Cliff Grays Podcast with Aaron Davidson

[Jhconnected]

Most of those GW clients probably take the class as well because they know they need skills they don’t have and taking a class and paying someone to teach you also accelerates the learning curve.

If the alternative is untold hours at the range, reading of forums and watching of videos trying to emulate what you learned, failing at the range, huge cost of ammo, all the time involved, lots of frustration…the Gunwerks course starts looking pretty cost effective and fun.

Instead, take the course, pay someone upfront to teach you the skills, practice what you learned, and go hunt.

 

[Kimber7man]

I might actually listen to a podcast, thanks for sharing. 6 hour drive tomorrow and I’m curious.

I will say this, based on the posts I saw in the Rokstok thread…

I don’t know if this was actually stated, and in what context, but, a higher failure rate of Nightforce scopes compared to Leupold, completely contradicts what is seen in the field in rifles that actually get used. To the tune of hundreds of samples of each that I’ve personally seen/held/shot/diagnosed etc.

I am the furthest thing from a Nightforce fan. They don’t make a single scope with a reticle that I want to hunt with. I also no longer even own a single NF scope. But to compare their field reliability directly against Leupold, and claim the Leupold is more reliable, is flat out not what happens with guns that actually used in the field.

I’m sure the claim above was stated in a different context with a different methodology? Because making that claim on hard use hunting guns just doesn’t add up to match real life; at least in what I’ve seen. And maybe I just haven’t seen “enough” yet?

I’m late on this, but perhaps he’s only compared the Mark 5 to many NF scopes? But who knows.

The one thing to remember: Aaron saying Leupolds fail less than NF comes from his lab testing. It’s weird that in real life, many guys here have had issues with Leupold and others, that went away when they chose a scope that passed the drop eval. Think about that.

IIRC he switched from NF to the Leupold Mark 5. If the comparison is only to THAT Leupold model, he’s probably got data to back up his statement.

 

[Kimber7man]

Listened to the Rokcast with Aaron D on the way home from a hunt last weekend. I find Aaron's responses particularly refreshing in a world of PC and Corporatized non-answers.

The "cheek weld" conversation was great and I get annoyed by added weight for adj cheep pieces too (seekins gen 3, looking at you).

I'm still not a fan of the marketing that leads to people thinking they bought competence while having no idea of their odds at hitting a target at extended distances.

22 Creedmoor and other significantly overbore cartridge talk was of interest too. Seems to align with my admittedly very small sample size of the more modest cartridges being more predictable/consistent.

Disregard, I found it. Thx.

 

[JDMBEND]

Regarding Aaron and Gunwerks, I am guilty of “contempt prior to investigation “. Initially I thought he was a arrogant d-bag that marketed wildly overpriced rifles and equipment to stupid rich guys. I almost didn’t listen to Cliff’s, then Ryan’s podcast with him.
I found both podcasts very informative and entertaining. My opinion of Gunwerks and Aaron has done a complete 180 turn. To me he came across intelligent, articulate and very knowledgeable regarding business and the firearms industry. While we don’t agree on everything, I liked what he had to say. So much so, that in the future, I would absolutely do business with Gunweks.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I’m late on this, but perhaps he’s only compared the Mark 5 to many NF scopes? But who knows.

IIRC he switched from NF to the Leupold Mark 5. If the comparison is only to THAT Leupold model, he’s probably got data to back up his statement.

Are you trying to say that the Mark 5 is as reliable or more reliable optics than NF? Because that’s the opposite of what has been observed.

 

[JohnJohnson]

IIRC he switched from NF to the Leupold Mark 5. If the comparison is only to THAT Leupold model, he’s probably got data to back up his statement.

I guess it all depends on the mode of failure. If it's loss of zero then I flat out don't believe him. If it's some other scope issue (turrets, parallax, or illumination breaking) I'd entertain the conversation at least.

 

[Kimber7man]

Are you trying to say that the Mark 5 is as reliable or more reliable optics than NF? Because that’s the opposite of what has been observed.

No, don’t put words in my mouth. I haven’t ever owned a Mark 5, no idea how reliable they are.

 

[Castle Rock]

Are you trying to say that the Mark 5 is as reliable or more reliable optics than NF? Because that’s the opposite of what has been observed.

Davidson qualified that by saying that they don’t test for side impacts
I have enjoyed the two podcasts and don’t understand the animosity towards him

 

[Aaron Davidson]

Guys, despite what we've done at GW, I am actually the typical introverted engineer type. I try my best to understand how things work, and to be an open book. i'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, I think it comes from a lack of patience. Thanks for listening to the podcasts, I like the freeform rant format, lmk what you would like to hear more of.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

No, don’t put words in my mouth. I haven’t ever owned a Mark 5, no idea how reliable they are.

10-4. In reality personal sample size on Mark 5 scopes is probably a bit small to make an “asserted” comment like I did (I’ve only personally shot and used around a dozen of them). With only 2 being used side by side with my other scopes.

I can only go off what I’ve seen and used, and the units I used did not withstand the same field use as Maven RS1.2s, SWFA Fixed 6 and 3-9, and Nightforce SHV.

This isn’t a drop test of any kind, just guns being used 3-5 days per weeks for thousands of rounds and riding for thousands of miles in Jeeps and Pickups on harsh mountain and desert wash access roads.

Some scopes standup to that use case with zero issues. Some have catastrophic failures. Some have the usual symptoms including a wandering zero occasionally. The Mark 5 would be placed in that last category of “wandering zero occasionally”.

 

[Jhconnected]

Guys, despite what we've done at GW, I am actually the typical introverted engineer type. I try my best to understand how things work, and to be an open book. i'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, I think it comes from a lack of patience. Thanks for listening to the podcasts, I like the freeform rant format, lmk what you would like to hear more of.

I like the detailed technical stuff. I typically hunt out those episodes on the GW podcasts as well as others. But, I’m an engineer so that makes sense.

 

[Southern Lights]

Guys, despite what we've done at GW, I am actually the typical introverted engineer type. I try my best to understand how things work, and to be an open book. i'm sorry if I come across as arrogant, I think it comes from a lack of patience. Thanks for listening to the podcasts, I like the freeform rant format, lmk what you would like to hear more of.

I enjoyed the podcast and I think you just come off as very matter of fact.

If you're taking requests though...

I want a lighter weight rifle scope in the 20oz range that is dependable, FFP and has a decent reticle that works at low power ranges of 4-6X as well as higher end if needed. Preferably in mil/mil. A 4-12 or 4-16 with ~40mm objective. Exposed elevation (preferably locking) and capped windage.

I like your new reticle as it appears easy to see at low power ranges but also dialed up when needed for longer shots. If it was in a lighter/smaller profile scope I'd buy one.

I agree with your statements that a lot of products are designed by marketing teams and not by hunters. I'm convinced that Nightforce has a Department of Useless Reticles at Low Power that has to sign off on all new products they ship.

 

[nm.otter]

Thanks, Aaron.

I'd enjoy learning more details about your experiments with ring movement on picatinny rails.

 

[Macintosh]

Im part way through the podcast. I have mostly been a bit baffled about the hate—several of the assertions in this thread I think totally misunderstood a point, or reacted more to the way something was said, rather than the substance of what was actually said. I caught myself doing same a couple times (something like “that’s the stupidest &@$ing question ever…”, yet when the explanation came out it made reasonable sense—its my initial repulsion at his overreaction to a legit question that gets in the way of hearing the pretty reasonable explanation). I havent agreed with everything, but for the most part the explanations make sense to me and most of it comes off as pretty well thought out solutions to legit problems, ie his idea of a better mousetrap, even if the delivery is a bit excessive at times. I don’t own a gunwerx rifle and I likely wont, but I own a couple that have elements borrowed from them which I appreciate greatly. It must be a pretty cool thing to be able to create an entire ecosystem of products designed to all work together to simplify a task like shooting. Theres more than one way to skin a cat, and even if the gunwerx way isnt all my way, what’s not to like about that? Having had a hand in technical product development I can appreciate that immensely. I especially liked the comment about gunwerx customers having funded R&D for the entire industry. I really dont know the details of that, but I know its true in principle, from gunwerx and from every other innovative company out there that has had their products copied in whole or in part. Remember, in the big picture “R&D” often stands for “rip off and duplicate”, and before you know it someone’s good idea becomes the status quo across an industry. I havent gotten to the scope testing part yet, looking fwd to that.

 

[douglasfir]

I enjoyed the podcast. AD is obviously passionate about what he does and likes his customers, and that's never a bad thing. Cliff Gray did a good interview. I learned a few things, which is really all I can ask for. It's really good to hear a different perspective from someone whose views can't be dismissed out of hand.

 

[Castle Rock]

If I had money to burn I would buy the whole system, including the training in an instant.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

Gunwerks is the best!
Our customers are the best hunters!

That’s about as far as I got and turned it off.

 

[Kimber7man]

10-4. In reality personal sample size on Mark 5 scopes is probably a bit small to make an “asserted” comment like I did (I’ve only personally shot and used around a dozen of them). With only 2 being used side by side with my other scopes.

I can only go off what I’ve seen and used, and the units I used did not withstand the same field use as Maven RS1.2s, SWFA Fixed 6 and 3-9, and Nightforce SHV.

This isn’t a drop test of any kind, just guns being used 3-5 days per weeks for thousands of rounds and riding for thousands of miles in Jeeps and Pickups on harsh mountain and desert wash access roads.

Some scopes standup to that use case with zero issues. Some have catastrophic failures. Some have the usual symptoms including a wandering zero occasionally. The Mark 5 would be placed in that last category of “wandering zero occasionally”.

10-4.
I think my last Leupold was an old 2-7x33 with Premier reticle mildot that I used on a TC muzzleloader…. Did not see the need to buy a Mark 5 for T&E when the Klassik 3-12 has worked so well.

 

[deerhunter628]

Gunwerks is the best!
Our customers are the best hunters!

That’s about as far as I got and turned it off.

Would have you thought higher of him and been more interested in the podcast if he said we dont make a good product and our customers are terrible hunters? I would hope they think they are the best and think they have the best customers.

 

[Castle Rock]

Gunwerks is the best!
Our customers are the best hunters!

That’s about as far as I got and turned it off.

Nothing like being closed minded