Riflescope Drops.

[Pronghunter]

I’m sure this has probably been discussed over and over, but in the last few weeks I’ve read what feels like thousands of post of “drops” on multiple sites, so of course Curiosity has gotten the best of me. I reached out to a couple of the biggest known optics companies. (Well above the Leupold/Burris level). It took some of them a few days for their techs to call me back. I basically asked them about slip, trips and falls with scopes, banging them around, and some of these 3 foot drops along with vibrations and other impacts. Basically in a nutshell, they said that their teams of engineers do their very best to build the highest quality optics they can with the best components to keep things “together” and they are tested for impacts…to what extent they wouldn’t say…. but some of these techs have mentioned that at the end of the day, these optics are filled with very small delicate components held together with everything from adhesive, brass, aluminum and stainless steel parts. Some parts extremely small….All stuffed into the tiniest space. And that some people are simply expecting these “small delicate” parts to hold up to abuse beyond what the internals can take.
Now while I agree that a 3 foot drop doesn’t sound like a lot and it’s something that can and will be expected while hunting or even at the range, a (small) point of impact change isn’t too significant in their opinion, and I’d have to agree. Can it break a hunt, absolutely. Is it frustrating? Absolutely. Does it suck, yup.
Some of these techs replied with “Did the actual optic break? Did the glass stay intact? Does The scope still function properly? Does the turret/parallax/diopter/etc still function as intended…and if so, then the scope has done its job.” Some of them also used analogies for other comparisons that made perfect sense. Everything in life that’s built has a breaking point or point of failure. Most things we just accept when it gets to that point. If a relatively (small) point of impact change is the only real effect of several 36” drop, then I’m ok with that as long as the optic still functions and stayed intact.

 

[sndmn11]

The purpose for drop testing rifle scopes has gone over your head.

 

[Pronghunter]

The purpose for drop testing rifle scopes has gone over your head.

Ok. Thank you.
Please close thread.

 

[ljalberta]

Sounds like you’re fine with losing zero on impacts (as are many people). I’d prefer to use scopes that hold zero.

In my view, if one of the functions of a scope is to hold zero, it seems hard to say that the scope is in fact still functional when it’s losing zero from impacts.

 

[Pronghunter]

Sounds like you’re fine with losing zero on impacts (as are many people). I’d prefer to use scopes that hold zero.

In my view, if one of the functions of a scope is to hold zero, it seems hard to say that the scope is in fact still functional when it’s losing zero from impacts.

At what height is it ok for it to lose zero or break? If it lost zero at 10’ then would that be acceptable? At what point do we say “ok, I’m fine with that?”

 

[sndmn11]

Ok. Thank you.
Please close thread.

At what height is it ok for it to lose zero or break? If it lost zero at 10’ then would that be acceptable?

The purpose is not to replicate impacts nor to abuse anything to the point of breaking.

The purpose, at least on this site, is to follow a protocol that a forum member developed based on his own experience and evidence to weed out scopes that are likely to randomly lose zero down the road. The type of zero loss where NOTHING abnormal happens to the riflescope but the zero has shifted. The protocol is intended to vet the particularly tested riflescope in a very short time with very little ammunition expended, rather than months/years and hundreds/thousands at an unknown time.

The question should be, rather than how high can a riflescope be dropped, "How many random zero losses are acceptable before it's called a failure?". Getting that number to zero is the intention of the drop testing on this forum.

 

[Dioni A]

Ya I got it.
My brother in law works for a design team that test Toyotas compact cars for forward and side impacts. He mentions the fact we accept (national safety) 35 mph as very survivable head ons but people don’t understand why 75mph head on accidents are not. The drop test just reminds me of my conversations with him. The amount of variables in their test are astronomical. Why does one fail at 35 and the next passes…. and why not test at 55 and 65 mph,… wouldn’t that be more acceptable?

And I honestly couldn’t find it. How many scopes passed the drop test?



Thanks.

They created a sub forum in long range.

I think the point of contention is a misunderstanding of what a scope is supposed to do. It's a precision aiming device. a loss of zero in an amount that results in wounding or missing is an absolute failure. Doesn't matter if you can re adjust it later. It failed at it's sole purpose.

Rifle Scope Field Evaluations

www.rokslide.com

 

[PredatorSlayer]

At what height is it ok for it to lose zero or break? If it lost zero at 10’ then would that be acceptable? At what point do we say “ok, I’m fine with that?”

If you go read the comment threads related to the drop tests you’ll find there are others that share your point of view. Most of them are trying to justify owning one of the scopes that failed the test.

 

[billoo349]

At what height is it ok for it to lose zero or break? If it lost zero at 10’ then would that be acceptable? At what point do we say “ok, I’m fine with that?”

36" seems like a pretty reasonable drop. 10' is a different story

Sent from my motorola one 5G UW ace using Tapatalk

 

[Pronghunter]

36" seems like a pretty reasonable drop. 10' is a different story

Sent from my motorola one 5G UW ace using Tapatalk

Yes. And from my post earlier I mention I agree with that. But apparently the majority of scopes don’t pass at 36 inch correct? So when do we say “what’s ok?” That’s literally all I was getting at.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Really? Another thread on this? When did it suddenly become acceptable to start shooting at big game animals after dropping your rifle; all because some strangers on the internet said you’re good to go?

I still can’t wrap my head around this concept.

What’s your acceptable “drop height”. 100 feet? 10 feet? 1 foot? Onto grass? Onto rock? Onto a tree branch? What makes you head back to camp or your truck, or a few hundred yards away to check zero?

If your answer is, “some stranger did drop tests with a few scopes and some “passed” this test, so I’m now good to launch bullets at live big game animals”. I seriously think you need to have your head examined.

I have yet to have somebody come in with a valid argument anytime I post this. It’s usually the same guys coming in justifying their actions with no reasonable parameters for what justifies a recheck of zero.

It turns into a hand raising of “yeah I drop my rifle all the time and these online stranger tests make me want to buy certain scopes”. That’s great and all. But what does that have to do with being a responsible and ethical rifle hunter? If you are dropping your rifle or banging your scope hard enough to cause a slight concern. Get your ass back and test it out. What if it’s the “final fall” before catastrophic failure? Maybe you’ve dropped it 100 times (lol) and it’s checked in fine. What about 200 times? What about 132 times? You don’t know when an optic is going to fail due to impact damage. A scope “passing” or “failing”unverifiable drop tests with very minimal data and very small sample sizes is hilarious to me.

These ridiculous hypotheticals of “you’re sitting on a mountain side, you have the bull of a lifetime standing perfectly broadside at 200 yards. It’s smells like juniper and your underwear isn’t even slightly bothering you. It’s even a good hair day even though you started balding at 21. You go to line up your shot, and OH NO!!! Your rifle tips on the bipod and lands on a rock with a significant enough side impact to cause some concern. What do you do?”

Maybe your scope has survived some home testing with rubber mallets? And it’s checked out fine dozens of times checking side bangs to the scope. What happens when it’s time for it to fail? Or lose zero? Or come loose in the mounts? Or?

There are so many things that are completely out of our control when hunting. One thing we can actually do and control to the best of our abilities is being responsible with our equipment. Rifle scopes being used to shoot at big game animals after a “drop” and justifying it by saying soke strangers on the internet said “it’s okay” is absolutely backwards to me.

 

[ChrisAU]

Yes. And from my post earlier I mention I agree with that. But apparently the majority of scopes don’t pass at 36 inch correct? So when do we say “what’s ok?” That’s literally all I was getting at.

IMO it’s somewhere around impacts experienced when:

1) Carrying the rifle in hand and slipping/stumbling to the ground.

2) Carrying a rifle slung and the sling failing resulting in a fall to the ground.

3) A rifle propped on a tree or other object barrel up with the butt on the ground.

I can tell you that just this past hunting season my Trijicon Credo experienced all of those a couple times each. As well as some rough handling in a Jon boat and a gear sled ha. Never lost zero. I have had cheaper scopes fail from those incidents in the past.

To expound on the sling falls, in WY I had the upper half of my Kifaru gun bearer come loose (I doubt I closed it fully or correctly) and the rifle fell barrel first to the ground, but I caught the butt. Got jarred, but scope didn’t impact ground. Nailed my Antelope at 400 yard that evening.

Second one was much worse, top sling buckle came undone while slung over my shoulder. Rifle fell 4 feet or so and landed on hard ground on the scope. Shot a hog in the face about an hour later with it.

And I’m known to climb questionable embankments or creek banks while holding my rifle and take a tumble.

I just want a scope that can survive somewhat normal abuse by my dumbass like that. Which I know I put multiple seasons of dumb mistakes on my gear in a short amount of time, but I’ll pay for durability if given the option. I’m in the field with an optic mounted weapon nearly daily 4-6 months out of the year.

 

[billoo349]

36" is what's ok in my opinion... It's about where you would be holding a gun in your hand and slipping and dropping it from. Formidilosus is not even being hard on the scope ie dropping it on a rock that I've seen. It still shocks me that at this price range most of these scopes can't hold up to that.

Sent from my motorola one 5G UW ace using Tapatalk

 

[isItFallYet]

I don’t think anyone is saying that it’s acceptable to shoot at an animal immediately after you drop a rifle, without checking zero. I see it more as, hey if I’m paying $1500 for a scope, these scopes are more rugged than others. And because of that, wouldn’t you want something that is higher quality and holds up better?

Would you rather buy 6 ply or 10 ply tires to put on your truck before you head out hunting?

 

[isItFallYet]

And I’d rather have some stranger on the internet test thousand dollar scopes, so I don’t have to. I appreciate what has been conducted with these scope tests.

 

[billoo349]

There are so many things that are completely out of our control when hunting. One thing we can actually do and control to the best of our abilities is being responsible with our equipment. Rifle scopes being used to shoot at big game animals after a “drop” and justifying it by saying soke strangers on the internet said “it’s okay” is absolutely backwards to me.

I'll be this guy because I have been there and I do everything to follow the rules... What if you're in an area that is in a fire ban and the only shooting you can do is in the lawful pursuit of game? Call it quits? I have done that and it sucks balls. I'd rather buy a scope that is recommended and take the chance. Call me irresponsible but I'm a hell of a lot less irresponsible then most.

Sent from my motorola one 5G UW ace using Tapatalk

 

[Ucsdryder]

I'll be this guy because I have been there and I do everything to follow the rules... What if you're in an area that is in a fire ban and the only shooting you can do is in the lawful pursuit of game? Call it quits? I have done that and it sucks balls. I'd rather buy a scope that is recommended and take the chance. Call me irresponsible but I'm a hell of a lot less irresponsible then most.

Sent from my motorola one 5G UW ace using Tapatalk

You’ve gone home because you were in a place with a fire ban and you dropped your gun and couldn’t confirm zero because it was illegal to shoot since it wasn’t in the lawful pursuit of a game animal?


Mmmmmmmmmhmmmmmmmmm…..

 

[SomeJackassOnAForum]

I always read these threads and imagine guys saving 2 oz to have the most worthless, minimalist sling possible while having a 36 oz rifle scope because it's drop proof

 

[roosiebull]

Yes. And from my post earlier I mention I agree with that. But apparently the majority of scopes don’t pass at 36 inch correct? So when do we say “what’s ok?” That’s literally all I was getting at.

Some still seem to shrug off 36” drops, most don’t hold zero with 12” drops, which means they can’t handle much at all… having a rifle tip over on the bipod while setting up for a shot shouldn’t be accepted, a scope that loses zero laying on the back seat driving dirt roads shouldn’t be accepted… if there are scopes that survive 3’ drops, and scopes that lose zero with 12” drops, that creates a realistic baseline for me.

 

[Laelkhunter]

Yes. And from my post earlier I mention I agree with that. But apparently the majority of scopes don’t pass at 36 inch correct? So when do we say “what’s ok?” That’s literally all I was getting at.

I would think normal handling of a scoped rifle during a week long Western Mountain hunt would subject the scope, etc to some trauma. I am wondering with scopes on high recoil rifles, how long can you expect them to hold zero? If you are shooting an unbraked .340 or .375, is the scope taking as much punishment as a 3 foot drop?? I'm thinking the scopes are designed to hold up to the recoil (rearward motion) of the mule kickers, but it seems that the recoil would be more stress on the scope than a 3 foot drop?