I know the answer... All of them eventually. So which scopes break the least? Not speaking of abuse here but just from shooting them a lot. In the last 2 years I had a Leupold and a Burris break and fail to hold zero. That's not so bad on the range but horrible on a hunt. I have also read of very high scope failure rates at shooting schools.

I am talking about 30-06 recoil levels and no abuse beyond an accidental drop. Just lots of use. I like the 2x7 and 3x9 scopes but am also interested in a 2.5 fixed for a couple applications.

Not being as rich as all your guys, let's hold the market price under $600 retail.

Many thanks for your inputs.

As you mentioned, they all eventually break...everything does sooner or later.

IF I had to pick one that would live it's life a bit longer, would look simple design and solid (read "more expensive") construction. The fewer parts/seals/lens systems/bells-n-whistles/ moving parts the better...so a basic basic fixed power.
-------
The alternative method is to buy two. One is well padded and packed away, along with the tools needed to switch it. Could happen, but would have to be a very-very unlucky guy to have two die on the same hunt.

Some folks are just harder on stuff than others, of the several hundred scopes I've had over 45 years of hunting I can count on the fingers of one hand the scopes that have broken.

A better question might be is which scopes can be fixed without any hassle when they do break. Leupold is one of those. The Sportsman's channel just had a show on how Leupold's are made and tested and there's not much tougher on the market.

So far, (knock on wood) I've only had one scope to "break" or to fail somehow. It was a Leupold, but it was my fault. A spill while packing out in the mountains pretty much destroyed the scope, the rifle stock and some people parts on myself.

Otherwise, I haven't had one to give up the ghost. I'm not a turret twister, though. I could see if that was SOP where some wear could lead to problems over several years.

If you are concerned about strength or rigidity, Zeiss and Swarovski still offer one-piece, all steel tube construction. Not sure, but Schmidt & Bender might offer the same. These aren't the Americanized versions though and are very expensive.

Either you have way more $$$$$$ than I do or I am really just cheap???, I could buy three scopes for that $600!

I'm still unsold on the Leupold's?, you hear two story's on them, "they're the greatest scope ever!" or "I'll never buy one of those POS's EVER again", I've heard several story's of Leupold NOT warranty there scopes!??? I did guppy and buy one to put on my .338 so we'll see?
I do LOVE! my Nikon scope, for the money I think it's the best scope I've ever purchased.

Leupold has been refusing to warrenty quite a few scopes lately leaving some unhappy customers, understandable since these are cheap fakes coming out of China. On some the optics are pretty good but they don't hold up. I suppose thats where some of the negative Leupold comments are coming from. You can't expect a manufacturer to warrenty an inferior product they never sold.

While i haven't tried every brand of scope out there, have tried a bunch...they all can break. As one poster mentioned, some are a whole lot easier to have fixed, but that's of little use to you 5 miles from the Jeep deep in the deer woods.

Have had Leupolds fail...both times variables, and both times when you turned the power wheel, the cross hair turned with it.

Some times it's your fault...leaning a rifle against a tree so the sun shines down the scope is a good way to kill your reticle, dropping the rifle, rolling a horse on one, slamming the rifle in a truck door, etc.

Many times it's not checking well each time you use it...those mounts didn't get loose all at once, but it seems taht way becasue we check so seldom (becasue we have to pull the scope rings to get to the mount and re-sight in, so we tend to ignore the mount screws).

i guess i'd get a high end air rifle scope rated for use with magnum springers... the double recoil from a springer air rifle will ruin a good powder rifle scope in short order.... you might check into that!

Leupold has been refusing to warrenty quite a few scopes lately leaving some unhappy customers, understandable since these are cheap fakes coming out of China. On some the optics are pretty good but they don't hold up. I suppose thats where some of the negative Leupold comments are coming from. You can't expect a manufacturer to warrenty an inferior product they never sold. .

How do you spot a fake Leupold visually, without looking through it? Is the lettering different? The finish different? Gold ring off color?

.

How do you spot a fake Leupold visually, without looking through it? Is the lettering different? The finish different? Gold ring off color?

This is from Leupold's web site.

In general, most of the scopes appear to originate from Hong Kong (People’s Republic of China), and have “Leupold Mark 4” laser engraved on the bottom of the turret in a silver etch, while the black ring on the objective is etched in white and does not include the name “Leupold.” The scopes also do not bear the Leupold medallion, a mark all Leupold scopes will always possess. An authentic Mark 4 riflescope will always be engraved black on black and have the name “Leupold” engraved on the black ring.

Thanks for the replys guys,

I appreciate your thoughts and insights. It bothers me that scopes of many qualities and price ranges run from nearly unbreakable to totally fragile in the same scope. Of the 2 scopes thaqt recently failed, one was a Burris Scout Scope with under 500 rounds through the 444 it was mounted on. The second was a Leopold 2x7 Vari X 2 with under 2000 rounds on it in a 30-06. Thankfully, both failed on the range instead of the woods. Both failed without any warning. I replaced the Leupold with a Bushnell 4200 in 2.5 X 8. While there are under 500 rounds on it, the optics are a dream. Hopefully it will give good service on my Savage in 7mm 08.

By the way, both Burris and Leopold were easy to deal with in getting scopes fixed. That's nice but does you little good out in the woods. I think that on any important hunt a fellow should not venture into the woods without a backup scope. Even if it's a little 2.5 power that will get you through the hunt.

Maybe it was about 15 years ago I remember Jeff Cooper going on endlessly of how unreliable modern scopes were. He spoke of a major design flaw being that the scope adjustments were internal instead of external. Don't know if he was right or wrong. I don't know why the modern rifle scope is not as reliable as the rifle it's mounted to (not in abuse but in normal use). It sure does seem silly that as the price of scopes has climbed (a heck of a lot), we have gotten better optics and better adjustments but we do not seem to get better durability. Something is missing here.

Anyway. Thanks for your thoughts.

I really have had very few scope problems through the years, the biggest problem I have encountered is poor clarity and failure to track or adjustment issues, I have had 2 that had a wandering zero, all on lower priced scopes. I suspect most scope problems are related to failure to use loctite and scope rings not being in perfect alignment. If you mount a scope and your zero isn't very close to the center range of your adjustments then it's almost certain you have an alignment problem. A fixed low power scope is always going to be more reliable, even the cheap ones are just about bullet proof. You just may have been unlucky enough to get a few bad ones.

i think more times than not one of the more over looked contributers to a scope failing over time is the scope base/rings set up. if a rifle's holes for the bases are ever so off and the rings maybe needed lapping, the combined problems over time will induce stress on the scope each time it is fired. that's why now a days you can't beat the burris signature zee rings with the inserts. it is self aligning and removes stress imposed onto the scope. just one thought on the subject and not meant to be the only factor, just one more variable that gets over looked some times.

You can't beat the Bushnell Elite Series at any price.

i think more times than not one of the more over looked contributers to a scope failing over time is the scope base/rings set up. if a rifle's holes for the bases are ever so off and the rings maybe needed lapping, the combined problems over time will induce stress on the scope each time it is fired. that's why now a days you can't beat the burris signature zee rings with the inserts. it is self aligning and removes stress imposed onto the scope. just one thought on the subject and not meant to be the only factor, just one more variable that gets over looked some times.

Way to go Jim! Makes a ton of sense. Not the only factor of course but it's really thinking through the possibilities. I've had 2 Ruger handguns where they did not quite screw the barrels on enough to the the front sight quite vertical and my 444 outfitter suffers the same lazy approach to gun making. Why not the scope mount holes too?

I have no ides how much of a side torque load it takes to damage a scope at the rings but it can't do the scope any good to be bent where it does not bend. It would seem that my preferred dual bases for scopes would put 100% of any problem right on the scope where as a single solid mount would better protect the scope. Sounds like the Burris mount is even a step up from that.

Almost 30 years ago I bought a new M-70 Winchester in 308. Put a used 3x9 Vari X 2 scope on it and literally shot the barrel out of the gun before selling it. In over a decade of hunting with it, some drops and much handling the zero never moved (with same load of course) unless it reflected work done on the gun. An no, I do not remember what mounts I had on it. Sure would like to go back to those days of scope peace.

Bill,

Good to see you back on the forum. I've not had any trouble with any of the Leupolds on my guns, for what it's worth.

for the record i have broken a couple of scopes while shooting, both on the same rifle with the same ring set up. first was a old simmons 3x9 about 8 yrs ago. now simmons did fix it promptly, but then i bucked up and bought a 3200 elite and put it on the same rifle (winchester ranger/model 70 in 30-06). broke that scopes rectical too in a few weeks.
removed the piece of junk aluminum see through rings/bases and put on a set of steel weaver bases and rings. no more broken scopes. since then i have leaned towards the burris rings with the inserts where aplicable, how ever i have no problems with any of my ruger factory rings and the scopes they hold. i don't know if that cheap ring set up i had on that old rifle did those scopes in or not, but i be willing to bet it played some sort of role.

Ive had 2 tasco's to break. 2 bsa's to break. 2 Simmons to break, 1 high end and 1 low end. Also 1 Bushnell and 1 golden ring scope to break. Most of my guns wear Burris optics and so far have proven bulletproof with no failures. I also never had problems from Nikon or Weaver. My dad has an old Redfield wideview with an oval type objective and that thing has been through alot and today its optics would make many high end scopes look like bargain bin optics.

Jason