BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[Serious Hunter]

I like Leica. (I own a Leica 900 LRF green/black)

Teenage girls were amassing at my house this evening for a daughter’s birthday party and sleepover. So I took advantage of fleeting daylight to flee the noise, grabbed one of my bows, and headed out for evening deer. As I hit cruising speed (~ 55 mph) on the highway going out of town, I heard a weird clunk, and looked in the rearview mirror. What looked like a quail or something was flopping to a stop behind me in the opposite lane. Normally I avoid stopping for birds, cats, dogs, etc. along a highway, for the danger of getting in an accident or getting run over – but I decided to go back and look. I pulled off near the object – and it, still in the center of the lane, was not a quail – but my Leica rangefinder – at least the larger part thereof. Yikes! These things are not cheap! I grabbed the rangefinder – with obvious piece(s) missing, and looked down the road. About 50 ft away was another piece. I let a passing car go by – hoping it wouldn’t hit the other piece still in the road – and then went and grabbed it.

I got back in my jeep, put the two pieces together. I prayed. I knew. And then I tried to range a building across the highway. I got a blurred target indicator, and with another push, got a blurred range. I adjusted the focus on the eyepiece, and tried again. 37 Yes!!! GIG! I like Leica. I went on to chase deer in the fleeting light.

[Hammer1]

You're one fortunate person.
But you know what will happen. You'll break something else ,more costly, or you'll break some body part, most necessary, in a manner never heard of before.

I beleive it is called Murphy's Law :thumbsup1:

[Don Fischer]

I wonder if it worked if Leisc would have repaired it for free/ I wonder as some years ago a guy reported finding a Leupold scope, in a river I think it was. It was full of water and useless. Claimed he sent it to Leupold and they sent him back a new one. Not sure if thats true or not but its an interesting story.

[Serious Hunter]

I resist Murphy as much as I possibly can. (He was a pessimist.) In regard to archery hunting [however] - if there is any flaw in equipment, thinking, preparation, whatever, that flaw seems to manifest - and deer scamper to safety. Archery hunting is a good drill - gets the `bugs' out.

[ChesterGolf]

Don Fischer wrote: I wonder if it worked if Leisc would have repaired it for free/ I wonder as some years ago a guy reported finding a Leupold scope, in a river I think it was. It was full of water and useless. Claimed he sent it to Leupold and they sent him back a new one. Not sure if thats true or not but its an interesting story.

Leupold sent that story along with my VX-II when I bought it. They stated that the hunter found a Vari-X II but since they didn't make them anymore they sent him back a VX-II in return because the work needed on the scope was too extensive. All he paid was the shipping one way to get the scope to Leupold. Not a bad warranty or bad advertising. :thumbsup1:

[Serious Hunter]

Don Fischer wrote: I wonder if it worked if Leisc would have repaired it for free ...

I dropped a name brand camera (won't name the name) and wanted to send it back (it would take pictures but couldn't get it back together). First thing they asked me was if I dropped it. Then they said `sorry'. So I duct taped it back together - and have been taking pictures ever since, nearly without a glitch. Even though it still works - I sure think less of them than I do Leica.

(Besides, dropping a camera standing still from a height of about 30 inches vs. dropping from a height of 36 inches from a car traveling 55 mph on asphalt are slightly different `tests'.)

[Hammer1]

Duct Tape.. The Handymans Secret Weapon :thumbsup1:

[WesternHunter]

I have a name brand set of binoculars and I will name them, they are a set of 10X40 Zeiss Victory. Paid just under $1000 for them 6 years ago. Crisp, clear, and bright optics, in fact when focused right I can even see perfectly clear without my glasses or contacts, and I have an astigmatism.

While at the range this past spring I set them on the bench, after taking a shot I noticed they had dropped about 3 feet and hit on concrete. Fortunately they seemed fine. I later called Zeiss to ask them about the shockproofness of these binos and if they did build any shockproof into them. The answer was lacking, as the customer service rep would only state that the binos were not indestructable. Yes, I'm aware of that I answered, and went on to ask again what shockproof standards they build into their binoculars. Again, the rep put me on hold to ask an engineer and came back with the same reply "they are not indestructable!" Yes I realise that nothing is indestructable, I told her, but for $1000 I would have expected a better answer from Zeiss as you would think that they could answer a simple question without trying to cover their own behind. I guess they thought I wanted some warranty work done for free or something. Gee for what I spent on these binos I would expect the same service that Leupold would provide. If I ever loose these binos or they break beyond repair (because they are not indestructable :](*,) ) I will never buy another Teutonic pair of optics again. Since no American companies can offer quality U.S. made binoculars at a reasonable price, maybe a set of binoculars made in Japan are worth my money. I can no longer see spending more that $800 for a good pair of binos.

[Serious Hunter]

I sent my story to Leica ...

Mr. Filler,

We are very pleased that the LRF 900 has exceeded your expectations. Hopefully, it will continue to provide years of expected service. Thank you for taking the time to let us know of your experience.

Best regards,

Terry E. Moore
Vice President - Sport Optics
Leica Camera Inc (NA)
One Pearl Court, Unit A
Allendale, NJ 07401
(201) 995-0051 ext 218
(201) 995-9711 - fax

[Don Fischer]

I think I read somewhere that most of the lenses are in fact made in Japan. I'm not sure that even Nikon makes their own anymore. There's a very good article on optics by Randy Wakeman over on "Savage Shooters". It'll make you think!

In the meantime, Leupold does seem to be the king of service. Although I was a big fan of the old Redfields and their warrenty was every bit as good as Leupold. I realize their back but I think I'll hold off on them and make sure the new owners are as good as the origional. I'm not sure how Burris service is. I think it was Don Burris that worked for Redfield in Denver befor starting up Burris. I visited with him a short bit once, I lived in Greeley, Colo at the time, and the guy really turned me off. So I've never owned a Burris scope.

[WesternHunter]

Sloppy shop keeping and the EPA are what lead to the demise of the old Colorado made Redfield scopes. My dad always favored the older American made Redfield and Weaver scopes. However, I have heard that the sniper of all snipers - Carlos Hathcock didn't speak too well of Redfield's performance in Vietnam.

I heard a story about a guy who lived only a mile or two from Burris and walked his scope in for repair. Burris would not accept it from him, as they required that he box it up and mail it in to them insured priority mail.

About the older U.S.A made Redfields and Weavers, their lenses were manufactured in Japan. Not sure why, since Rochester New York had plenty of optical lense manufacturers at one time. Today most of Leupold's glass blanks for lenses are imported from both Germany and Japan. In fact Leupold has recently refrained from placing the "Made in U.S.A." lable on their scopes for fear that the state of Kalifornia will sue them for false labling, just as Kalifornia did to Leatherman.

I can't comment about Leupolds service or warranty repair. Never used it. In the 15 years since I've started owning Leupold scopes I have never had a problem with any of them.

With the exception of Leupold and Unertl, I personally think that in todays world that the German, Swiss, and Austrian optics are among the best, very few are making optics like these guys are today. But, my big problem with Zeiss is that it seems that once they have your money, they just don't care about you anymore. I think that's appauling, and unacceptable.

[Serious Hunter]

I shoot Leupold scopes that are perhaps older than I am (and I am, bummer, getting fairly old). One scope I trashed as the adjustment screws were evidently shot. After reading these posts perhaps I should have sent it in for service. Others are working fine.

[WesternHunter]

Not sure why Randy Wakeman doesn't favor friction lock windage/elevation adjustments. I prefer friction MOA adjustments to the 1/4 MOA clickers for the reason that I can make more precise adjustments for windage and elevation out over longer distances. I also have never had a problem with them moving out of adjustment over the long term either. Furthermore, basic fully coated lenses on a hunting rifle scope give me as much brightness as I can use in the field, multi-coated lenses just cost more and I see a need for them only if you want to pay more. Would rather save that money for multi-coated lenses on a good pair of binoculars than a scope.

The more the years go by in the field, the more I come to accept that a scope should be as simple as possible. No need for all the bells and whistles.

[Serious Hunter]

I agree with simplicity. Besides - it's all I can afford presently. My two rifles have fixed 4 x scopes. Bullet goes where crosshairs point. It's my job to get the crosshairs in the right place at the right time.

[Don Fischer]

WesternHunter wrote: Not sure why Randy Wakeman doesn't favor friction lock windage/elevation adjustments. I prefer friction MOA adjustments to the 1/4 MOA clickers for the reason that I can make more precise adjustments for windage and elevation out over longer distances. I also have never had a problem with them moving out of adjustment over the long term either. Furthermore, basic fully coated lenses on a hunting rifle scope give me as much brightness as I can use in the field, multi-coated lenses just cost more and I see a need for them only if you want to pay more. Would rather save that money for multi-coated lenses on a good pair of binoculars than a scope.

The more the years go by in the field, the more I come to accept that a scope should be as simple as possible. No need for all the bells and whistles.

I am not sure either but Randy certainly well thinks what he writes. I have two old Redfields with the friction adjustments. They are a bit tuff to zero but very precise. The click adjustmenrs work fine but best with adjustable bases. By the way, those old Redfields are my favorite scopes; a 2 3/4 and a 1-4x.

Come to think of it, the click adjustments are probally faster for long range shooters that adjust in the field. You don't have to move my adjustments very far to have maved them to much.