It's been years but both were Leupold scopes. I can't remember precisely which Leupold scopes or whether or not both .375 rifles were mounted with precisely the same Leupold scopes. These rifles belonged to two different individuals one of which was me and the other, my friend so the scopes could have been two different models.
My friend's scope failure led to another kind of failure. My friend may have been using factory ammunition but I had loaded my own cartridges. Although I don't remember the details, I loaded my .375 for a safe but high velocity. The bullet, I don't want to use the manufacturers name but has 'Grand' somewhere in its title was in the 285 grain range.
Before the scope incident, I had shot several animals with the…ah…'Grand'. It shot right through a leopard producing a sudden kill. It also dropped a large bushbuck in his tracks--I can't remember if it exited. I killed a zebra but it took a couple of shots and the bullets didn't exit. No major surprise. But I shot a quartered on impala and the bullet exited his rump as small fragments. I shot a 50 lb baboon, killing him instantly, but the heavy bullet didn't exit.
Now my load was OK because, using the same formula, I loaded some with Hornady solids. I killed a bull elephant with a single side head shot. The bullet struck the middle of the brain and almost exited the skull. I shot two Cape Buffalo bulls. One collapsed instantly with a neck shot. The other required two chest shots but didn't get 80 yards.
OK, so the Hornady solids performed as advertised but the 'Grands' …… Anyway, my friend's scope was wrecked so I invited him to use my rifle and my reloads [I still hadn't put two and two together]. He got a 100 yd shot at a large male lion. He fired at the point of his shoulder but the lion walked off dragging a foreleg. My friend reckoned he'd made a bad shot and hit him in the foot, so he and the guide both started shooting and bagged the lion after a lot of shots.
The first 'Grand' hit the cat perfectly but shattered on the shoulder. It shattered into hundreds of pieces but not one fragment entered his chest cavity. Another 'Grand' hit the lion immediately above the eye. This bullet didn't shatter but was distorted after passing through about an inch of frontal bone and was embedded in muscle. It didn't stop the lion.
My possible explanations: Although there was no evidence of my reloads being over-pressure, the bullet was very fast and the recoil was heavy. 1. the 'Grand' in .375 H and H [this is 35 years ago] may have been designed for lower velocities. 2. the heavy recoil dislocated the scope glass [which doesn't explain my friend's scope failure because he was using factory loads].
As I think about it, and as I wrote previously, my own Leupold scope shattered when I shot [Nosler Partition] at a bear uphill from me, with a cliff some distance below him. I was on a frozen beach at the foot of the same cliff. The bear rolled down and fell off the cliff. It almost hit me. I can remember it looking bigger and bigger as it fell towards me. Did I tuck and roll to avoid it--an action that could have damaged the scope? I can't remember. I do remember moving fast so that the falling bear didn't hit me. I fired from a big pile of frozen snow, prone, but I can't remember any violent movement on my part [like rolling on my rifle and scope]. But, then again, I was acting automatically which doesn't allow much room for recent or distant memory. I do remember that the bear was wrecked by the fall with large gashes in his hide.
By the way, in reply to some of the posters who never seem to miss and never wound and lose an animal. I've done a whole lot of hunting. I won't even attempt to enumerate the beasts I've shot and 1. I do miss sometimes and 2. I've even had a few wounded animals escape. Heck, I've even had some wounded prairie dogs 'escape' but not because of rifle, bullet or scope failure.
. Threads like that should end with one response. "Yes, if you can hit a dime 100% of the time from field positions out to 200 yards. If not.... no." no need for further discussion. That's why they are called SENSIBLE minimums.... not "absolute-bare-bones-skin-of-your-teeth" minimums.
