Have you ever broken a good modern scope?

barry1974w said:
Where’s the member with the photo of the leupold that’s broken in half, wasn’t it gatehouse? The only failure I’ve had that wasn’t my fault was one of those graphite scopes that bushnell made for a while. It held zero but would get blurry when the magnification was turned up.
But that being said, compared to many of the guys on here I hardly shoot. I doubt I’ve shot 1000 rounds of centrefire in the last year :( . I’ve got a VXIII on my 375 Ruger that hasn’t failed. Only put a few hundred rounds threw it though.
Click to expand...

Here's one.

IMG_6073.jpg

Broken in a fall into the rocks after 35 years of serious hunting. Glad there were iron sights to finish the hunt successfully.

The rifle is still at work with another Leupold from Korth. :rockOn:

Ted
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6073.jpg
    IMG_6073.jpg
    119.8 KB · Views: 186
I store my firearms on a wall in my gun room. I have my Sako A7 with a Nightforce SHV stored about 5 feet off the ground. To this day I'm still not sure how it happened but I came into the room a week later and my Sako was lying on the concrete floor with a couple good scuffs on the scope, which likely hit the ground first. I through for sure the scope was going to be toast. Fast forward a few weeks later and I picked off a skunk at over 100 yards. Needless to say I am a strong supported of Nightforce scopes from that day on.

To sum it up I dropped my rifle/nightforce scope from a height of 5 feet straight onto concrete and the scope held its zero flawlessly. You get what you pay for in my books!
 
Bennyyb said:
I store my firearms on a wall in my gun room. I have my Sako A7 with a Nightforce SHV stored about 5 feet off the ground. To this day I'm still not sure how it happened but I came into the room a week later and my Sako was lying on the concrete floor with a couple good scuffs on the scope, which likely hit the ground first. I through for sure the scope was going to be toast. Fast forward a few weeks later and I picked off a skunk at over 100 yards. Needless to say I am a strong supported of Nightforce scopes from that day on.

To sum it up I dropped my rifle/nightforce scope from a height of 5 feet straight onto concrete and the scope held its zero flawlessly. You get what you pay for in my books!
Click to expand...

overbuilt scope will last for sure but i do not know if that kind of scope is made for any kind of hunts ...
 
Bennyyb said:
I store my firearms on a wall in my gun room. I have my Sako A7 with a Nightforce SHV stored about 5 feet off the ground. To this day I'm still not sure how it happened but I came into the room a week later and my Sako was lying on the concrete floor with a couple good scuffs on the scope, which likely hit the ground first. I through for sure the scope was going to be toast. Fast forward a few weeks later and I picked off a skunk at over 100 yards. Needless to say I am a strong supported of Nightforce scopes from that day on.

To sum it up I dropped my rifle/nightforce scope from a height of 5 feet straight onto concrete and the scope held its zero flawlessly. You get what you pay for in my books!
Click to expand...

One should look at NF initial roots to appreciate thier toughness. Was built upon selling to Australian kangaroo and pest/predator hunters.
Rifle and scope bounced to hell and back Aussie outback often in the night time mostly offroad.
 
Hmmm... The question begs, does the average joe hunter know if his scope is pooched or not? I suspect there are a lot more "underperforming" scopes than people realize. By underperforming, I mean a half-decent scope that is unable to hold POI or track repeatably.
 
platnumbob said:
I personally witnessed a Trijocon ACOG die last weekend from another member on this site. It was mounted on a .308 and after a few rounds the fiberoptic illumination just cut out. Weird. I am sure the warrenty will cover it.
Click to expand...

Kinda surprising to read this due to how tough ACOGs are, but hey, it's bound to happen.

-S.

P.S.
:D I just checked the dates on this, I'm not expecting a response to my queries.
 
Last edited:
canucklehead said:
Two failed Vortex optics (A PST and a Razor HD), and now one Trijicon ACOG with failed fiber optic illumination... gotta call Trijicon right now actuallly... :)
Click to expand...

Were you there with Platnumbob when the ACOG died? Or a separate incident? How did it die? Yeah, I'm nosy...

-S.

P.S.
I just checked the dates on this. No reply expected. ��
 
Last edited:
In this next of the wood, average Joe-Hunter fire (at the most) 3 shots a years.
- 2x shots before the hunt, to confirm it is still on target, and 1x at the moose/deer

And then there's the "older" hunter, who just take their 1x shot at the moose/deer
- "The rifle has been shooting straight for the last 10/15/20 years, why should I waste good ammo..."
 
kamlooky said:
I think some of you have missed the word ........... "Leadsled"
Loaded down with weight, they have busted stocks too.
Click to expand...

You want to try an explain the thinking of that theory on damaging scopes...
Scope damage just does not make sense to me.

Stock damage - very possible...

A very light rifle with a heavy recoiling cartridge is the toughest set up on a scope... nothing is going to jar a scope more...

Now take that rifle and use a lead sled... you are effectively adding that weight to the rifle... and reducing the recoil and stress on the scope...

My home made 'lead' sled weighs 18 pounds and is set up to slide freely on the bench... so in effect it is adding 18 pounds to the stock... haven't harmed any stocks to date.
 
Last edited:
Normally the hardest a scope ever gets hit in use is accelerating from a standing start and that all happens in a micro-second. That's easily demonstrated by scopes sliding ahead in the rings. They never seem to go the other way.

Compared to that, the deceleration when the rifle hits your shoulder is practically coasting to a stop. Complicate that by taking the rapidly moving rifle and slamming it into a 20-50 object. Sled-sleds jar scopes, and break stocks. Muzzlebrakes can tear up scopes too. Or take a BAR and mount a welfare scope on it and you can shake it to death in a morning.
 
Muzzlebrakes can tear up scopes too.
Click to expand...

I’ve heard this before but the science doesn’t seem to back it up. Recoil is simply the opposite reaction of the bullet moving away from your shoulder and the gas and ejecta also moving away from your shoulder. Some of the recoil is reduced by simply allowing much of the gas to escape perpendicular to the bore this not applying as much recoil from escaping gas towards your shoulder or the scope. Brakes do not cause movement in both directions like an air gun can. They simply allow gas to escape to the sides thus reducing the equal energy headed towards you and the scope. There’s simply no way in physics that they could damage scopes.

I know there are some brakes which direct gas backwards at a 45 degree angle. THAT would creat a problem, clearly, but regular brakes that direct the gas perpendicular to the barrel can only reduce recoil, they can never create movement in the opposite direction.

I’ve had a nice perpendicular brake on a rifle from 1981 with a leupold scope vari-x II that should have died a hundred times over by now if the “common knowledge” were true.
 
Last edited:
cosmic said:
Hmmm... The question begs, does the average joe hunter know if his scope is pooched or not? I suspect there are a lot more "underperforming" scopes than people realize. By underperforming, I mean a half-decent scope that is unable to hold POI or track repeatably.
Click to expand...

I think both of these happen far more often than people recognize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom