Rifle Scopes 150 Scopes tested, Results Posted !

[Lowlight]

I don't know all the dates of the manufacturer, we had a bigger class of Parks Service Guys with them, several failed, don't know the dates, they are .gov rifles one as bad as 89%

We did not do dates

 

[Enough Said]

@lowlight when you said the older leup mk4’s had a lot of tracking error, how old are we talking? I have a 2007 mk4, are the ones you evaluated older than that? Have never gotten around to testing the tracking on mine.

We don't have time to go that deep into the scope's manufacturing history. Thankfully, they are beginning to disappear from the firing line. We have much trouble with them before we started tracking the results.

 

[JakeM]

Schott glass compensates for any mechanical tracking errors.

They hawking the schott cuz they know your gonna need to see all your misses with that scope.

 

[StevenTing]

Glad I could contribute a data point to this.

Now if I could only get TargetsUSA to build some more of those scope tool bases, all would be good.

 

[Lowlight]

We have a process which is an assembly line to get this done,

Understand in a 2 DAY Class in AK, where a lot of this data is from, we do the following

1. Fundy Eval
2. 3 Hour Class
3. Scope Test
4. Rifle Set up
5. Zero and Fix Fundy
6. Shoot to 500

That is all done on Day 1

It's a process, it's a commitment, it takes a lot of coordination and understanding with students / instructors to make it happen in a timely manner

 

[Powder_Burns]

Thats understandable, my mk4 is getting bumped down to midrange and in gas gun use so its going to see less and less dialing/precision use. Was just curious if newer mk4 builds were having the same issues.

 

[Spblademaker]

Great info.

Are the Athlon Ares listed ETR's or BTR's? I'm assuming they were the 34mm tube ETR's. If so that's a good showing for a 1K scope so far.

The 99% was a BTR. Nor certain what the other 2 were.

 

[Campguy308]

Good info. Its interesting that the PST Gen 2 did so well.

 

[J Scott]

Thank you very much for putting this together as well as answering our questions. Your data will help inform me as to which scopes to consider for my Altus build.

 

[moriver]

Awesome info thanks for posting it up.

 

[Lil Casino]

Great info, thanks for the time and effort! Were all ZCO's 5x27 or were there any 4x20 in there?

 

[NorthWesterner]

Awesome work @lowlight could you keep the results pinned somewhere as you populate the list?

 

[cshank]

Frank, are you going to collect and record the data for student scopes with other mechanical issues? Fails to hold zero, reticle canted relative to turret, etc?

 

[Tchitcherine]

Nice work Frank et. al. Good to see a number of instances from across the spectrum. Much appreciated!

 

[UNKBOLTGUNGUY]

That’s awesome to see. Razor Gen II it is!

 

[Carlos0311B4]

The Razor is bad a$$, imho. Unfortunately I don’t have mine anymore... it tracked 100% as well 3-18x50Mil/Mil

I wonder how many manufacturers were dreading this post and how many said “being it on bi!$”

 

[Takashi]

Truly valuable data, amazed its not locked away or behind a paywall, thank you!

 

[StrayDog]

Last 2 match seasons twisting my Gen2 Razor past 14 mils for .308, data confirms Razors are a great value! Good stuff, thank you.
Gonna try out the ZComp next season, old eyes are happy.

 

[Enough Said]

Frank, are you going to collect and record the data for student scopes with other mechanical issues? Fails to hold zero, reticle canted relative to turret, etc?

We have started to do that but don't have enough info to release anything subjective or substantive as of yet.

 

[E-Tool]

Told y’all gen 2 razor wasn’t just a starter scope!

How did the fail scopes react to the news?

 

[DaleAGribble]

Wow, pretty clear why the razors are so damn popular.

Thanks for compiling this !!

 

[Long Range 338]

The Fan Boi-ism on this thread is going to make it unreadable.... Yes you all purchased an amazing optic and have now received a pat on the back and reinforcement of your decision making. I'm just waiting for the belly aching to start once a few bad reviews start to roll in!

 

[cshank]

We have started to do that but don't have enough info to release anything subjective or substantive as of yet.

I really like what you and Frank are doing. Honestly a database to track test results would be awesome. For that matter if you documented a repeatable test methodology that others could submit results, well this would be huge. Obviously one would have to prevent people / vendors from manipulating data / some sort of vetting process for those conducting the testing and submitting results.

If you did open up submissions to the community I think you could prevent multiple scope submissions for the same scope model from the same person to prevent people padding the data. Perhaps binding the data submission to serial number In addition to model?

However I think a lot could be gained by tracking this data over a larger sample size.

Ultimately you are testing and quantifying the success of a manufacturers QA. That data should stabilize into a predictable value for each line of scopes from a manufacturer.

Cool stuff.

 

[SOAPdata]

Kinda surprised to see the Minox ZP 5 with 98.3 (.

It is only a single scope, but yeah kind if disappointing. I like my 2 minox zp5s very much

 

[Pogo1760]

Not sure if anyone has pointed it out yet but both Athlons are misspelled. Supposed to be Ares and Cronus.

 

[Huskydriver]

Not sure if anyone has pointed it out yet but both Athlons are misspelled. Supposed to be Ares and Cronus.

Epic first post... Joined 22 min ago just to point that out!

 

[BLKWLFK9]

Marc T. And Frank checking my genII razor this past weekend. 100%

 

[Tokay444]

Couple o’ OG silverbacks right there.

 

[Earnhardt]

I know you don't need your ass kissed...but Thank you for this!!!

 

[Vamike9]

As many have read, during our Sniper's Hide Training Courses, we perform a tall target test on many of the student's scopes. Originally we did only in our PR 2 Class, which usually only runs about 2 a year. This year we expanded that to our PR 1 Classes because of the results and the benefits.

Methods,
We use our Sniper's Hide Tracking fixture and it's set up exactly at 100 yards, or in our case, we use 300ft to fine-tune it. We also use a 4ft level and ruler to look at the reticles and measure the variation if we see it. The fixture weighs 30LBS so as not to influence the results and any negative is double-checked.
View attachment 7456804

We consider 2% within spec of most scopes, and the minor variations we see can and should be used to insert into ballistic software to correct the solvers. Scopes are our weakest link in the system, if something will break usually it's a scope first. If you dope your rifle out by shooting it, the variations are minor, but if you are software to predict the computer must know there is a deviation. Not all software let's you do this, Turret Correction, but they should.

Software like Coldbore 2.0, FFS, and Now Genesis Ballistics have the Scope Tracking Utility built into the program. Here is an example:
View attachment 7456809

The added value we found of doing this in every class is, we can find scopes that have the reticles canted as well as demonstrate parallax in their optic by adding and removing it while it is on the fixture. Then, once the scope has been tested we have an instructor guiding the student in rifle set up so the scope is placed in the optimal point of the rail for their body type. About 1/3 of the scopes per class were found to be canted in the rings to varying degrees. We also see reticles not properly aligned to external Levels. It's here too we can fix the reticle and level relationship if the level is off. Sometimes it's an error in initial mounting, sometimes it's happening with installation and tightening. Rifle set up is an important part of our class, fitting the rifle to the shooter solves a lot of problems down the road.

So as of now, we have 150 scopes on our list that have been tested and recorded. The results are here for all to see:

View attachment 7456820
Moving forward expect to find more data, more scopes tested more classes incorporating this process.

Good info!

 

[Desert Raven]

Will this be a sticky? This is awesome, real-world info that will be helpful to customers and a motivator to make a quality scope, for manufacturers. Well done and much appreciated, guys!

 

[Enough Said]

Not sure if anyone has pointed it out yet but both Athlons are misspelled. Supposed to be Ares and Cronus.

Don't own one, sorry. Trust me when I say it's the scope you think it is.

 

[Enough Said]

I really like what you and Frank are doing. Honestly a database to track test results would be awesome. For that matter if you documented a repeatable test methodology that others could submit results, well this would be huge. Obviously one would have to prevent people / vendors from manipulating data / some sort of vetting process for those conducting the testing and submitting results.

If you did open up submissions to the community I think you could prevent multiple scope submissions for the same scope model from the same person to prevent people padding the data. Perhaps binding the data submission to serial number In addition to model?

However I think a lot could be gained by tracking this data over a larger sample size.

Ultimately you are testing and quantifying the success of a manufacturers QA. That data should stabilize into a predictable value for each line of scopes from a manufacturer.

Cool stuff.

Thanks. We are only interested in tracking the scopes that come through our course. One tracker, one list.
Repeat students do not get their scopes tracked twice, as was the case this last weekend with @Spblademaker. He can attest to the fact that I did not record his data, but it came out exactly as it did last fall.

Taylor

 

[hafejd30]

This has to be some of the best real world info I’ve seen on the actually used scope brands

Awesome job and thank you

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Just for small correction on the Athlon scopes.

they are spelled:

Ares (likely a BTR)
Cronos (likely a BTR)

 

[hafejd30]

Just for small correction on the Athlon scopes.

they are spelled:

Ares (likely a BTR)
Cronos (likely a BTR)

If you look above we’ve covered this already

 

[AK86]

Thanks for the info men!

 

[patriot07]

This is very cool. I only had one scope with tracking issues, and the issue wasn't tracking precision - it was that the erector wasn't perpendicular to the scope body and reticle. I used the cap on the vertical adjustment knob to set level, used a plumb-bob on the other end for level and the reticle was dead straight. But when I turned the dial, the reticle moved to the right. Not a ton, but absolutely enough to matter for small targets at long distances. I think it was on the order of .3-.4 mils of right-ward motion over 6 mils of vertical travel. If shooting a half moa target at 800 yards with 6.5 creedmoor, that would take your reticle completely off the target left to right.

Anyway, I sent the scope back and a replacement was given that tracked absolutely dead nuts on. I'm not going to bother saying the brand name, because I don't think that experience is indicative of their quality. But that's my only bad tracking experience.

 

[daylate]

Thanks.....good info , was hoping you guys were going to share this..

 

[cake5150]

Thank you to all involved for putting this info together. That is pretty incredible how well the gen 2 Razors do considering their average street price. I may have to pick one up, but the weight has always deterred me. I mostly prefer to hold rather than dial, but this is still extremely useful information that will doubtlessly help a lot of people (myself included) make purchasing decisions.

 

[nobeone]

Perhaps I am a bit slow on the uptake but, if the numbers represent % of tracking, just what do numbers >100 mean?

 

[CrabsandFootball]

One thing I have always wondered is tracking repeatability. Do you do the tall target test once or twice per scope? If you did 10 or 100 times (to simulate actual use) would there be varience? Could a poor scope with inconsistant tracking hit the mark once and then fail after? I dont know enough about how these scopes are made to understand if that is even possible.

No body should get too worked up over the numbers from a positive or negative point of view. Its a very small sampling of one aspect of the scope. Its awesome you guys are sharing and as you get more data the confidence level should go up.

Good work boys.

 

[Dr. Strangelove_207]

Thanks for taking the time and effort to do this guys, very much appreciated!

 

[Huskydriver]

Perhaps I am a bit slow on the uptake but, if the numbers represent % of tracking, just what do numbers >100 mean?

I am assuming it is a % of true...so if a scope tracked 99.5% at 100 yards that's roughly 13.33 mils so .995x13.33= 13.26 mils meaning your scope is off by .07 mils from true... so your looking at something you can't even dial but would need to be known to input into your ballistics calc for longer range shots.

 

[Dthomas3523]

Perhaps I am a bit slow on the uptake but, if the numbers represent % of tracking, just what do numbers >100 mean?

It means they moved more than the advertised click amount.

So if it was 98%, it would be .2 mils short (reticle would be at the 9.8 mark) if you dialed 10 mils.

If it was 102%, it would be .2mils high (reticle would be at 10.2 on target) if you dialed 10mils

 

[Totoro]

Great info fellas, much appreciate the hardwork and data collection/compiling.

I will say the alloy rims are great for repurposed seats and tables!

 

[GrumpyOleFart]

Excellent info.
Cheers.

 

[clcustom1911]

Bushnell kicked it all around!
I only have one, but that may change....
Many thanks!
Jordan

Yeah, the worst Bushy tested at 99.8%, the rest were 100%

Pretty damn good.

 

[BigJimFish]

Excellent data to have publicly available. Thanks for recording and posting it Frank.

Also interesting to see what brands and models are showing up in your classes.

 

[rtucker6508]

Great info... thank you guys!