Ruger Forum

ZommyGun · August 21st, 2012, 05:32 PM

I have a Simmons Pro-Air 4-12x40 AO/TT-1/8moa scope that is about 15 years old and now does not hold zero...

It has the Life-time limited warranty and Bushnell said send it in but they can't say if they will honor the warranty until the see it...understandable of course...

AND I have to pay shipping both ways which is $20...

As far as optical quality...it is fine by me...

So have any of you sent scopes in on warranty to Bushnell or anyone else for the matter for not holding zero...have them come back fixed...and stay fixed...

Also interested in the reverse...sent in...supposedly fixed... but not fixed or not stay fixed...

Is the scope worth $20 if it is solid zero with linear tracking and repeats settings accurately...YES...definitely...it already tracks and repeats extremely well and always has...but now it jumps...it'll still track/repeat/reset until it jumps again...

Only problem is I hate to waste time and money only to be frustrated with it when it comes back or have them tell me it was abused and no warranty or whatever else can go wrong...not to mention waiting for them to get to it...

What do you guys think...

lah2420 · August 21st, 2012, 05:57 PM

I sent one in and they just replaced it with the next model up. If I remember right, I sent it the cheapest USPS way and they only asked something like $7 or $8 return. Still cheaper than buying a new one. If it's not scarred and beaten up, I think they will treat you right. Most of my scopes are Simmons, because they are inexpensive and seem to work well.

ZommyGun · August 22nd, 2012, 06:47 AM

Thanks for the reply...

If I was reasonably sure it would come back fixed and stay fixed I would do it...the money for shipping is minor relative to the time and money lost in addition to the cost of shipping as a result of installing and trying to use a scope that turns out to be unreliable...that is really what I am trying to avoid...

I suppose I should just send it in...

MZ5 · August 22nd, 2012, 08:17 AM

My own personal thought is that there's little or no chance they'll repair it. They'll either replace it with a current model or they'll tell you it's not covered. So, if you're attached to that exact scope, my personal belief/guess is that you can choose between keeping it broken or not. Maybe I'm wrong, but my guess is it'll get replaced, not repaired.

ZommyGun · August 22nd, 2012, 08:55 AM

Thank you that is also very helpful...

I am not attached to the scope...it is a nice enough scope but too big/heavy for my 10/22 for off-hand shooting which is what I like...

I was trying to use it for general purpose accuracy tuning/testing of the gun itself from bench rest which did not work out due to it's intermittent "hop" to a consistent but 6-10moa elevation change...it appears to go back and forth the same two states...I could be wrong...but I don't think I am...

You guys have convinced me the send it in... thanks again...

Ruger Redhawk · August 22nd, 2012, 09:09 AM

Send it USPS. It's allot less expensive. One time I had to send a scope to Leupold for the same reason it wouldn't hold it's zero. I went to a UPS store and they wanted almost 20.00 to ship that scope. Needless to say I went to the PO and was less than half of UPS's price.

ZommyGun · August 22nd, 2012, 10:14 AM

Yes that is good advice...also if you go to a UPS "store" that is a independently owned franchised retail service center...you are paying a large mark-up...

UPS is cheaper than USPS 95% of the time but only if you go directly to a UPS shipping center or have a business that you pay for UPS daily package pickup on...

On a package that size UPS is only slightly cheaper than USPS Priority Mail...priority mail is faster...

For the average person you cannot go wrong with Priority Mail and the flat rate boxes come in very handy although the flat rate you are paying for weight that you probably are not using...cheaper to use your own box if you have the right size...

Bushnell requires that you include a $10 check or M.O. sent in with the scope...

All things considered...it's $18-25 total depending...

Its not really the $20 so much as the result... I am going to send it in and hope it's not money for nothing...which chasing warranties is usually a waste of time which is why I NEVER pay extra for any kind of warranty...

Since you had to send a Leupold in for not holding zero that goes right to the point...what good does it do to pay more for a Leupold if it doesn't hold zero...you can get that from any brand...lol...

You Don't get what you Don't pay for...

So when buying a "lesser" brand (assuming across the board similar size and features) what is it you Don't get when you Don't pay for the better brand...

If it is optical performance that is less important to me...

If it is reliability/durability/linear/repeatable that you DON'T get in the lesser brand then it's worth paying more for the higher quality...

Since this is the only scope I have ever had in 50+ years of having rifles I really don't have a depth of knowledge having learned the hard way...lol...

Still interested in all opinions related to that whole "quality" thing and what you get or more importantly DON'T get in a scope for your $$$....

Thanks... ZG

Ruger Redhawk · August 22nd, 2012, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZommyGun

Since you had to send a Leupold in for not holding zero that goes right to the point...what good does it do to pay more for a Leupold if it doesn't hold zero...you can get that from any brand...lol...

Actually I didn't realize this was going to be a debate about better scopes and the lower end scopes.
I have several of the original Redfields and quite a few Leupolds. This was the first scope I ever had a problem with. To be honest since I got the scope back all I've done was mounted it on a new rifle and have never taken it to the range. I'm sure Leupold fixed it with their reputation. I can assure you you'll have more problems with a lower end scopes than you will with a better scopes. I have two friends that had Simmons. The one may still have. Both their scopes ended up going back because the crosshairs came loose.