Nightforce lately?

[Will16]

For which he offers no proof other than "tits across the back fence" from somebody who was probably beaten by a NF user. How gullible are you ?

He never said NF sucks you moron. Here you go again not actually arguing a point but just Flailing around because you don't like facts

 

[6.5-300 BEE]

The op Obviously isn't a bot. Does anything you say make sense?

Makes perfect sense to anyone who can analyze his vague, unsupported claims.

Were I NF, I'd be dragging these twits into court as their lies constitute slander and attempt to interfere with lawful interstate trade.

 

[AaronSkipDavidson]

Also the reason why I don't like Leupold is because of their high failure rate. The op and all most everybody here hasn't had a problem with NF not working correctly.

I'm not trying to defend Leupold here, but how did you establish that they have a high failure rate? If I look back through our data of 10s of thousands of completed projects, we are seeing comparable failure rates of the Leupold Mk5 and the Nightforce NXS. Statistically, I see no difference. However, from personal anecdotal experience, I've had to failures on hunts with NF NXS scopes. I've used the NXS on hundreds of trips, with only a dozen under my belt with Mk5 so I realize that the anecdotal data is meaningless.

 

[Will16]

Now we're back on track. bash Leupold with ZERO data to support internet BS.

Two of my Leupolds failing to even get sited in is proof Leupold sucks.

 

[bigngreen]

If you looked at the history of the NF Comp scope it had a very high failure to hold zero rate, so high there were all of the sudden 4-6 companies making scope checker bases so guys could check their optic to verify zero holding, all threads on those have been purged from the internet much like this one likely will, there is a reason.

 

[Will16]

I'm not trying to defend Leupold here, but how did you establish that they have a high failure rate? If I look back through our data of 10s of thousands of completed projects, we are seeing comparable failure rates of the Leupold Mk5 and the Nightforce NXS. Statistically, I see no difference. However, from personal anecdotal experience, I've had to failures on hunts with NF NXS scopes. I've used the NXS on hundreds of trips, with only a dozen under my belt with Mk5 so I realize that the anecdotal data is meaningless.

I'am not talking about mark 5, mk8 optics: they have proven to be great

 

[6.5-300 BEE]

He never said NF sucks you moron. Here you go again not actually arguing a point but just Flailing around because you don't like facts

really I quote what he posted:

• It's not the same company it was a few years ago. Massive turnover, poor customer service, and arrogance.
• They've traded precision for profit. Lost focus on what made them great.
• Their new lines (SHV/NX8) are substandard (returns) and other companies have improved/passed them in the at the NXS/ATACR price points.

If those are slams I've ever seen one.

ZERO evidence is provided to support any of this BS. Claims w/o evidence constitute slander.

 

[ButterBean]

The guys who came in 2nd place at mammoth used an NX8 and that wasn't an easy course on equipment. The guys who came in first for the non tough man competition one had an NXS the other a ZCO. I have an ATACR F1 and it's the most impressive scope I've personally seen. It's on par if not better than my buddies kahles. Much nicer and easier features to use than his SB PMII. Now I'm the king of "poor man" scopes so Comparing it to my SWFAs, bushnells, and nikons isn't really fair.

I'm interested in any specific complaints he has. I don't doubt his complaints are valid just narrowing down what the issues are. Thanks for the post.

I thought I was the king of poor man's scopes, I now see I have competition

 

[Will16]

When I say dot dot dot sucks I'am not talking about every single optic line they make. I'am speaking about the overall picture

 

[Deleted member 48126]

I'm not trying to defend Leupold here, but how did you establish that they have a high failure rate? If I look back through our data of 10s of thousands of completed projects, we are seeing comparable failure rates of the Leupold Mk5 and the Nightforce NXS. Statistically, I see no difference. However, from personal anecdotal experience, I've had to failures on hunts with NF NXS scopes. I've used the NXS on hundreds of trips, with only a dozen under my belt with Mk5 so I realize that the anecdotal data is meaningless.

not specifically with the mark 5, but as others have stated luepolds large offering of scopes their lower end have been prone to failure. Much like vortex diamondback failing now all vortex fail. Not saying that's where Will16 is making his claim off of, but I've seen that before. Or like a PST fails so I won't trust a razor gen II. Just another example.

 

[Will16]

really I quote what he posted:

• It's not the same company it was a few years ago. Massive turnover, poor customer service, and arrogance.
• They've traded precision for profit. Lost focus on what made them great.
• Their new lines (SHV/NX8) are substandard (returns) and other companies have improved/passed them in the at the NXS/ATACR price points.

If those are slams I've ever seen one.

ZERO evidence is provided to support any of this BS. Claims w/o evidence constitute slander.

Those aren't his claims you nut, that is what he was told by someone else and is the reason he is here for validation

 

[6.5-300 BEE]

I'am not talking about mark 5 optics: they have proven to be great

Will you are talking out your butt. If had any REAL experience with 100s of Leupold scopes as I have OR could post any validated statistical data you might be worth listening to. As you have neither, your credibility matches that of the OP ------ ZERO.

 

[6.5-300 BEE]

Those aren't his claims you nut, that is what he was told by someone else and is the reason he is here for validation

Will he is passing along BS w/o validation. Does he really think that this forum has validated statistical analysis of any brand of scope ?

Just a pot stirrer trying to slander what we all know are among the best scopes made.

 

[Will16]

If you looked at the history of the NF Comp scope it had a very high failure to hold zero rate, so high there were all of the sudden 4-6 companies making scope checker bases so guys could check their optic to verify zero holding, all threads on those have been purged from the internet much like this one likely will, there is a reason.

Good Manufacturers can have a bad line or two and bad manufacturers can have a good line or two. But when you sum up most of the things they make you can then make a statement based on the hole of there products