Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44 new model

[T_Widdy]

About to be real unpopular....

After the "Why can't people accept...." post, figured what the hell I'll drop my new Maven.

1- I did not follow the scope eval test, only did the drop portion, did not shoot between drops, did not run through elevation and windage twisting
2- The gun is not proofed/bonded to chassis
3- I did not have an allen head to fit torque wrench for the scope ring screws, tight w small end of allen wrench
4- The ground may have been harder than suggested
5- I personally wouldn't put much in my own eval, will remount to different rifle and try again another time
6- Lots of variables unaccounted for
7- No I'm not selling you this scope (yet)


Tikka .223, Sportsmatch, Maven 1.2 at 100 yards
Everything was degreased and loctited on assembly 2 days ago.
Hand loads (amateur) 1st round 50gr varmit load
2nd round 77gr hpbt



I did two rounds of drop test (3x18 and 9 x 36), had a .4 mil right shift after the 1st set of drops.

(sorry for the ass crack)


Checked action torque (60ftlbs), ring bases as tight as I dared, ring screws hand tight via short end of allen wrench.
Rezeroed with different ammo (actually left it .2mil high rather than burn ammo) redropped as above. Again 0.4 mil shift to right

Let it Rain

Sleeping pad (3/8”) foam under a doubled up moving blanket on loose gravel. Guessing someone on here can tell me the exact weak point in my system w the consistent right shift.

There are two predrop (10 shot) zeros posted each followed by the corresponding post drop 10 shot groups.
The caveat is on the “predrop” 1 photo the three outside shots (top right, outside left, and one other) were the site ins, the 10 shots in the middle would be the “zero”.

I’ll swap the maven onto a tikka/KRG/Bravo and put the SWFA 3-9 off it onto the .223 and run a head to head when I get time

The scope didn’t move in the rings? You said you marked them. Hand tight with the small end does not seem enough.

 

[MidGAHunter]

@bluumoon do you have a torque wrench? I'd be interested to see you repeat the test with it torqued to spec. You clearly had a shift. Now, make sure the actuon is torqued, the rings are torqued, AND the scope is torqued to spec. Do you have a proof scope? That would help isolate the issue as well. Thanks for doing this!

 

[Montucky]

I’m a diehard Leupold fan but I chose the Maven 1.2 on a new little Ruger & absolutely love it….! Pretty impressed with how accurate the turrets are. Zeroing at 100 was the most accurate clicks per moa I have seen. Also they were out of ScopeCoats that come with the purchase & they just sent me one today. Pretty Impressed with quality & customer service so far……

 

[Bluumoon]

@bluumoon do you have a torque wrench? I'd be interested to see you repeat the test with it torqued to spec. You clearly had a shift. Now, make sure the actuon is torqued, the rings are torqued, AND the scope is torqued to spec. Do you have a proof scope? That would help isolate the issue as well. Thanks for doing this!

I have a torque wrench, but not the allen insert to fit the scope rings, will find one prior to retesting and check everything.

Will test the SWFA on the current rifle, pull and test on .223
Then mount the Maven on the Tikka/KRG/sportsmatch

Going to blow through all my reloads form this last week.

I wouldn't read too much into my "testing", basically someone said I/we won't do something and I said the hell I won't.

If anything this shows I need to "proof" my own system

 

[sndmn11]

basically someone said I/we won't do something and I said the hell I won't.

If anything this shows I need to "proof" my own system

That was me, good job

 

[ljalberta]

Great stuff bluumoon. Also, you live in some gorgeous country.

 

[Bluumoon]

Great stuff bluumoon. Also, you live in some gorgeous country.

Mesa Verde is the background.

 

[willfrye027]

I have a torque wrench, but not the allen insert to fit the scope rings, will find one prior to retesting and check everything.

Will test the SWFA on the current rifle, pull and test on .223
Then mount the Maven on the Tikka/KRG/sportsmatch

Going to blow through all my reloads form this last week.

I wouldn't read too much into my "testing", basically someone said I/we won't do something and I said the hell I won't.

If anything this shows I need to "proof" my own system

It feels really good to know your whole “system” is drop proof. I’ve realized I had ring issues, action torque issues, and even a loose prefit barrel issue from doing some drops. Now I feel like things are about as solid as they can be, it instills confidence.

 

[HighUintas]

@bluumoon that was painful watching your rifle bounce from 36" on the topside drops. If you get everything figured to where there's no shift after that kind of bouncing.... That would be very impressive.

I haven't watched too many drop videos, but the ones I've seen Form do, they don't see to bounce/hit as hard.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Nice @bluumoon keep it coming. Looking forward to more results.

 

[Bluumoon]

@bluumoon that was painful watching your rifle bounce from 36" on the topside drops. If you get everything figured to where there's no shift after that kind of bouncing.... That would be very impressive.

I haven't watched too many drop videos, but the ones I've seen Form do, they don't see to bounce/hit as hard.

Hopefully it was bc I put a bouncy pad underneath. I’ll do it over snow next time.

 

[Formidilosus]

Hopefully it was bc I put a bouncy pad underneath. I’ll do it over snow next time.

You will break scopes doing it on gravel. You want something like a golf course grass- it has some give. Wet, semi packed sand might be about right.

As for the scope/rifle, that is almost certainly something moving- should be from right side impacts.

 

[Bluumoon]

You will break scopes doing it on gravel. You want something like a golf course grass- it has some give. Wet, semi packed sand might be about right.

As for the scope/rifle, that is almost certainly something moving- should be from right side impacts.

I have some "grass", but the dirt is fairly compact underneath, I actually thought the gravel would be softer. How about snow over loose packed dirt with my same padding (Foam Pad and moving blanket) ?

Alternatively I have an Astral Dog bed, fairly stiff PFD foam, that is 5" thick. Wasn't sure if that would be too cushy.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have some "grass", but the dirt is fairly compact underneath, I actually thought the gravel would be softer. How about snow over loose packed dirt with my same padding (Foam Pad and moving blanket) ?

Depends on how deep the snow is.

Think about what is trying to be done- jar the scopes internals, or potentially show a bend if the tube is thin- but not snap eyepieces or turrets off. You do want severe shear forces, etc.

I good idea or sense of what is about right for a substrate is if you were to drop full body weight straight into your knees and just got up and brushed your knees off and went about your day- good. If however you dropping straight into your knees would cause you legit pain or injury- not good. Even with a 3/8” foam sleeping pad and a blanket on gravel, you drop straight to your knees full weight, and there is a good chance you will be seeing a doctor.

Alternatively I have an Astral Dog bed, fairly stiff PFD foam, that is 5" thick. Wasn't sure if that would be too cushy.

Actually that might work ok. If the erector gives that probably would show it.

 

[HOT ROD]

Well I guess the wonderful USPS has lost my scope. It has been sitting in Casper WY for 8 days now

U want me to run down and pick it up for U?

 

[kkp005]

U want me to run down and pick it up for U?

It went from showing still in Casper to being on my front porch in Texas all in the same day. Seems like a very nice optic. Now if I could just get my 6cm back from PBB I’d have a gun for it

 

[Macintosh]

Sure would be nice to have a specific universal surface defined, or at least a “proof” mechanism to define if the drop surface is too hard or too soft. Ie “if you drop an egg from 18” and it breaks, its too hard, if it drops from 36” and it doesnt break, its too soft”. Theres an awful lot of squishiness (no pun intended) in the various surfaces folks are using that, given the range of surfaces various people have used, could exponentially increase or decrease the peak force applied to the scope.
I am not an engineer, or a mathematician, but for many years I was directly involved in drop testing climbing equipment. What you see when dynamic drops are quantified is that as an impact becomes closer and closer to static, i.e. a true sudden stop, the peak force resulting from the same drop increases exponentially. The difference between super soft and very soft may not be as significant, but if people are erring on the harder side of a drop surface, a very small difference in surface will have a vastly larger increase in peak force. It adds a lot of slop to these online tests to not be able to say definitively if it’s too hard or too soft. I know the reason for not using a standard surface is to make it possible to conduct this test at a lot of shooting ranges, but I feel like defining something like a sheet of plywood or a hard pelican case or something “universal”underneath a specific set of padding would go a long way toward making this closer to “standardized”.

 

[PathFinder]

About to be real unpopular....

After the "Why can't people accept...." post, figured what the hell I'll drop my new Maven.

1- I did not follow the scope eval test, only did the drop portion, did not shoot between drops, did not run through elevation and windage twisting
2- The gun is not proofed/bonded to chassis
3- I did not have an allen head to fit torque wrench for the scope ring screws, tight w small end of allen wrench
4- The ground may have been harder than suggested
5- I personally wouldn't put much in my own eval, will remount to different rifle and try again another time
6- Lots of variables unaccounted for
7- No I'm not selling you this scope (yet)


Tikka .223, Sportsmatch, Maven 1.2 at 100 yards
Everything was degreased and loctited on assembly 2 days ago.
Hand loads (amateur) 1st round 50gr varmit load
2nd round 77gr hpbt



I did two rounds of drop test (3x18 and 9 x 36), had a .4 mil right shift after the 1st set of drops.

(sorry for the ass crack)


Checked action torque (60ftlbs), ring bases as tight as I dared, ring screws hand tight via short end of allen wrench.
Rezeroed with different ammo (actually left it .2mil high rather than burn ammo) redropped as above. Again 0.4 mil shift to right

Let it Rain

I had similar shifts on an almost identical drop surface. Packed gravel with a very thin case on top. It was a well bedded Tikka 6UM with a SWFA 5-20 in UM rings. It ended up being a slightly loose action screw from Permatex thread locker that didn't set up. Fixed that and it passed after. I'd bet bedding and higher action screw torque will help yours. That said, the drop medium was too hard, it wanted to break stuff for sure. My SWFA 5-20 still works fine (passed tracking and a drop test since) but the vertical turret is stiff now, and bent an aftermarket bolt handle. Grass/soft dirt and a bit more padding is the way to go.

 

[swavescatter]

There's a reason Form calls this drop "evaluations" and not tests.

A real test would involve slip tables and fixtures to ensure repeatability. ASD plots would need to be developed or MIL-STD 810 type tests would be run for both single event and lifetime reliability. I've done this type of testing before and it's cost prohibitive. You'd want dozens of scopes for each model, etc.

I'm not saying these evaluations are meaningless, but they require large grains of salt...

 

[atmat]

There's a reason Form calls this drop "evaluations" and not tests.

A real test would involve slip tables and fixtures to ensure repeatability. ASD plots would need to be developed or MIL-STD 810 type tests would be run for both single event and lifetime reliability. I've done this type of testing before and it's cost prohibitive. You'd want dozens of scopes for each model, etc.

I'm not saying these evaluations are meaningless, but they require large grains of salt...

In fairness, @bluumoon didn’t proof his system before and didn’t even have torque values on his rings. I really appreciate the work he did, but I’d take that with a greater grain of salt than Form’s evals.