Arken in the House

[thinhorn_AK]

Nice cop out

Not a cop out at all. Im commenting on my experience with arken optics not playing the what if game about other scopes. If anybody is copping out its you. you seem to be taking it as a personal insult that I don't like Arken stuff which is incredibly strange.

 

[Bubblehide]

It is a sample of one, so coming to any conclusions would be premature at this point. However, the overall implication is that the Arken MIGHT (likely) be a reasonable low budget option, albeit not as durable as SWFA. Testing of a few more Arken scopes will provide more conclusive information.

 

[Tumbleweed]

Not a cop out at all. Im commenting on my experience with arken optics not playing the what if game about other scopes. If anybody is copping out its you. you seem to be taking it as a personal insult that I don't like Arken stuff which is incredibly strange.

I could care less if you like Arken or not. It looks to me like you have an axe to grind on this actually. Don't use them

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I could care less if you like Arken or not. It looks to me like you have an axe to grind on this actually. Don't use them

I dont have an axe to grind, I had a bad experience with Arken optics and choose to spend my $$$ elsewhere. I said just a few posts ago that people should buy whatever they want. Not sure what I've said that means I have an axe to grind. I stated that Arken failed the drop test and I agreed that there are other scopes that failed as well, I wouldnt buy those either.


If you have had good experiences with them, great, I had a bad experience with them and that will influence where I spend my money.

 

[Tumbleweed]

It is a sample of one, so coming to any conclusions would be premature at this point. However, the overall implication is that the Arken MIGHT (likely) be a reasonable low budget option, albeit not as durable as SWFA. Testing of a few more Arken scopes will provide more conclusive information.

I doubt the SWFA will do better. I would like to see this test on the EP5 as I see it more as their flagship.

 

[JGRaider]

I doubt the SWFA will do better. I would like to see this test on the EP5 as I see it more as their flagship.

A few years ago, Form used to post over on 24HCF. One particular test he did involved a Tract riflescope that was used, and had been passed around to various members of that forum to use/test prior to him doing the vaunted drop test, in which the Tract failed. About that same time, one was done on an SWFA, the 3-9x IIRC, and it failed too.

 

[Formidilosus]

A few years ago, Form used to post over on 24HCF. One particular test he did involved a Tract riflescope that was used, and had been passed around to various members of that forum to use/test prior to him doing the vaunted drop test, in which the Tract failed. About that same time, one was done on an SWFA, the 3-9x IIRC, and it failed too.

One can not say that SWFA “failed”. First, IIRC it was shoulder height. Second, there is no clue if the rifle action/stock/mounts held zero or not. That isn’t saying it couldn’t have lost zero- but it’s also not the damning evidence that you try to say either.


I wouldn’t trust someone doing a drop at all, with any scope unless they have proofed the rifle and mounts with a known scope by dropping and having no shift; the rife is almost guaranteed to lose zero, not just the scope. I have had plenty of people say their Vortex/Leupold/etc scope lost zero by dropping, and I always tell them “yeah, it probably did; however unless you have your rifle where it does not move at all, ever, in the stock, and your mounts and rings near permanently attached- you can’t say for certain that it was the scope”.




As for the Arken- it did not “do well” on the drops- it failed. However, once again people do not understand or deliberately refuse to understand that the drops aren’t just “drops”. When a scope works correctly and holds zero through all three drop portions- they don’t have failures later. I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m saying that in hundreds of scopes that “passed” everything in the eval and made to 3,000’ish rounds working correctly, I have not seen that scope fail later.

I have seen a couple different scopes that would hold zero on the singe 18” and 36” drops, but would sometimes lose zero on the 9x36” drops- that do work correctly and reliably for heavy use. But they are few. Will the Arken? Maybe. But we’re a long ways away from knowing that.


I would caution anyone saying “my scope is working great” after a few months/a couple hundred rounds; that their are multiple scopes that when new, that people that should know better said were “great” and “really fixed this time”. The Leupold Mark 6 is one of those- those scope are POS and almost universally regarded as such now. But the first year or two that they were out, people tried to crucify me for stating that they had issues. The Mark 6’s did “better” at holding zero than the previous models- but exhibited similar issues to scopes that people are here saying “did pretty well”.

 

[Formidilosus]

I doubt the SWFA will do better.

? There is a SWFA in the eval section, and they are one of the most known and proven scopes on the market.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have actually. I'm assuming you're referring to the drop test evaluation where the EPL4 performed extremely well surpassing by far scopes like the MK5 Leupold and Vortex Razor LRT?

This is not what the eval states or shows- your reading into it to say what you want it to say. Comparing any scope to the three scopes you mentioned doesn’t do much. All three of those couldn’t stay zeroed from car rides, let alone actually work.

Lol! You can't see the forest for the trees! There was a $5k scope that didn't pass. Are you saying it isn't high quality?

Are saying a scope that fails at it’s sole function is “high quality”? Yes, the $5k scope that I evaled was a junk scope. It doesn’t matter what it costs- that scope was a failure at every level. Price has shown no correlation with working as an aiming device- none at all.

 

[Formidilosus]

Which of about 99% of scopes out there seem to do. Most fail miserably and a few not so much and very very few that don’t. I guess it’s buy the Nightforce or nothing then…..

Ok. Let’s go with that line of thinking- “night force is the only scope brand that holds zero and works correctly” (it’s not, but we’ll go with it). What’s your alternative? Go with a scope that has a higher probably of failing to hold zero?

That’s an interesting thought- how do you juxtapose “I will consciously choose a scope that has known significantly higher change of failing and potentially wounding an animal”; with “I am an ethical and responsible hunter that will do everything possible to ensure a quick and humane death”?

 

[JGRaider]

That SWFA drop test was just as valid as the used Toric test that was passed around to multiple people before you got it. Once again, I'm not arguing your experiences, but after 51 years of big game hunting, and almost 400 big game animals killed (not including vermin like hogs), if I say my optics are working great so far, that's what I mean. I'm not going to speculate what may happen in the future, and I'm doubling down on my position that I won't base my optics buying decisions on any drop test done by anyone.

BTW, curious why you quit posting over on 24HCF?

 

[Formidilosus]

That SWFA drop test was just as valid as the used Toric test that was passed around to multiple people before you got it.

No- it’s not. Rifle and mounts lose zero when dropped and from vibrations. The rifle that I use on here is bonded from top to bottom- literally metal has to break for the rifle or mounts to lose zero, and it’s proofed with a scope through the drops before every scope evaled; then if the new scope loses zero, the rifle is again checked with the proof scope. The rifle and mounts are not in question when I eval a scope.
As for the Tract, what Toric was passed around to multiple people? The one on 24HR CF?

Once again, I'm not arguing your experiences, but after 51 years of big game hunting, and almost 400 big game animals killed (not including vermin like hogs), if I say my optics are working great so far, that's what I mean.

Have I stated that they aren’t working for you? Pretty sure I haven’t quoted you, said anything about you, or referenced you in any way with anything I’ve posted until now. And the only reason I did now is because I was brought up, and statements are being made by several people m that are nebulous at best, or outright incorrect and I am addressing them.

I'm not going to speculate what may happen in the future, and I'm doubling down on my position that I won't base my optics buying decisions on any drop test done by anyone.

Ok. Have I asked you to?

BTW, curious why you quit posting over on 24HCF?

Because it became more about arguing with a few people than about discussion. My focus online is narrow and specific- I do not care to waste my time. The equipment, gear, and use that applies to me is rather niche. I do not care about suitability of things for shooting deer in food plot or with their head under a feeder, nor about anything that relates to that. Mountain, backpack hunting and shooting is where my interest lies.

 

[JGRaider]

We will agree to disagree about the SWFA/Tract drop tests then, fine by me.

I'm not necessarily talking to you when referencing buying decisions made by drop tests. Many here argue that point, and IME it's ridiculous criteria, that's all.

There are very, very few people on the planet that shoot as much as you and your guys do. I think you would even admit that. What applies to you and your guys may have little to nothing to do with the average hunter/shooter.

24HCF can be a rough crowd. There's definitely many more idiots over there than their used to be. Can't say I blame you.

 

[rclouse79]

I clicked on this because I briefly looked at Arken the last time I bought a scope. Based on a couple of my posts that have been pulled recently, I am befuddled this slap fight was allowed to continue. I guess there are no tender snowflakes in this thread to make a report to the moderators. Carry on gentlemen.

 

[Formidilosus]

We will agree to disagree about the SWFA/Tract drop tests then, fine by me.

I’m not arguing or disagreeing, I’m actually asking which scope? I dont
know which you are referencing and if I have made a mistake I want to correct it.

I'm not necessarily talking to you when referencing buying decisions made by drop tests. Many here argue that point, and IME it's ridiculous criteria, that's all.

I would hope the drop portion in the eval is just one factor of a decision with an understanding that it isn’t specifically or only about a scope working when dropped- it’s also an indication of long term functionality.

There are very, very few people on the planet that shoot as much as you and your guys do. I think you would even admit that. What applies to you and your guys may have little to nothing to do with the average hunter/shooter.

That’s true. However, I try to tailor what I write to the use case of “serious backpack hunters” or whatever the tagline is. If I only went by my actual use and needs outside of hunting- yeah there’s like two scopes I would use. I hunted with 14 different people this year with between 4 and 10 days per person. Nothing crazy just normal backpack deer and elk hunts, and there was only scope that lost zero: the Leupold Mark 5. That rifle was being carried by someone and if they would have taken a shot over 200 yards, it would have caused a miss, under 200 a wound.
We check zero before the hunts, in the middle if a chance comes up, and after to see what happened. Just normal backpack hunting- and yet accounting for proper mounting, etc; it’s about a 50% chance that the zero has shifted a bit- sometimes a lot. The only scopes this doesn’t happen with are NF, SWFA, some S&B’s, some Bushnell Elite tacticals, and so far the couple of Trijicons.


I can not come up with an objective justification for choosing a less reliable scope; or better stated a scope with a relatively high failure or problem rate, over a scope that doesn’t have that problem rate. It would be different if there weren’t any scopes that truly worked, but there are, so I can’t justify using one that doesn’t.

Although I do not see the allure of the Arken as a hunting scope- it’s not especially light, the reticle isn’t great for low power visibility in broken terrain and low light, the “glass” is usable but not great, it’s kind bulky, etc; and for me- it’s made in china. Some people mind, some people don’t- I am one who does care when it comes to things that steer bullets, however that is for my own personal issue. I do hope it does well, and it does show that the excuse of so many people and manufactures about durability with scopes and dropping for instance- is mostly BS. $300 scopes should in no way be doing massively better than $3-5K scopes.


My prediction with the Arkens based on a small sample size and the limited use so far; is that their QC will end up being spotty- that is, some scopes will work out of the box, others will have problems in QC out of the box- which is already being relayed by people. However, if you get one that generally doesn’t have a major flaw, it will probably work for most people in how they hunt and shoot. Not ultra durable, but not ridiculously fragile either. Which is probably a decent place to be market wise.

 

[JGRaider]

I clicked on this because I briefly looked at Arken the last time I bought a scope. Based on a couple of my posts that have been pulled recently, I am befuddled this slap fight was allowed to continue. I guess there are no tender snowflakes in this thread to make a report to the moderators. Carry on gentlemen.

Great post........

 

[Tumbleweed]

This is not what the eval states or shows- your reading into it to say what you want it to say. Comparing any scope to the three scopes you mentioned doesn’t do much. All three of those couldn’t stay zeroed from car rides, let alone actually work.

As I recall the Leupolds had a much more dramatic departure from zero after the 9/36 then did the $400 Arken. That was my point. Yes technically they both failed your test. My scopes would never experience the level of beating that your test produces which for me creates value in seeing how much one can take vs. how much another will take before there is a loss of zero. The Arken did not fail as dramatically as others did.
Also, I don't recall reading that the Arken had lost zero from the truck ride. Thought it was gtg?

Are saying a scope that fails at it’s sole function is “high quality”? Yes, the $5k scope that I evaled was a junk scope. It doesn’t matter what it costs- that scope was a failure at every level. Price has shown no correlation with working as an aiming device- none at all.

We agree. I was trying to tell the other commenter this.

 

[JGRaider]

So you're on a trophy mule deer hunt on the Jicarilla and you drop your Nightforce, SWFA, Bushy Elite scoped rifle 3-4ft to the ground off of your shoulder. Are you going to check zero? Only a fool would say no.

 

[Formidilosus]

As I recall the Leupolds had a much more dramatic departure from zero after the 9/36 then did the $400 Arken. That was my point. Yes technically they both failed your test.

Ah, ok yes then.

My scopes would never experience the level of beating that your test produces which for me creates value in seeing how much one can take vs. how much another will take before there is a loss of zero. The Arken did not fail as dramatically as others did.

Yes, as written the Arken is a partial fail. It’s should be an absolute embarrassment that this Arken did so much better than the “premier” scopes from so many manufacturers.

Also, I don't recall reading that the Arken had lost zero from the truck ride. Thought it was gtg?

No, it has not lost zero since the drop eval.

We agree. I was trying to tell the other commenter this.

I’m mainly trying to be sure that people don’t get their hopes up too early, based on the start of the eval with any of them. The Trijicon Tenmile is very close to having 3,000 rounds on it and has shown no issues at all…. And I still caution people not to make blanket statements about them.

 

[Formidilosus]

So you're on a trophy mule deer hunt on the Jicarilla and you drop your Nightforce, SWFA, Bushy Elite scoped rifle 3-4ft to the ground off of your shoulder. Are you going to check zero? Only a fool would say no.

Or someone that knows exactly what the scopes will take. If, it costs me nothing to check- of course I would. If however given a NF or SWFA 6x or 3-9x and it happened as I was getting into position, I would take the shot because I actually know what they do with those impacts.