://www.facebook.com/Adams-Custom-Rifles-LLC-802656463114204/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

 

[Keith Kilby]

I understand the concept of using a frozen scope as a control to check other scopes. Can a scope be frozen by bottoming out the elevation and windage adjustments? Or does it have to be frozen by tearing it apart and otherwise locking up internals? It would be nice to have a scope for your control that could be put back into regular service for something other than short range BR( like the Brackney conversion for sale in the Optics for sale section). Might be a stupid question for those of you that are optics experts but I'm not one of those and am curious about methods to freeze a scope temporarily.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Not sure about that. However frozen scope do come up pretty cheap. You also do not need a frozen scope. Just use any 2 scopes and that will tell you if you have an issue. Then you just have to do some swapping to figure out which scope is bad.

 

[JRS]

I understand the concept of using a frozen scope as a control to check other scopes. Can a scope be frozen by bottoming out the elevation and windage adjustments? Or does it have to be frozen by tearing it apart and otherwise locking up internals? It would be nice to have a scope for your control that could be put back into regular service for something other than short range BR( like the Brackney conversion for sale in the Optics for sale section). Might be a stupid question for those of you that are optics experts but I'm not one of those and am curious about methods to freeze a scope temporarily.

The scopes were frozen by removing the turrets and some of the internal goodies. It requires some homemade tools (different scopes require different tools) and JB Weld. The idea was to eliminate any movement or perception of movement within the scope that would cause a point of impact change.

 

[Eddie Harren]

Better'n the funny papers!

 

[msinc]

Found more than one...definitely an eye opener.

Wow, after reviewing my PM alert, if I am understanding this correctly, I see now why so many of one particular brand of scopes are always in the "for sale" section!!!!!! I can also understand the {probably numerous} fanboys getting their panties in a knot!!!! Must have been a sudden uptake.

 

[BOB LEE SWAGGER]

Mr. Smith, how dare we "cause problems" for anyone that takes our money with the promise that their {rather expensive} product is supposed to perform, but fails miserably. We should just let it go and pray, hope that the scope we pay dearly for doesn't shift too awful bad when we get it on our rifle!!!!!! Cause problems for manufacturers.........that's just crazy talk, oh, to be so lost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's American business...straighten up and fly right or go out!!! I wonder what scope company owns him!!!!

You might want to re-read this. Mr. Smith wasn't siding with the scope manufacturers.