Now you're going to tell me that I should have chosen a RWD car since it'll be more reliable.
No, I'm going to tell you that you have limited reading comprehension skills because that was not my point.
And as the owner of an AWD car and a 4WD Jeep, I assure you that, if you keep your Audis, you will pay more to fix the parts of the AWD system when they wear out, than you would have paid for a FWD Audi drivetrain -- after you paid more for the car.
Worth the price? Well, a car wrapped around a pole in the snow is even MORE expensive than the maintenance, so probably yes. But if you think that, over time, no more will break on your AWD car than on a 2WD version, I've got a bridge to sell ya.
Finally something I agree with
Well, you changed your mind then, because you insisted that there was
no difference beacuse Leupold says there isn't.
The fact is, Leupold hardly makes any fixed scopes. For them to admit any difference would be contrary to their business interests. There's nothing scientific about that.
Again, there's surely nothing wrong with accepting a downside -- especially a small one -- because you want the upside. However, a belief that there is no downside is simply not reality.
And... if someone simply says, "Well, I want a variable, even though I don't know why, because maybe I'll want it at some point," they probably should factor in the downside.
Leupolds are well-made scopes. Audis, Subarus, etc. have great AWD systems and won't have the problems that an AMC Eagle did.
However, my 1987 Toyota 2WD pickup went a good deal farther, with fewer breakdowns, and a lot less maintenance cost, than the Subaru we've got.
Now the front-heavy Toyota with awful rear traction spun out on the highway a few times, and I'm lucky to be alive. I'll take the tradeoff, and I prefer a car with better weight distribution, AWD, ABS, and more modern tires than I had on the truck back in the '80s and '90s, even though all these things are more expensive to maintain -- sometimes much more expensive.
But to believe that the Subaru will require as little mechanical work in the long run as that simple old truck would be delusional, as a quick perusal of our household expenses over time would demonstrate.
I think that the most accurate thing to say would be: "Leupold's current lineup of variables is so reliable that, unlike the old ones, there's not much for an average hunter to worry about."
However, as Will Fennel says, the military does use fixed scopes, for average Marines, too, not just snipers.
One final note... For the rifle in question, I really like the "Frontier" version. The low-power, forward mounted scope really works, at least as I'd envision using the stubby little rifle, which is to say, out to MPBR for quicker shots. Past that, I'd rather have a longer barrel, so the muzzle closer to the target.
