Toughest Scope: Trijicon? Leopold? Others?

[trperk1]

I have always used Leupolds specifically on my hardest recoiling weapons and never had a failure.

 

[Gemsbok45]

They are tough against recoil and that’s what every manufacturer tests for. It’s all the unexpected where NightForce excels over everyone.

 

[Hillcountry63]

I have a Leopold Freedom 1-4 on my 375 Ruger and it has worked out well enough. Occasionally it seems the zero wonders a tad, maybe 1 MOA. It is not clear whether this is me or the scope. All I can say is my Leopold 2-7 on a 308 has been more consistent, smaller groups AND it never seems to wonder. If a group opens up because I'm tired and shooting bad it seems more centered just bigger.

Because of this I'm considering a scope upgrade. My 375 is my "bear gun" so I really don't want it to fail me at an bad time.

Does anyone have an opinion about how tough a Leopold is compared to other stuff out there (sub $1000)? Right now an old style Trijicon Accupoint 1-4 looks like the best bet. I like the sleek construction and light weight compared to the tactical style scopes by other companies. The illuminated reticle is not totally necessary but nice.

How do Trijicon Accupoints hold up to recoil and to being bumped into things? I've heard a few good reports. Has anyone broken one? Has anyone had one survive abuse?

I am a SWAT Team Leader and have used Trijicon more years than I care to share at work, active duty down range and on most of my hunting rigs…. I bet my life on them. They’re bomb proof and I’ve never had a POI shift. Just my .02

 

[Gemsbok45]

Good on you and thanks for your service. They make a great product! Stay safe you are appreciated!!!

 

[Hogpatrol]

I had the predecessor to Trijicon's Ten Mile 5-30 FFP and the parallax went south. I had bought it used off of ebay. I sent it back, was emailed that scope was obsolete and not able to be repaired. They sent me a brand new Ten Mile FFP in the same power, no charge. From my perspective, I came out smelling like a rose.

 

[Alaska Luke]

Hillcountry thanks. I think I made the right choice. I mounted the Trijicon today. It feels really good. Sight picture is great and the dot is fast.

 

[intj]

Bringing up a slightly old thread. Over the last few years I have leaned a bunch about scope reliability.

Probably 15 - 20 years ago I though I had settled on my optics. I liked whatever version of Leupold's VX-3 series that fit what I was doing. They were lightweight, seemed durable, and I didn't dial the crosshairs in the field.

A few years ago, the LRBR community starting checking scopes for their ability to hold zero. We found that the NF BR models, the NXS, and the Vortex Golden Eagle all held their zero. All of the the other scopes, including the lighter weight NF Comp, had reticle shift of about .1 MOA between shots.

Now .1 MOA reticle shift isn't an issue for any kind of hunting, or any discipline other than BR. But it does push back against the idea that such and such scope is dead nuts reliable under recoil.

Then we get to the drop tests. On another forum, there is an individual who has done extensive testing, documentation, and posted the results. So far, the only scopes that ever fully pass the drop tests are Nightforce and Trijicon.

He drops scopes from 18" and then 36". A three-foot drop isn't an unrealistic event in the field. The amount of reticle shift ranged from about .2 mil to 1 mil. That's roughly .7" to 3.6" at 100 yds.

So my thinking from 20 years ago that a Leu 1.75-6 was a bullet proof scope was wrong. As I prepare for my buffalo hunt over the next couple of years, one of my steps will be to get a Nightforce 1-8 scope for whichever rifle I take.

 

[TMac]

Bringing up a slightly old thread. Over the last few years I have leaned a bunch about scope reliability.

Probably 15 - 20 years ago I though I had settled on my optics. I liked whatever version of Leupold's VX-3 series that fit what I was doing. They were lightweight, seemed durable, and I didn't dial the crosshairs in the field.

A few years ago, the LRBR community starting checking scopes for their ability to hold zero. We found that the NF BR models, the NXS, and the Vortex Golden Eagle all held their zero. All of the the other scopes, including the lighter weight NF Comp, had reticle shift of about .1 MOA between shots.

Now .1 MOA reticle shift isn't an issue for any kind of hunting, or any discipline other than BR. But it does push back against the idea that such and such scope is dead nuts reliable under recoil.

Then we get to the drop tests. On another forum, there is an individual who has done extensive testing, documentation, and posted the results. So far, the only scopes that ever fully pass the drop tests are Nightforce and Trijicon.

He drops scopes from 18" and then 36". A three-foot drop isn't an unrealistic event in the field. The amount of reticle shift ranged from about .2 mil to 1 mil. That's roughly .7" to 3.6" at 100 yds.

So my thinking from 20 years ago that a Leu 1.75-6 was a bullet proof scope was wrong. As I prepare for my buffalo hunt over the next couple of years, one of my steps will be to get a Nightforce 1-8 scope for whichever rifle I take.

Believe some models from SWFA also passed his tests. The 6x42 SS, 3-9x42 SS HD and possibly the 3-15 SS.

 

[intj]

Believe some models from SWFA also passed his tests. The 6x42 SS, 3-9x42 SS HD and possibly the 3-15 SS.

The 6x42 shifted initially then held. The SWFA 2.5-10 had shift. If anyone is interested I can PM the link to this test. I think I can get him to test more scopes.

Also, we are kind of assuming that if one passes or fails to test that they all will. That is probably generally true, but there will be exceptions. Years ago I had a leather sling in an older style mount pull out. The pre-64 M-70 FWT fell off my shoulder onto hard sort. The Leu 2.5x8 held its zero.

 

[358 Norma]

I've never had a Leupold scope shift zero on me and I've used them on everything from 22LR-50bmg! I do know this when the US Army did some testing of optics for their sniper rifles in the early 2000's they threw rifles with optics out of helicopters and the only two scopes to hold zero were the Leupold mark IV and the Night force!

 

[Hunting Hitman]

I’ve had had good success with Leupold and Swarovski scopes. My problem with Night Force is the dislike for the reticle for hunting.

HH

 

[intj]

The only way we know for sure that a scope doesn't shift its reticle when firing is by using a scope checker. That allows us to mount a fixed scope side by side with the scope we are checking, shoot, and check for shift.

Again, most scopes--even very expensive scopes--do have some reticle shift under firing, though it isn't enough to matter in most shooting situations. What separates the men from the boys is the 36" drop test.

I am fortunate enough to work in the firearms industry, and one of the things we do is load development for both the rifles we build as well as other builder's rifles. I personally have shot a lot of scopes and collectively we have shot a lot more.

I think what imparts the most stress on a scope is a large chambered rifle with a brake. Like a 33 XC or a 338 Lapua IMP.....or 375 CTs and 416 Barrett's. The brake seems to add a significant forward motion in addition to the rearward recoil. This added movement adds a lot of stress. We have had scope mounts shoot loose and chassis screws come loose.

I too never noticed an issue with my own Leupolds on unbraked rifles, but I never wrung them out like we do at the shop. I also plan to keep the Leupold's on my lighter rifles. However, those aren't DG rifles or long range rifles. I think that outside of competition shooting, long range hunting (600+ yds) requires the most out of a scope in terms of consistent tracking and holding zero. With the way I like to hunt--close--reticle shift isn't going to make that much difference.

We have had several scopes fail one way or the other. Our Mk 5 has failed a couple of times and the USO has failed. This is just from shooting at the range. While the NX8 in 4-32 is outstanding, the NX8 in 2.5-20 isn't in terms of durability. We have had at least two 2.5-20s fail. I even broke the zero-stop on a Swarovski, but that was my fault--though its plastic parts in the turret didn't inspire confidence.

Anyway, most scopes will work fine in most situations, but the toughest will probably say Nightforce of the side. From what I understand, the US Military stopped using Leupold and now only uses Nightforce.

 

[JimP]

From what I understand and herd from one that is in the know, the military went away from Leopold because of problems with the scopes returning to zero when using the CDS dials.

 

[TMac]

The only way we know for sure that a scope doesn't shift its reticle when firing is by using a scope checker. That allows us to mount a fixed scope side by side with the scope we are checking, shoot, and check for shift.

Again, most scopes--even very expensive scopes--do have some reticle shift under firing, though it isn't enough to matter in most shooting situations. What separates the men from the boys is the 36" drop test.

I am fortunate enough to work in the firearms industry, and one of the things we do is load development for both the rifles we build as well as other builder's rifles. I personally have shot a lot of scopes and collectively we have shot a lot more.

I think what imparts the most stress on a scope is a large chambered rifle with a brake. Like a 33 XC or a 338 Lapua IMP.....or 375 CTs and 416 Barrett's. The brake seems to add a significant forward motion in addition to the rearward recoil. This added movement adds a lot of stress. We have had scope mounts shoot loose and chassis screws come loose.

I too never noticed an issue with my own Leupolds on unbraked rifles, but I never wrung them out like we do at the shop. I also plan to keep the Leupold's on my lighter rifles. However, those aren't DG rifles or long range rifles. I think that outside of competition shooting, long range hunting (600+ yds) requires the most out of a scope in terms of consistent tracking and holding zero. With the way I like to hunt--close--reticle shift isn't going to make that much difference.

We have had several scopes fail one way or the other. Our Mk 5 has failed a couple of times and the USO has failed. This is just from shooting at the range. While the NX8 in 4-32 is outstanding, the NX8 in 2.5-20 isn't in terms of durability. We have had at least two 2.5-20s fail. I even broke the zero-stop on a Swarovski, but that was my fault--though its plastic parts in the turret didn't inspire confidence.

Anyway, most scopes will work fine in most situations, but the toughest will probably say Nightforce of the side. From what I understand, the US Military stopped using Leupold and now only uses Nightforce.

Do you use Burris scopes, personally or at the shop? If so how do they do?

 

[WAB]

Which Leupold scopes were the US military using? I find the CDS on the MK5 significantly different to that on the VX5. Curious as to any performance differential.

 

[358 Norma]

The only way we know for sure that a scope doesn't shift its reticle when firing is by using a scope checker. That allows us to mount a fixed scope side by side with the scope we are checking, shoot, and check for shift.

Again, most scopes--even very expensive scopes--do have some reticle shift under firing, though it isn't enough to matter in most shooting situations. What separates the men from the boys is the 36" drop test.

I am fortunate enough to work in the firearms industry, and one of the things we do is load development for both the rifles we build as well as other builder's rifles. I personally have shot a lot of scopes and collectively we have shot a lot more.

I think what imparts the most stress on a scope is a large chambered rifle with a brake. Like a 33 XC or a 338 Lapua IMP.....or 375 CTs and 416 Barrett's. The brake seems to add a significant forward motion in addition to the rearward recoil. This added movement adds a lot of stress. We have had scope mounts shoot loose and chassis screws come loose.

I too never noticed an issue with my own Leupolds on unbraked rifles, but I never wrung them out like we do at the shop. I also plan to keep the Leupold's on my lighter rifles. However, those aren't DG rifles or long range rifles. I think that outside of competition shooting, long range hunting (600+ yds) requires the most out of a scope in terms of consistent tracking and holding zero. With the way I like to hunt--close--reticle shift isn't going to make that much difference.

We have had several scopes fail one way or the other. Our Mk 5 has failed a couple of times and the USO has failed. This is just from shooting at the range. While the NX8 in 4-32 is outstanding, the NX8 in 2.5-20 isn't in terms of durability. We have had at least two 2.5-20s fail. I even broke the zero-stop on a Swarovski, but that was my fault--though its plastic parts in the turret didn't inspire confidence.

Anyway, most scopes will work fine in most situations, but the toughest will probably say Nightforce of the side. From what I understand, the US Military stopped using Leupold and now only uses Nightforce.

I had a friend back in the late 90s who was building custom 50 BMG Target rifles and we found that pretty much every scope except the Leopold Mark 4 would not stand up to the 50 BMG for the same reasons you noted. The recoil impulse of the 50 BMG and the muzzle brake tended to shake Scopes to pieces, the only thing that we found that was worse on Scopes were air rifles!

 

[cknwax]

Have the Trijicon 1x6 accupoint on my 375 and 404J. On three trips to Africa they have taken a lickin and kept on tickin.

 

[Scott CWO]

Special Forces buddy says NF.

 

[Gemsbok45]

The toughest is NightForce. You can decide after that. Like Swarovski Binos you get what you pay for!

 

[intj]

Do you use Burris scopes, personally or at the shop? If so how do they do?

I have a couple but haven't used them much. It would be interesting to see how they hold up.