I am going to state what I stated in the beginning which has been a largely ignored observation by those who like the results and is the flaw in the test. He adjusted and noted the increase in ring poundage on the scopes that passed but made no such adjustments on those that failed. It appears that if he was partial to a particular brand S&B, NF though they initially failed as all others did he adjusted the poundage and preformed the test all over again. I am not arguing for or against any particular brand and I did not review every test but I did look at his notes on the ones that passed and then a few of the ones that failed. By making the adjustments he invalidated the test.
You made my agreement for me as well. Your scope had a broken assembly. It wasn't faulty. It broke after 375 rounds from a high recoiling rifle. Again I have had scopes that have broken or that I broke or that came from the factory broke but as long as the thing was in working order it never failed to hold zero not on a $1500 plus scope. I have in forty plus years never seen a poi shift that wasn't explainable and it was usually a bad part that was replaced under warranty or faulty rings. The replacements for the few I have had never failed.
Additionally, as others have mentioned a sample size of one is insufficient to make any definitive conclusions. I have in my career and life run NF, Leupold, S&B, Athlon, Vortex, ZCO, Swarovski, SWFA, IOR Valdada and a host of other. I have had 4 failures with the exception of some really cheap scopes in the early years (ie Tasco etc.). All these scope failures just kind of baffle me. I personally think it horse manure! I think someone misses and it the scopes fault, they have one failure and the company is crap, or they favor a certain brand and want something that helps them go home and explain to their wife why they just spent $5k on a scope for their hunting rifle. Don't get me wrong I shoot a PM2 and love it! The test support my scope of choice but I also own and have owed others that have never failed me either. Holding zero is the most important aspect of a scope. I have never had a tier one fail to do that. NF, S&B, Vortex, Athlon, ZCO, Leupold , Kahles all build models that are tough as nails and will hold zero under the most brutal of operating conditions. It then moves to features and function, followed by glass. All things being equal I would give up a little glass quality in a hunting scope to get the features( ie reticule) I wanted.
Finally, I nor do most of us want to tote a 2-3+ pound scope on a LRH hunt. I personally would rather have the weight in my rifle not my scope. A light weight scope however, will have a thinner tube wall thus making it more susceptible to damage. There are trade offs with every model. Choose what fits your criteria and go shoot. I am a little bit of a scope snob, however I don't care for Kahles or NF, not because I don't think they are great scopes but rather because I don't like their controls. It's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. That said as I stated earlier if I were getting into the game and building a long range rig I think NF is the best bang for the buck. There are scopes that in my opinion are better (ie some of the new S&B scopes) however, at and additional 4-5K over the night force what you gain is not enough to justify the difference in price.
I appreciate his effort but at the end of the day the test is flawed for several reasons. 1) unequal testing parameters. 2) insufficient testing numbers per model. 3) there is no way to control how individual models impact the striking surface, it is to random 4) The test is not repeatable form model to model. 6) There appears to be bias. Again just my observations and experience.
My beef with this argument is it appears to suggest that unless your spending 3500 on a scope you can't trust your equipment and that is just simply not true. There are multiple factors that can effect zero other than the scope. There are a lot of good quality scopes on the market today that cost far less than 3500+. When factoring in intended use there may be no need for such a scope. Again my scope of choice is a S&B or Leupold for hunting purposes. At present as of today I have 4 Leupolds and 2 S&Bs on my six primary hunting rifles. I trust all of them. They have never failed me. The cheapest is around $650 and the most expensive 4K. Pick what you have confidence in and go hunt. I started with a Tasco World Class and quickly went to a Vari X 111 3.5-10x50. Now I own scopes from a half dozen manufacturers all with a different purpose in mind. Just because you can beat the crap out of the tube of a scope doesn't mean it is the best for the job!
. Left him a nice little mark to remember the experience. I would repeat as I did in my first response to this post. I think the movement is more due to the rings than the scopes themselves. I am not saying in doesn't happen but I bet on a high quality scope it has more to do with poor mounting and mounts than the scope.
