Catching up on the developments here haha
A sample size of 1 is not statistically significant regardless of the manufacturing techniques. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal evidence, regardless of manufacturing techniques employed. CNC machining may give you a higher likelihood of consistency, but it is not a guarantee. #### happens. Stuff gets through QC that shouldn't, and in the gun world it seems to happen all the god damn time even with CNC machining.
Form, the guy doing a lot of the testing on rokslide has done this to dozens of Leupolds. They all did not perform well. Not just the drop test, feel free to go read for yourself, like I said before there is no conclusion to be made that their current offerings are durable. Like I have said before, they have zero shifts just riding in his truck. The MK5 actually performs better than the VX3-HDs, those seem to not even return to zero just from dialing..
To address the sample size, even with a sample size of 1, the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of that sample being representative the entire population.
What do you think the chances of you getting a Leupold lemon? One in a thousand? So the odds of someone doing a review on an optic, at random, to get the lemon is 1/1000 -> 0.1%, now in the specific thread linked, he does two mark 5hds so now you are looking at getting two lemons in a row, which would be 0.0001% chance to happen.
Are there reviews out there that have been done on a lemon?
Yes, but it's also very rare.
Reality is that Leupold has a quality control program, so the odds are probably much lower. That combined with his actual sample size, its hard to argue with his observations.
A scope didn't hold zero through all that?...
There are scopes that pass the whole drop test. Multiple 3ft drops may is an extreme level of ruggedness but 18" is pretty normal and is important
to me. Here are some real life examples:
- Normal (18”) is about what one gets if a rifle is leaned against a truck or tree and gets knocked over, or a minor slip that causes one to catch themselves with the rifle in their hand.
- Hard (36") is about what one gets if the are climbing and slip on rocks or hard ground and the rifles is dropped or impacts directly; or if the rifle is stroked to the pack and the person falls with the rifle hitting the ground or an object.
- Very hard (multiple 36") use is the rifle coming undone from the pack and dropping scope first on the ground, or the person falling while climbing in a shake slide and the rifle rumbling a few feet down the hill.
These are just observations so you can come to a conclusion yourself if a scope is
good enough for you based on them.
Every scope fails eventually. Having that eventually as far in the future as possible due to the lowest probability of failure possible sounds pretty good to me.
Without mechanical reliability, optical clarity simply allows you to see the target you are about to miss a little better
Haha well said, I like it, might use it sometime!
Does anyone actually test scopes objectively and thoroughly for their ability to maintain zero under typical (ie rough) hunting conditions? Years ago one reviewer I recall used a heavy, secured, concrete platform to which a steel rail and substantial rings were attached. When mounted in this rig the scope was mechanical fixed and he arranged/placed a target to be observed through the scope so that any movement of the reticle could be observed.
He did a number of tests to demonstrate that some scopes would exhibit (under the conditions they were subjected to) movement of the reticle ... ie would not retain their zero. IMO the ability of a scope to retain its zero is much more significant than attaining some pinnacle of optical clarity.
in one of his experiments he even demonstrated that the pull of a rubber band against the objective of a scope could significantly move the reticle point of aim ... more alarming was the fact that in many cases ... removing the rubber band did not cause the scope to return to its previous zero ... which he attributed to errors when mounting a scope in a manner that induced stress in the tube.
The only place I've found is Rokslide you can check out the optic evaluations
here. My personal opinion is that scope reliability is drastically underrated and most people brush it off and just re-zero everytime they go shooting.
Be careful about who you choose to mount the scope.
It's not a difficult task and depending on the components, usually has some forgiveness. Still, be careful on who does the job.
It can easily make what should be an acceptably accurate combination into an inconsistent shooting combination, if it isn't done properly.
Good luck with this and I hope your DAD has a happy birthday.
Unfortunately, the nut mounting the optic will be me. I got a torque wrench and a wheeler leveling kit so it should be alright! Also thank you, I'll forward your wishes kind stranger!
