Rifle Scopes Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

[Flynn]

This is a spin off to this thread: http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/220779-swfa-ss-parallax-knob-fell-off.html
I'm wanting feedback from experienced shooters as to what are the most rugged scopes. By rugged, I mean that holds up to the beating a FN SCAR gives them (apparently, SCARs eat optics). If the ACOG holds up, I'll be looking for a scope that is more capable of long range shots (700-1000 yards). Thanks..

 

[Graham]

You don't need any special scope for an FN SCAR.

 

[waveslayer]

ACOG. Nightforce

 

[Flynn]

So Super Sniper scopes are junk and fall apart regularly?

You don't need any special scope for an FN SCAR.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

So Super Sniper scopes are junk and fall apart regularly?

Kindly don't put words in my mouth. I never said that. A single occurrence neither proves causation nor does it speak to either the rifle make or the scope brand.

 

[Flynn]

Two scopes..the replacement scope failed as well within 25 rounds or so...

Kindly don't put words in my mouth. I never said that. A single occurrence neither proves causation nor does it speak to either the rifle make or the scope brand.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

Two scopes..the replacement scope failed as well within 25 rounds or so...

It's probably one of them scope-eatin' rifles. If I were you I would sell the rifle cheaply here on the Hide before it mauls any more scopes.

....Certainly not safe to have it around small children.?

 

[Flynn]

Lol, now freaking way, I love this rifle! It's by far my favorite. Not only of my current collection, but of all time..

It's probably one of them scope-eatin' rifles. If I were you I would sell the rifle cheaply here on the Hide before it mauls any more scopes.

....Certainly not safe to have it around small children.

 

[Artifact]

Any Bushnell Elite Tactical will do, they are rated for higher calibers. Truth be told any quality scope will do just fine and there are several of them.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

"Ladies and Gentlemen, in this fight to the death we have:

.... In the black corner ...., the evil villain: SCAR.

And .... in the white corner .... The caped crusader super hero: Mister Ssssssuuupeeeerrr SNIPE-ER. "?

 

[Flynn]

Thanks, and I would like to think so. This is probably just crazy bad luck..

Any Bushnell Elite Tactical will do, they are rated for higher calibers. Truth be told any quality scope will do just fine and there are several of them.

 

[vincent317]

I use a Nightforce with an Aadland 20moa mount on my SCAR17. I'm just at 1000 rounds with no issues at all.

 

[RobertB]

Get a nightforce and know your good.

 

[OptedOut]

This is a spin off to this thread: http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/220779-swfa-ss-parallax-knob-fell-off.html
I'm wanting feedback from experienced shooters as to what are the most rugged scopes. By rugged, I mean that holds up to the beating a FN SCAR gives them (apparently, SCARs eat optics). If the ACOG holds up, I'll be looking for a scope that is more capable of long range shots (700-1000 yards). Thanks..

Flynn,
While the SCAR does not eat up optics 'regularly' it does have a potential problem that has caused electronic and optical devices to fail. I've read all the white papers and have seen the end results when it happens.

See my LAST post from yesterday in another thread ;
http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...opes/221182-home-leave-looking-ior-scope.html

 

[hrfunk]

Ok. I'll bite. Why is a SCAR harder on optics than an AR10, M1A, or any other semi-auto that fires one of the larger battle cartridges?

HRF

 

[Wayfaerer320]

Get a nightforce and know your good.

I personally know a guy who's Nightforce broke atop his Barret .50 BMG one day at the range.

No, this does not mean that Nightforce scopes are not rugged, but I'm just making the point that heavy hitting rifles will always have the potential to make glass and lots of little mechanical components fail. It's always a possibility and it doesn't matter if it's a $300 SS or a $2500 Nightforce.

No scope is perfect forever.

On another note - these guys wouldn't be using Super Snipers if they kept failing all the time on their rifles (heavy hitting M-14s too):

So, if an M-14/M1A can handle it, why couldn't a SCAR?

 

[OptedOut]

Ok. I'll bite. Why is a SCAR harder on optics than an AR10, M1A, or any other semi-auto that fires one of the larger battle cartridges?

HRF

The views I state are from personal experience, but with a quick web search I found these two threads, there are probably more around ;

FN SCAR 16/17 - Question for NSW Operators - SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?90273-SCAR-17-and-SEAL-s&p=1115549#post1115549

Some of the views stated in those two threads bear out command reports I've read and witnessed.

Keep in mind it is a concern when the rifle was/is being used in combat, recreational shooters will probably (?) never experience a failure.

 

[matt2143]

Cyclic mass, velocity of the recoiling components, whether it has a muzzle brake, etc.

My vote would be Nightforce.

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

Ok. I'll bite. Why is a SCAR harder on optics than an AR10, M1A, or any other semi-auto that fires one of the larger battle cartridges?
HRF

Definitely see the threads that MSG Janoski posted links to. There's also a big on ar15.com, though you may take extra grains of salt with that one.

No consensus what might cause it, but the theories are:
-heavier than normal carrier hitting a lighter than normal receiver
-muzzle brake reverse recoil
-more flexible upper receiver and scope rail than other designs, possibly causing the scope to be bent up and down during recoil
-this is FN's required sacrifice to appease the Illuminati

OP, I would usually expect a SS scope to be durable and hold up. SWFA says they are 50 BMG rated, which means they should stand up to reverse recoil from brakes. You could play the SS lottery again (I imagine shipping charges are getting old), talk to SWFA about trying out one of their newer series scopes that might be more rugged (I'm thinking the 3-9x or 1-6x), or go Nightforce and know that if it fails it's not for lack of buying a rugged scope.

 

[Matno]

I'd vote for Nightforce, but on a side note, I thought the .50 bmg was a relatively soft recoil (more of a push than a smack). If something is ".50 bmg rated" is that purely marketing hype? I'd think if you want a truly "tough" scope, get one that's shotgun rated (although those all seem to be on the low end of the price and magnification scale).

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

I love my ACOG. I use it on my HK MR556A1. When my sling disengaged, the rifle fell scope down. The scope was perfect and only just a few scratches.

As for long range shooting, you can use it. There are many different reticules out there and the one I have is useful for up to 800 yards. I even used the rifle in competition out to 250 meters.

So for a very tough scope, get the ACOG. It will not fail you. Ask any military members who used it overseas. They can tell you.

 

[Wayfaerer320]

I love my ACOG. I use it on my HK MR556A1. When my sling disengaged, the rifle fell scope down.

As for long range shooting, you can use it. There are many different reticules out there and the one I have is useful for up to 800 yards. I even used the rifle in competition out to 250 meters.

So for a very bough scope, get the ACOG. It will not fail you. Ask any military members who used it overseas. They can tell you.

ACOGs have failed overseas (and in training as well) - they're not invincible - no scope is.

They're definitely tough scopes though for sure.

 

[smschulz]

USO or Nightforce.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

Keep in mind it is a concern when the rifle was/is being used in combat, recreational shooters will probably (?) never experience a failure.

Let's think about that for a moment: What is it about combat that changes the nature of the recoil or how the rifle functions?

 

[LRDD]

Another vote for nightforce. I have one that has took a beating in its life, and its still tracks just like the day I bought it.

 

[GlockBlock]

Let's think about that for a moment: What is it about combat that changes the nature of the recoil or how the rifle functions?

Bro, do you even combat?

 

[Matno]

Let's think about that for a moment: What is it about combat that changes the nature of the recoil or how the rifle functions?

How about not having to pay for your own ammo?

 

[hewlett260]

I love my ACOG. I use it on my HK MR556A1. When my sling disengaged, the rifle fell scope down. The scope was perfect and only just a few scratches.

As for long range shooting, you can use it. There are many different reticules out there and the one I have is useful for up to 800 yards. I even used the rifle in competition out to 250 meters.

So for a very tough scope, get the ACOG. It will not fail you. Ask any military members who used it overseas. They can tell you.

I don't mean to be a dick when saying this but as a Marine and an infantryman for seven years now, I have had eight(8) ACOGS fail me in the last four years. Two of them failed me in Afghanistan. I can't and won't recommend an ACOG to anyone looking for a durable scope. When they work they are ok but the feeling of always wondering when it may break makes me question why they cost so much.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

Bro, do you even combat?

You mean if you don't include World of Warcraft in my mom's basement? My dick is still bigger than yours, just ask anyone from your unit.

How about not having to pay for your own ammo?

Fair enough, now let's think that one through as well: Compare the amount of ammo you fired during your last firefight with the amount of ammo that you put through your competition rifle in a year.

 

[Doka]

If I had to pick a 'type, of scope, then an acog is definitely top of the list as being the most rugged..saying that I have two in for repairs - one for windage that has stopped working and the other for the same problem but on elevation.

In regards to a brand..in my experience USO seem to be the most rugged brand out there. Never had a problem with one and always perform no matter what..rain hail shine or dust..

In reality USO, Night force or any number of the high end scopes are pretty solid...except swaro..out of 6 scopes 3 have been sent back for repairs within the warranty period and one has been back twice.

Might have been a bad batch, but when you are heading away for a shoot and you have to consider taking a spare scope just in case..its a bit of a pain

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

Fair enough, now let's think that one through as well: Compare the amount of ammo you fired during your last firefight with the amount of ammo that you put through your competition rifle in a year.

Never having been in combat, I always ASSumed that what made it harder on scopes was being frequently dropped on or thrown against rocks, armor plate (vehicles), and other hard sharp stuff. Heavily affected by the users not having spent their own funds on the scope, and maybe being a little tired from hiking 20 miles wearing 100lbs of gear. Along with the occasional blast wave from OPFOR saying "hi!" Just guessing though, no direct experience. I would think that a back-country hunter who's really, really hard on gear might compare as an environment.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

Never having been in combat, I always ASSumed that what made it harder on scopes was being frequently dropped on or thrown against rocks, armor plate (vehicles), and other hard sharp stuff. Heavily affected by the users not having spent their own funds on the scope, and maybe being a little tired from hiking 20 miles wearing 100lbs of gear.

Read the original post: If that was the case then an FN SCAR wouldn't be any harder on scopes than would any other rifle, which was my point.

 

[Rotortuner]

NF will handle brutal recoil. I would get on of those. I have one on a 50 and have used them on many 308's 300's etc.

CJG

 

[SomeOtherGuy]

Read the original post: If that was the case then an FN SCAR wouldn't be any harder on scopes than would any other rifle, which was my point.

I'm not arguing that combat is causing SCAR optics to break while civilian use isn't. See my post #19. I don't even know if the SCAR is special or not for breaking optics, though I've read plenty of stories that it is. My post #31 is just my WAG about how combat may be harder on equipment than any other use.

 

[Matno]

I don't mean to be a dick when saying this but as a Marine and an infantryman for seven years now, I have had eight( 8 ) ACOGS fail me in the last four years. Two of them failed me in Afghanistan. I can't and won't recommend an ACOG to anyone looking for a durable scope. When they work they are ok but the feeling of always wondering when it may break makes me question why they cost so much.

I have an ACOG (although I'm planning on trading it - it was a gift), but I was wondering you could elaborate on how your ACOGs failed. Seems odd that a robust, sealed, fixed-power scope would fail repeatedly. Not that I don't think it's possible, I'm just curious how they fail.

 

[ego235]

I have an ACOG model TA11J-G the windage stopped working all of a sudden one day. I had it on a FN SCAR 16s. I only take it to the range, no real abuse. I'm not saying one way or another. Could very well just have been bad luck. Sent it back to Trijicon, they fixed it and had it back to me in about a month.

 

[Opticsspecialist]

most rugged scopes, nightforce and schmidt and bender come to mind.

 

[LRTI]

Over a 4 week block of training with the SCAR17 one guy will (depending on his job) put a high of 2,240ish rounds through his SCAR17 live fire, and about the same amount with blanks. For the guys with SCAR17s, they're using a NF scope or an ELCAN 1/4 power. I've not seen a NF fail on a SCAR. I have seen one ocular lens come loose, and I've seen one elevation turret mechanism go down during sniper specific training on MK13s. I doubt it had as much to do with the SCAR or the MK13 as it did with the number of rounds those two scopes had seen shot down range, and the typical (ab)use that all of our scopes and turrets are subjected to.

Over a week long sniper specific block of training each shooter will fire 300-350ish rounds through his MK20 or SCAR17, about the same number through his MK13, and about 80-100ish through his MK15 (50 cal); all using NF scopes.

I have been involved with 22ish of the week long sniper trips, and about the same number of that other specific 4 week block of training as a trainee or a trainer. I've dropped mine about 6 ft out of helos and seen them roll 200 yards down a mountainside, but still work for long shots hours later. To say I have confidence in NF scopes is an understatement.

The scope of our future, however, is the S&B 5-25 with the tremor2. I've used it for three trips now and I'm learning it, but it's impossible at this point to tell of its ruggedness.

Admittedly, I've only used one brand of scope extensively. Others here have a much broader experience profile than I.

LRTI

 

[OptedOut]

Let's think about that for a moment: What is it about combat that changes the nature of the recoil or how the rifle functions?

Full auto.
A whole lotta rounds.
Rifles that get used and abused.

 

[E. Bryant]

Is anyone ever going to instrument a SCAR with some accelerometers, or will we spend the next decade spreading different unconfirmed hypotheses about why it supposedly kills scopes?

 

[Flynn]

Great posts, thank you. I took an Eotech off of an AR and put it on the SCAR 17. I shot 80 rounds and the Eotech is still functioning.

 

[Graham]

Great posts, thank you. I took an Eotech off of an AR and put it on the SCAR 17. I shot 80 rounds and the Eotech is still functioning.

Shocked....Shocked, I tell you. ?

 

[Bigtex308]

Shocked....Shocked, I tell you. ?

80 rounds is a lot. must be good to go after putting it through that much of a torture tes

Ike

Those that will give up liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.

 

[Graham]

Full auto.
A whole lotta.

The SCAR is a pussycat on full auto.

 

[Flynn]

The first two scopes didn't last 25 rounds

80 rounds is a lot. must be good to go after putting it through that much of a torture tes

Ike

Those that will give up liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.

 

[OptedOut]

Is anyone ever going to instrument a SCAR with some accelerometers, or will we spend the next decade spreading different unconfirmed hypotheses about why it supposedly kills scopes?

There is no need, US SOCOM tests from 2008-9 showed that the SCAR H (and the SCAR L to a lesser extent) did have a problem because of the upper and lower being of different materials (aluminum & polymer) caused the two different energy waves that did, when they cycled and collided at the same time most often when in full auto, put extreme forces on any type of optic mounted to the rifle with an alarming failure rate of the optic.

The SCAR is a great battle rifle but it does have its problems, it's far from perfect.

 

[Graham]

Need opinions on most rugged scopes..

...different materials (aluminum & polymer) caused the two different energy waves that did, when they cycled and collided at the same time most often when in full auto, put extreme forces on any type of optic mounted to the rifle with an alarming failure rate of the optic.

So you are saying that these optic failures are due to energy waves?

 

[billyburl2]

Flynn, what mount were you using? I don't doubt your SS's failed, but in my limited experience in shooting matches(all of them local, 20-40 shooters), I have seen just about every optic fail, even a Night Force... It happens. Am I a fan of the SS? Yes, I have three. A 5-20, a 3-15, and an old 10x. Every time I start to think I have broke one, I find something wrong with my rifles. My 300 WSM EATS rail screws! Have already moved up to #8's, thinking about going to 5/16...

 

[E. Bryant]

There is no need, US SOCOM tests from 2008-9 showed that the SCAR H (and the SCAR L to a lesser extent) did have a problem because of the upper and lower being of different materials (aluminum & polymer) caused the two different energy waves that did, when they cycled and collided at the same time most often when in full auto, put extreme forces on any type of optic mounted to the rifle with an alarming failure rate of the optic.

When I start reading terms like "energy waves", my engineering skepticism kicks in. Is there any publicly-released documentation on this phenomena, or is this just internet lore? A quick web search didn't turn up any such test data.

 

[OptedOut]

So you are saying that these optic failures are due to energy waves?

"Energy waves" is the term used in the SOCOM white papers (test reports) used, if that's not scientifically correct...I don't know but the bottom line was that the two materials used (instead of all aluminum) caused a difference that that would rear it's head and cause trouble occasionally.

On a separate note; I home you over ate turkey and all the trimmings as I did today!