theres been alot of talk about the quality of redfield scopes since they have been bought by leupold...has anyone actually had a

[scratchgolf72]

theres been alot of talk about the quality of redfield scopes since they have been bought by leupold...has anyone actually had a redfield in a torture test, can it stand up to all the abuse a good leupold can and still mantain its zero? ive heard many stories about leupolds being knocked around, dropped, and tortured on hunting trips and still performing, but havent heard any testaments to the redfields other then "they are made in the leupold factory so they have to be good". anybody here have some insight as to how durable the new ones are?

[iloveguns22]

While a true fan of Leupold, a Redfield scope made at the Leupold plant will give comparable quality for a lot less money.- Sourdough Dave

[iloveguns22]

If possible get a Leupold, but a Redfield is good if it suits your budget better.- iron giant

[iloveguns22]

I personally haven't had the opportunity to own either, but I've only heard good things.

[99explorer]

Durability should be identical to the Leupold, because the only difference in manufacturing quality is:
1. The Redfield has less polishing of the tube.
2. It is not multi-coated on all elements, resulting in a 1.5 to 2% loss in light transmission, and
3. Nitrogen gas is used rather than the more expensive argon, which saves on manufacturing cost.

[Sourdough Dave]

I took a fall one elk hunt and knocked my leupold out of zero. It cost me a shot at an elk. I've yet to take a fall with my redfield and hopefully won't. Any scope can be knocked out of zero by the mishaps of hunting. I was banged up by that fall too. I'd be just as happy to avoid the abuse to both me and my scope.

[scratchgolf72]

agree with everybody that none of us intentionally try to injure are gear, but stuff does happen...i am 100% a leupold man, but if these redfields are just as good and dont cost $400 why not try one.

[shane]

It's not just as good as a Leupold. You get what you pay for. The big deal with Redfields is that they are a Made in USA scope that is cheap and decent. That didn't exist a few years ago.

[Moose1980]

I put one one my Ruger M77 on my .338 win mag for my moose hunt last year. I put 60 rounds through the gun at the range and the 61st came after 6 days of running around the Maine woods, through bogs and clear cuts and driving over 300 miles of very bad logging roads. No, its not a torture test, but it worked. Good enough that I've begun swapping out my other scopes for the Redfield.

[WA Mtnhunter]

If I were in the market for a cheap scope, the Redfield would be worthy of a look. But since I'm not, I'll pass.

[99explorer]

It seems to be just the thing for a budget-minded shooter who doesn't need that last ounce of perfection for everyday hunting conditions. A good solid dependable scope made in the U.S.A. with a great warranty at a reasonable price.

[RES1956]

Ditto WAM. I'd rather spend the extra $100 for a Leupold and not have to wonder,,,,

[DakotaMan]

I carried an OLD 1965 Redfield 3-9x on my main 25-06 hunting rifle for nearly 15 years. It was dropped in the water, down hill sides, on the concrete range floor, etc. and I don't think I had to re-zero it for at least 10 years and I shot about 5000 rounds a year from that rifle. I finally dropped it on an asphalt road when I slammed the emergency brake on and jumped out of the truck doing about 20 mph (thought I was stopped) to chase after a coyote that ran across the road right in front of me. That Redfield was a goner... bent tube with a chunk out of the bell! Missed the coyote too!

I don't think the new Redfields are quite that good but they have't been on the planet long enough to know for sure unless someone wants to intentially beat the daylights out of their prized scope to find out. Since then I've used Leopolds and have NEVER had to re-zero for any reason over the last 30 years other than switching ammo. I've tortured them too... the worst being a few years ago, when I dropped my rifle/Leupold about 20 feet with no scope problem. I did fire a test shot to be sure it wasn't bent but as I suspected... it was a Leupold and was right on. If you don't hunt hard, run up and down mountains and you don't fall as much as I do, I am sure a Redfield would be just fine now that Leupold is making them. A person really should't torture a rifle scope the way I have but I hunt hard and want a Leuopold so I can keep hunting when **it happens. By the way, I use good mounts too.

[scratchgolf72]

ill just stick with the leupolds...no reason to take the chance i suppose.

[WA Mtnhunter]

Good bases and rings are the important link between the scope and rifle. Cheap or poorly designed and incorrectly installed mounts are the root cause of many shooting ills.