Objective Testing

[Critch]

I would love to see an objective group of people for the products we love. Underwriters Labs does extensive testing on products and rates them. It would be nice to have an objective study of say rifle scopes so that we could choose better. If I mention Burris Scopes for instance I will get all sorts of opinions,,,same with any other maker.

I have an older Tasco scope that has perfomed extemely well for 20+ years, I have a Burris Scope that I still don't trust...I know that is probably not normal...but we all have the same stories.

I have a Savage 10FP rifle that outshoots my brother's 700P,,,,that Remington cost a lot more..

Is there such a group out there that I'm missing?

[Jack]

I don't know of anyone doing objective testing with any sort of scientific method. Wish I did.
I suspect the age old question 'who's gonna pay for it' is the reason why no one's doing it.
I think we've all heard the opinion 'Brand A is the best thing since the invention of the wheel' and 'Brand A is total junk', from one source or another. Part of the problem there is that a lot of brands now have a wide array of scopes at different price ranges. Within the same brand, the low end stuff may be mediocre at best, and some of the higher priced models can be excellent.

[Critch]

Let's say you had a machine that you could put several scopes on and simulate 1000s of rifle shots, you could easily compare them. I tend to buy Leupolds because of quality and the guarantee, but I have had a few fail me over the years.

But let's say that testing shows that an upper end Simmons at $100 performs at least as well as a lower end Leupold at $200, that would be something.

I would also like to know the pedigree of some scopes. I've noticed that BSAs and Barskas look an awful lot alike,,,where are they made, who specifially made them?

[skeet]

I also think there are a lot of scopes made for the mass merchandisers. I think some of Cabela's scopes are made by BSA and some by Burris. It seems Burris is importing stuff these days too The leupold Line has some really good scopes and some I would not have anymore..then there are the Konus and others out there. I sold a guy a nice varmint rifle quite a few years ago. He put a 6x24 BSA on it.. It goes everywhere with him and has a kinda hard life. The darn thing is still working and has never needed any adjustment. I guess you can get good in any brand....and bad too. I just picked up a Leupold VX III 6.5 x 20...won't focus..going back to Leupold for repair... Bought it for 50 bucks. Few nicks and ring marks..but 50 bucks?? The guy I got it from was really annoyed at it We'll se how good the Leupold warranty really is

[Critch]

I have never had a problem at all with Leupold upholding their guarantee. They are great.

[Jack]

One thing that happens with any product that's made to market at a relatively inexpensive price point is, the quality control standards are lowered. So, out of a carton of say, 50 of an item, there can be some real dogs, some not so good, and a few quite good.
Hence, one guy says brand X low price stuff is really terrific (he got one of the good ones) and a lot of other people say the same brand X is garbage (they didn't get the good one).
I believe some of Cabela's high end optics are made by Meopta, a European company, not very well known here.
There are ways to objectively test optics, but, not something that's generally done at home- the testing equipment is expensive. Modulation Transfer Function testers are used. For what MTF is, go here: http://photo.net/learn/optics/mtf/
MTF machines can objectively test the resolution and contrast of any optical device.
Another way, that you can do at home, is with Air Force test targets. Those are somewhat like the eyecharts at your opthalmologists office, modified for use with optics. You can compare 2 (or more) different optics by pointing them both at AF test targets and comparing.
However, neither method does anything to test for durability- a factor in riflescopes.

[skeet]

A scope line I have had really good luck with is the Bushnell line..especially the Elites I have 2 Elite 6500s 2 4200s and one...nope 2 3200s..one is a pistol scope They have all held up really well are clear and seem to be rugged. The blind guy I hunt with(legally not completely) has 2 of the 6500s and he really likes 'em and he is hard on scopes and rifles..you know..always falling and tripping and all. LOL

[Jack]

For no reason I can think of, I haven't used any of the current Bushnell stuff. A friend has a 3000 series Bushnell on a 22 target rifle, and that scope seems quite good.
I've had good experiences with Leupold, Burris, Pentax, Zeiss Conquest, Nikon, and Meopta scopes. The Weaver Grand Slam line, too. IME, if you stay away from their low end models (if they have them), each of those companies makes a very nice scope.
The Weaver V series isn't up to those, quite, but they seem to me to be good value for the money.

[skeet]

I have also used some of the Nikons a Weaver Grand Slam(glad it's gone) A Zeiss Conquest and of course the Burris line..especially the older Fullfield and a couple of the newer signatures. They are head and shoulders much better than the Fullfield IIs. The Conquest is a good scope if a bit high priced(even wholesale) The Nikons are ok but the fild of view seems restrictive...for me anyway. I like the older Fullfields and the Signatures very much. My Fullfields are both 2x7s and are just not good 'nuff for my eyesight problems. One of the Signatures I got on a rifle from another HC member and it seems to be a very well made scope..and that rifle is very accurate. The newer Leupolds are usually ok..if a lot pricey..but the rifleman line is somewhat cheaply made in my opinion The VX I is marginally better and their new Redfield line seems to be decent too..just not as pretty. I would prefer to buy American and have quite a few esp older Redfields and Leupolds and of course the real Weavers.. Hard to buy American scope these days