What to buy? NX8 or MK5HD

[Alpha Echo]

If anyone doesn't recheck their zero after dropping their scope in the field anyway, then they aren't very smart. If it holds zero, great. If not, re-zero and get back to hunting.

I care way more about accurate tracking and RTZ than dropping my scope.

So here's a scenario, you're in the backcountry, 10 miles in, at a glassing spot, and you glass up elk cross canyon with your binos. In your rush to get to your spotter, your foot knocks your shooting tripod over, causing your rifle and scope to fall to the ground. You notice a bull of a lifetime (let's say 400 inches for grins and giggles) in your spotter, you range it, and its within your shooting range. You can't get any closer since the elk are cross canyon. How many of you guys would honestly pass the shot, hike out 10 miles to the truck, go to the range to confirm zero, and then try to find that bull again?

As @buzby mentions above, some guys hunt in very rugged country...and stuff happens. If a drop does happen, I want to know without a doubt that I can have confidence in continuing my hunt. Is it statistically significant? No. But if a scope fails that unscientific test, what it tells me is that the manufacturer is not putting out durable products 100% of the time that I can have confidence in. And yes, that does bias me towards scope models that do not fail.

The point of those tests, as @Wedgy notes, is to make you think. So my question is, why don't all premium scope manufacturers drop test every scope they sell at the factory, scientifically, to parameters they determine are sufficient, before asking us to pay thousands of dollars for them? The only manufacturer I have seen advertise that they drop test is Trijicon. Does that impact my decision to spend my hard earned money in the future? You bet it does!

 

[Mike D Texas]

So here's a scenario, you're in the backcountry, 10 miles in, at a glassing spot, and you glass up elk cross canyon with your binos. In your rush to get to your spotter, your foot knocks your shooting tripod over, causing your rifle and scope to fall to the ground. You notice a bull of a lifetime (let's say 400 inches for grins and giggles) in your spotter, you range it, and its within your shooting range. You can't get any closer since the elk are cross canyon. How many of you guys would honestly pass the shot, hike out 10 miles to the truck, go to the range to confirm zero, and then try to find that bull again?

As @buzby mentions above, some guys hunt in very rugged country...and stuff happens. If a drop does happen, I want to know without a doubt that I can have confidence in continuing my hunt. Is it statistically significant? No. But if a scope fails that unscientific test, what it tells me is that the manufacturer is not putting out durable products 100% of the time that I can have confidence in. And yes, that does bias me towards scope models that do not fail.

The point of those tests, as @Wedgy notes, is to make you think. So my question is, why don't all premium scope manufacturers drop test every scope they sell at the factory, scientifically, to parameters they determine are sufficient, before asking us to pay thousands of dollars for them? The only manufacturer I have seen advertise that they drop test is Trijicon. Does that impact my decision to spend my hard earned money in the future? You bet it does!

I suppose there is a very slim chance the stars align in the scenario you posted, and in that case that becomes a question of personal ethics more so than equipment choice. I'm not saying go buy a bottom of the barrel scope like a Barska or Vortex but most people that are shooting in those disciplines are leaning toward better quality optics, generally speaking of course.

And why in the world would anyone hike out10 miles to check zero? Rocks abound in most places where this would be taking place.

I don't know about Trijicon and their factory testing methods but Nightforce is known to impact test their scopes at the factory.

 

[Recon$$]

I know alot of guys are liking the trijicon ten mile but the military doesn't use trijicon on precision rifles. So comparing an RCO to a real scope is null and void.

 

[buzby]

I know alot of guys are liking the trijicon ten mile but the military doesn't use trijicon on precision rifles. So comparing an RCO to a real scope is null and void.

Admittedly a bit apples and oranges. But across the board trijicon optics are known to be reliable. They don't seem to have budget line that compromises durability like a lot of brands.

They don't manufacture their rifle scope line. They're made by LOW.
LOW also makes the NX8s, SHVs, Bushnell LRHS, and the SWFA 5-20, and Vortex Razors. All but one of those passed the "test".
Another pattern emerging.

 

[Recon$$]

Fair enough if that's true.

 

[Wedgy]

I'm not saying go buy a bottom of the barrel scope like a Barska or Vortex but ......

How dare you !!
LOL

 

[Mike D Texas]

How dare you !!
LOL

 

[Starbuck]

NX8 for me.

 

[BigPrince]

everything about the Rokslide scope drop test is unintelligent…the testing parameters are NOT controlled

The ONLY "tests" that I will listen to are the real life testimonies of military personnel that put these optics through REAL tests…everyday beating the crap out of their optics…

Or how about the guys in PRS, running from stage to stage, putting their optics on the line…

I don't care either way, but that's just nonsense. Expecting rokslide to have controlled testing parameters and yet giving credence to the most random uncontrolled experiences of military personnel and PRS competitors.

Happy New Year.

 

[Earnhardt]

Military personnel…in battles with the enemy, or military exercises…many opportunities to damage the optic

PRS…running from stage to stage, having many opportunities to damage the scope by slamming or bumping into "something", as well as put up with the recoil of thousands of rounds…

Scope "drop test"… watch me push/drop the scoped gun onto the ground……

 

[buzby]

I don't care either way, but that's just nonsense. Expecting rokslide to have controlled testing parameters and yet giving credence to the most random uncontrolled experiences of military personnel and PRS competitors.

Happy New Year.

I may be off here;
Leupold has a mil contract
Lots of (sponsored) leupolds in PRS
Leupold failed every RS test.
Only the first 2 count.
Comfirmation bias

NF performs well in all three

 

[lancetkenyon]

Just going to say this.
I think I had a brand new (39 shots under it) Leupold Mk5HD 5-25 go down today. Was shooting fine, then all of a sudden, shots went 3" high right @ 100 yds. Adjusted to correct and next shot was center. Then following shot was 3" low. Readjusted, center, then 3" low again and 3 ahot group went from 1/2" to 3"+ and scattered.
I will pull it and check all screws in the morning, but I was very frustrated today, hoping to finish load verification today.

 

[Alpha Echo]

I suppose there is a very slim chance the stars align in the scenario you posted, and in that case that becomes a question of personal ethics more so than equipment choice. I'm not saying go buy a bottom of the barrel scope like a Barska or Vortex but most people that are shooting in those disciplines are leaning toward better quality optics, generally speaking of course.

And why in the world would anyone hike out10 miles to check zero? Rocks abound in most places where this would be taking place.

I don't know about Trijicon and their factory testing methods but Nightforce is known to impact test their scopes at the factory.

Fair point about not hiking out. The point I was making was more about missing the opportunity because ethically, I would not want to take the shot with a scope I didn't have full confidence in, and needing to wait until the elk moved off to check zero so as not to spook them.

 

[Alpha Echo]

Admittedly a bit apples and oranges. But across the board trijicon optics are known to be reliable. They don't seem to have budget line that compromises durability like a lot of brands.

They don't manufacture their rifle scope line. They're made by LOW.
LOW also makes the NX8s, SHVs, Bushnell LRHS, and the SWFA 5-20, and Vortex Razors. All but one of those passed the "test".
Another pattern emerging.

My understanding about contract manufacturers like LOW is they make product to the brand's design specs, tolerances, etc. So its probably a combination of quality manufacturing process like LOW and good specs/tolerances from the brand name manufacturers.