Looking for some advice on Rifle Scopes and Suppressors.

[HandgunHTR]

The man the myth the legend said he no longer uses them for hard use. since then everyone started poo pooing them.

It really doesn't have anything to do with Form. I don't want to put words in the man's mouth, but I am pretty sure the only reason he isn't using his is because he has been testing/using the prototypes of the S2H scope.

The main reason why people are turning away from them is due to the inordinate price increase. The other providers who get their scopes from LOW, Tract being the main one that I know of, had a slight price increase (around 8%), but Maven decided an almost 30% price increase was warranted. They are still good scopes, but they aren't that good. I can get a used NF for that kind of money. I can also still get a Tract for less than $1000 with my military discount. I know that the Tract that Form tested didn't pass his drop test, but the two that I have passed my similar test and have served me quite well. Of course I am not as hard on my gear as some on this forum are and it may just be a matter of time, and I really like the Eagleman reticle on my second Tract. If it does crap out on a hunt and cost me an elk or deer, oh well. I don't hunt for the kill anymore. If I go on a OIAL hunt, I will take one of my other setups (most likely the ones with NF optics).

 

[flyfisher117]

It really doesn't have anything to do with Form. I don't want to put words in the man's mouth, but I am pretty sure the only reason he isn't using his is because he has been testing/using the prototypes of the S2H scope.

The main reason why people are turning away from them is due to the inordinate price increase. The other providers who get their scopes from LOW, Tract being the main one that I know of, had a slight price increase (around 8%), but Maven decided an almost 30% price increase was warranted. They are still good scopes, but they aren't that good. I can get a used NF for that kind of money. I can also still get a Tract for less than $1000 with my military discount. I know that the Tract that Form tested didn't pass his drop test, but the two that I have passed my similar test and have served me quite well. Of course I am not as hard on my gear as some on this forum are and it may just be a matter of time, and I really like the Eagleman reticle on my second Tract. If it does crap out on a hunt and cost me an elk or deer, oh well. I don't hunt for the kill anymore. If I go on a OIAL hunt, I will take one of my other setups (most likely the ones with NF optics).

They’re definitely not $1300+ scopes or what ever they charge now. Hence why I said I wouldn’t pay a dime over $1000 for one.

There has still been a shift where they magically aren’t as good and people recommending against them. Which is silly. Of the scopes we have on the market and available today they’re still just fine. So if OP needs one go snag one used and start using it today.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

They’re definitely not $1300+ scopes or what ever they charge now. Hence why I said I wouldn’t pay a dime over $1000 for one.

There has still been a shift where they magically aren’t as good and people recommending against them. Which is silly. Of the scopes we have on the market and available today they’re still just fine. So if OP needs one go snag one used and start using it today.

The shift was when SWFA 3-9x scopes began to be regularly in stock at $600. When those were not available, the Maven at below $1000 was a good alternative. But the Maven at $1400 versus the SWFA at $600 is a no-brainer. And that availability was what drove Form’s change in recommendation, which everyone is now repeating.

 

[flyfisher117]

The shift was when SWFA 3-9x scopes began to be regularly in stock at $600. When those were not available, the Maven at below $1000 was a good alternative. But the Maven at $1400 versus the SWFA at $600 is a no-brainer. And that availability was what drove Form’s change in recommendation, which everyone is now repeating.

They’re good too if they float one’s goat. After 16 years of owning SWFA I no longer have one in the safe. Maybe that will change if they can figure out how to keep their 6x in stock.

 

[omicron1792]

The shift was when SWFA 3-9x scopes began to be regularly in stock at $600. When those were not available, the Maven at below $1000 was a good alternative. But the Maven at $1400 versus the SWFA at $600 is a no-brainer. And that availability was what drove Form’s change in recommendation, which everyone is now repeating.

I hear you.

I saw the shift when s2h scope became real and form said a few negative comments on the maven. I even asked about the shift a couple of months ago.

Post in thread 'S2H winter class 2026 observations and lessons learned'
https://rokslide.com/forums/threads...tions-and-lessons-learned.441862/post-4593719

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I hear you.

I saw the shift when s2h scope became real and form said a few negative comments in maven.

That’s an entirely different reason to not get the Maven, except for the whole six-month wait.

If I needed a new scope next week, a new SWFA beats out the Maven. If I needed a new scope next month, a used NF beats out the Maven. If I need a new scope next year, the S2H scope beats them all out (except that the SWFA will always be a great budget option).

 

[omicron1792]

That’s an entirely different reason to not get the Maven, except for the whole six-month wait.

If I needed a new scope next week, a new SWFA beats out the Maven. If I needed a new scope next month, a used NF beats out the Maven. If I need a new scope next year, the S2H scope beats them all out (except that the SWFA will always be a great budget option).

I agree with you. That’s why I’ve never bought one.

To me, that doesn’t explain why most that were always recommending the Maven changed their tune.

Seems to be more authentic to just say “Maven is a great scope, I just want to try the new S2H. It looks even better.”

 

[LongWayAround]

I agree with you. That’s why I’ve never bought one.

To me, that doesn’t explain why most that were always recommending the Maven changed their tune.

Seems to be more authentic to just say “Maven is a great scope, I just want to try the new S2H. It looks even better.”

I have used the Maven quite a bit and think it's a great scope.

People complain that the turret spins too easily. Maybe it does. I have had mine move a couple of clicks while carrying it, definitely not multiple mils or anything.

They also say the illumination sucks. I wouldn't know about that because I never put the battery in.

I also got mine under $1000, not sure I would feel the same at $1400.

I'm interested in the s2h scope, but haven't had a rifle I needed one for yet.

Dollar to value : it's hard to argue against the swfa.

 

[LongWayAround]

It really doesn't have anything to do with Form. I don't want to put words in the man's mouth, but I am pretty sure the only reason he isn't using his is because he has been testing/using the prototypes of the S2H scope.

The main reason why people are turning away from them is due to the inordinate price increase. The other providers who get their scopes from LOW, Tract being the main one that I know of, had a slight price increase (around 8%), but Maven decided an almost 30% price increase was warranted. They are still good scopes, but they aren't that good. I can get a used NF for that kind of money. I can also still get a Tract for less than $1000 with my military discount. I know that the Tract that Form tested didn't pass his drop test, but the two that I have passed my similar test and have served me quite well. Of course I am not as hard on my gear as some on this forum are and it may just be a matter of time, and I really like the Eagleman reticle on my second Tract. If it does crap out on a hunt and cost me an elk or deer, oh well. I don't hunt for the kill anymore. If I go on a OIAL hunt, I will take one of my other setups (most likely the ones with NF optics).

I think it has almost everything to do with his comments.

Form said it's good to go in the drop test and Maven couldn't keep it in stock.

Form said he quit using it. People start selling them.

It's a pretty direct correlation.

Their price increase definitely hurt new sales, but didn't affect current owners who decided to sell.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I think it has almost everything to do with his comments.

Form said it's good to go in the drop test and Maven couldn't keep it in stock.

Form said he quit using it. People start selling them.

It's a pretty direct correlation.

Their price increase definitely hurt new sales, but didn't affect current owners who decided to sell.

I agree completely.

One offhand comment about Mamba magazines being slightly superior to Waters magazines was enough to make Mambas unobtainable and Waters borderline unsalable.

People are buying $150 scope bumpers because someone saw a pair on a picture of one of his rifles, asked about them, tracked them down, and he said they were more durable than $15 Butler Creeks… and that might be important in a “must get this shot off” hunt scenario.

If Butler Creek came out with an option that was better than the scope bumpers, Form would try them out, use them hard, report on it, and Butler Creek would sell a ton of them. And the classifieds would be full of scope bumper caps for sale. (I will note that I sold my scope bumpers yesterday because I hate them. And they lasted less than five minutes on the classifieds. If Form did the same, the company would probably go out of business.).

The man’s following and influence is real and the only thing that keeps it in check is his personal integrity. Which he has in abundance.

 

[scaast]

Brakes are for sissies.

Oh, absolutely! Let's use that airtight logic to rewrite the guidelines:

Brakes: sissy
Recoil pads: sissy
Suppressors: Big sissy (be a man...go deaf)
Scopes, optics, and range finders: sissy...real men use iron sights and range estimation
Carbon fiber: Big sissy...real mean like heavy sh*t
Adjustable trigger: sissy...real men like heavy, sloppy triggers
Bipods, tripods, shooting bags: sissy...real men shoot offhand
Slings: sissy...carry that heavy POS

 

[packgoatguy]

I appreciate all of the feedback. I am new to long range shooting. I'm a bigger guy, so recoil doesn't bother me as much as it bothers others, I understand developing good techniques, and practice and being comfortable with your rifle is the most important thing.

My main goal is to use the 6.5 for deer in Minnesota, Montana and the Dakotas at reasonable ranges with the Leupold VX-5HD 3-15. As for the 7prc, I'm hoping to make that my Elk rifle and long range rifle as my skills develop. Maybe I am way off with my rifle line-up, maybe I'm getting close.

Recoil affects the movement of the rifle... regardless of the size of the shooter. The more recoil... the more potential for unwanted movement from your point of aim. There is a misconception about recoil that it is all about managing pain and thereafter not "flinching" because of it. Sure... the effect on trigger control is part of it... but only part. The physics at play dictate that the rearward movement of the rifle begins in the millisecond when the primer ignites and the bullet begins to leave the case mouth. That instant is too short of time for our brains to register and compensate for. Most of the recoil impulse has already happened before the bullet even leaves the barrel. So, in a perfect world... the rifle being shoved backwards into the shooters shoulder would travel in a nice straight line... in which case, the barrel would stay pointed at the intended target. However, in reality, the rifle encounters various obstacles during this rearward motion that can divert it from its perfect rearward path, and consequently, moves the muzzle off target before the bullet is in flight. The more recoil, the more this process is exacerbated. Shooters who feel they are good enough at shooting heavy recoiling rifles are in reality just getting good at keeping the rifle's ivevitable rearward movement as close to in-line with the point of aim as possible... but often they only truly master this from one or two comfortable shooting positions... and then they wonder why they missed a shot on an animal in the field when they had to shoot from a different shooting position that did not created the ideal geometry for the controlled rearward movement of the rifle under recoil.

 

[Formidilosus]

The man the myth the legend said he no longer uses them for hard use. since then everyone started poo pooing them.

Why post something not true? I’ve never stated I don’t use them for hard use (Inhave stated that I generally don’t choose them on my personally rifles much anymore). And, since the very beginning I stated that if the SWFA 3-9x was available I wouldn’t care at all about the Maven. The soft clicks came out within a couple months of them hitting the market. The reticle being a bit too thin on low power was noted around the same time- all of those things were stated by me. Nothing has changed except the Maven being near $1,500 now. The SWFA 3-9x is the best general purpose $600 scope on the market. Note: that doesn’t mean it will be forever the best $600 scope on the market- it can be improved.

To @Q_Sertorius point- I believe the scope bumpers to be the best option for scope caps currently available. The moment something is actually better, then it will be the best option and the scope bumpers won’t be. Give me BC caps that don’t break= wouldn’t give a rip about scope bumpers.

Ya’ll hear and read what you want to hear and read, and not what is actually stated.

 

[flyfisher117]

Why post something not true? I’ve never stated I don’t use them for hard use (Inhave stated that I generally don’t choose them on my personally rifles much anymore). And, since the very beginning I stated that if the SWFA 3-9x was available I wouldn’t care at all about the Maven. The soft clicks came out within a couple months of them hitting the market. The reticle being a bit too thin on low power was noted around the same time- all of those things were stated by me. Nothing has changed except the Maven being near $1,500 now. The SWFA 3-9x is the best general purpose $600 scope on the market. Note: that doesn’t mean it will be forever the best $600 scope on the market- it can be improved.

To @Q_Sertorius point- I believe the scope bumpers to be the best option for scope caps currently available. The moment something is actually better, then it will be the best option and the scope bumpers won’t be. Give me BC caps that don’t break= wouldn’t give a rip about scope bumpers.

Ya’ll hear and read what you want to hear and read, and not what is actually stated.

Sorry “serious” use.

Like above someone else had noticed the same trend.

 

[omicron1792]

Why post something not true? I’ve never stated I don’t use them for hard use (Inhave stated that I generally don’t choose them on my personally rifles much anymore). And, since the very beginning I stated that if the SWFA 3-9x was available I wouldn’t care at all about the Maven. The soft clicks came out within a couple months of them hitting the market. The reticle being a bit too thin on low power was noted around the same time- all of those things were stated by me. Nothing has changed except the Maven being near $1,500 now. The SWFA 3-9x is the best general purpose $600 scope on the market. Note: that doesn’t mean it will be forever the best $600 scope on the market- it can be improved.

To @Q_Sertorius point- I believe the scope bumpers to be the best option for scope caps currently available. The moment something is actually better, then it will be the best option and the scope bumpers won’t be. Give me BC caps that don’t break= wouldn’t give a rip about scope bumpers.

Ya’ll hear and read what you want to hear and read, and not what is actually stated.

Form. Answer my question on thoughts on pxt barrels please

 

[Formidilosus]

Sorry “serious” use.

Like above someone else had noticed the same trend.

Neat how you did not address the reality of the rest that I wrote. I believe this is the second time I have corrected what you wrote about this subject- why do you keep acting like there is some “ploy”?

The Maven RS1.2 is a generally reliable and durable scope- and it was one of only two that were available for over a year. The reason that “the trend” of people not being over the moon for the Maven is because the SWFA 3-9x is back available, the RS1.2 is long, it is $1,400, the reticle is a bit thin- but usable, the elevation turret is widely too easy to turn (later samples are worse than my initial pre production), the parallax turret needs a strap wrench to turn in cold weather, and the owner functionally said that Roksliders are silly or stupid.

I don’t think for very many people the RS1.2 was “the” scope in that power range people were looking for- it was and is a good placeholder, similar to the Trijicon Tenmile. Now that the 3-9x SWFA is available again- which I would proffer is a better hunting scope, and the ZT which is better at every single thing- and less money- than the R1.2; I’m unsure why it’s a surprise that people are choosing other scopes?

 

[Formidilosus]

Sorry “serious” use.

Like above someone else had noticed the same trend.

You skipped over the reality of the rest of what I wrote. I believe this is the second time I have corrected what you wrote about this subject- why do you keep acting like there is some “ploy”?

The Maven RS1.2 is a generally reliable and durable scope- and it was one of only two that were available for over a year. The reason for “the trend” of people not being over the moon for the Maven is because the SWFA 3-9x is back available, the RS1.2 is long, it is $1,400, the reticle is a bit thin- but usable, the elevation turret is widely too easy to turn (later samples are worse than my initial pre production), the parallax turret needs a strap wrench to turn in cold weather, and the owner functionally said that Roksliders are silly or stupid.

I don’t think for very many people the RS1.2 was “the” scope people were looking for- it was and is a good placeholder, similar to the Trijicon Tenmile.

 

[ckt3]

It does. Just put a bore guide through it first to check it for yourself, but it has adequate clearance.

Worst case, it self clearances

 

[Formidilosus]

Form. Answer my question on thoughts on pxt barrels please

I do not know what you are talking about.

 

[flyfisher117]

Neat how you did not address the reality of the rest that I wrote. I believe this is the second time I have corrected what you wrote about this subject- why do you keep acting like there is some “ploy”?

The Maven RS1.2 is a generally reliable and durable scope- and it was one of only two that were available for over a year. The reason that “the trend” of people not being over the moon for the Maven is because the SWFA 3-9x is back available, the RS1.2 is long, it is $1,400, the reticle is a bit thin- but usable, the elevation turret is widely too easy to turn (later samples are worse than my initial pre production), the parallax turret needs a strap wrench to turn in cold weather, and the owner functionally said that Roksliders are silly or stupid.

I don’t think for very many people the RS1.2 was “the” scope in that power range people were looking for- it was and is a good placeholder, similar to the Trijicon Tenmile. Now that the 3-9x SWFA is available again- which I would proffer is a better hunting scope, and the ZT which is better at every single thing- and less money- than the R1.2; I’m unsure why it’s a surprise that people are choosing other scopes?

lol again I get accused of acting like there is some ploy. Even though I have my Zero Tech on order. Even though I have been a fan of SWFA since MOa turrets and Mil dot reticles were socially acceptable.

Just calling it silly how in the course of a year it went from being a poster child to being a bad scope here in the forum. But yea I did agree in posts above about it being a silly optic at $1400 or what ever it costs now. And yeah I did get some of the O rings for my elevation turret after having it spin on me in brush this year.