Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44 new model

[HighUintas]

I’m not sure how I should view this.

1. That rifle is ugly as sin, but that’s ok, it’s what’s on the inside that counts. I bet it has a great personality! . Just messing with you.

All this emphasis has been put on these scope evaluations by some members on here. So after getting the gold star from you know who, we have a scope that fell and shifted. What does this tell us? If your scope takes a hit, you probably need to confirm zero. Maybe this scope is LESS likely to have a POI shift than say a vortex LHT, but without there being a measurable way to tell just which impacts are “ok” and which are “not ok”, what value does the scope evaluations really have? I’m kind of thinking out loud here…

Btw, I have a 1.2 as well and the POI shift makes me sad.

You shouldn't be too sad about it. Other items in the system could have shifted. The scope in rings, the rings, the action in stock, mxgsfmdxs eyes, etc.

With my personal drop test, I bent the elevation turret and the thing still works flawlessly and also passed a tall target tracking test after that bend. I think they're solid. But to get the entire system rock solid and resistant to drops like that seems a pretty tall order.

 

[Ucsdryder]

You shouldn't be too sad about it. Other items in the system could have shifted. The scope in rings, the rings, the action in stock, mxgsfmdxs eyes, etc.

With my personal drop test, I bent the elevation turret and the thing still works flawlessly and also passed a tall target tracking test after that bend. I think they're solid. But to get the entire system rock solid and resistant to drops like that seems a pretty tall order.

True. But how does anybody see this and not say “a dropped rifle, needs zero confirmed”. Whether it’s scope, rings, rail, etc. Where do you draw the line in a drop? 20” ok, 24” not ok? 36” on a soft mat is ok, what about a firm mat? What about 40” on a soft mat? What about 24” on gravel? What about 12” on a rock?

A junk scope that won’t hold zero is a different story. I think vortex viper falls into that category.

I still like my maven and plan to have another one in the near future.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

My

Whose rifle is this??

My Tikka 22 Creedmoor.

 

[JollyRoger]

My

My Tikka 22 Creedmoor.

I’m not buying it… no orange? Not Mxgsfmdpx’s rifle! Those tiny dabs on the action screws aren’t cutting it! I’m calling the cops

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

True. But how does anybody see this and not say “a dropped rifle, needs zero confirmed”. Whether it’s scope, rings, rail, etc. Where do you draw the line in a drop? 20” ok, 24” not ok? 36” on a soft mat is ok, what about a firm mat? What about 40” on a soft mat? What about 24” on gravel? What about 12” on a rock?

A junk scope that won’t hold zero is a different story. I think vortex viper falls into that category.

I still like my maven and plan to have another one in the near

This is totally outside my wheelhouse. This is the first maven RS1.2 out of 6 that I own and have put through a ton of use that has had any sort of impact shift. This one in particular actually has the least amount of use by a fairly large margin.

I have regular update posts in this thread with use cases and round counts on two of them specifically. Still going strong.

I would think that if you ask anyone on this forum, @Formidilosus included, and they are checking zero on a gun/scope that falls from 4 feet high, directly onto the windage turret, with rock being what it lands on. Especially when heading out for a 10 day hunt and you have the opportunity to give it some checks. Can’t speak for everyone though just my guess.

 

[Formidilosus]

True. But how does anybody see this and not say “a dropped rifle, needs zero confirmed”. Whether it’s scope, rings, rail, etc. Where do you draw the line in a drop? 20” ok, 24” not ok? 36” on a soft mat is ok, what about a firm mat? What about 40” on a soft mat? What about 24” on gravel? What about 12” on a rock?

Ignoring the fact that the drop eval is not solely about zero retention after drops, but long term zero retention in normal to hard use- instead of pontificating and nearly always taking a contrarian view without any experience- why not test your gear and find out? A single afternoon with an open mind experimenting will answer more than all of your “questions” that you ask.

I’ll bet money the scope didn’t shift, unless it physically bent. One must proof their rifle as well.

A junk scope that won’t hold zero is a different story. I think vortex viper falls into that category.

A Vortex Viper is no worse at zero retention than then vast majority of “high end” scopes made. The LHT’s have nearly identical performance from impacts as Vipers- so are LHT’s junk?

 

[Wiscgunner]

True. But how does anybody see this and not say “a dropped rifle, needs zero confirmed”. Whether it’s scope, rings, rail, etc. Where do you draw the line in a drop? 20” ok, 24” not ok? 36” on a soft mat is ok, what about a firm mat? What about 40” on a soft mat? What about 24” on gravel? What about 12” on a rock?

A junk scope that won’t hold zero is a different story. I think vortex viper falls into that category.

I still like my maven and plan to have another one in the near future.

I think this is the entire point of @Formidilosus recommending people test their own system. It means nothing for someone to buy all the parts found on someone else's great rifle. As many have said the entire system gets a real test after a drop like that. However if you have tested your rifle then you will know if that drop was likely less of an impact or more of an impact than what you have seen in your testing. @mxgsfmdpx has tested his system and I would get felt this drop was outside that testing and needed a double check. "A dropped rifle needs to be checked" is not necessarily a true statement. Tipping over your pack in the grass with a rifle that withstands 3ft drops on soft ground doesn't need to be checked. A rifle that withstands tipping over on the bipod on grass probably should be checked for the same tip over on concrete, imho. In this case a rifle that passed a 3ft drop on soft ground took a 4ft drop on rock. outside the parameters of the confidence test.

​

 

[HighUintas]

True. But how does anybody see this and not say “a dropped rifle, needs zero confirmed”. Whether it’s scope, rings, rail, etc. Where do you draw the line in a drop? 20” ok, 24” not ok? 36” on a soft mat is ok, what about a firm mat? What about 40” on a soft mat? What about 24” on gravel? What about 12” on a rock?

A junk scope that won’t hold zero is a different story. I think vortex viper falls into that category.

I still like my maven and plan to have another one in the near future.

I know what you mean and I agree. Even if a guy drops his rifle from 3' on a pad and t doesn't shift, he should probably check zero after it takes a serious hit like that one did. I'm just saying it may not be the scope. It's really hard to tell in this case since the shift was relatively minimal. And it all depends on knowing your gear and if you've tested it for that condition.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I know what you mean and I agree. Even if a guy drops his rifle from 3' on a pad and t doesn't shift, he should probably check zero after it takes a serious hit like that one did. I'm just saying it may not be the scope. It's really hard to tell in this case since the shift was relatively minimal. And it all depends on knowing your gear and if you've tested it for that condition.

I don’t think the small amount of shift is insignificant.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Ignoring the fact that the drop eval is not solely about zero retention after drops, but long term zero retention in normal to hard use- instead of pontificating and nearly always taking a contrarian view without any experience- why not test your gear and find out? A single afternoon with an open mind experimenting will answer more than all of your “questions” that you ask.

I’ll bet money the scope didn’t shift, unless it physically bent. One must proof their rifle as well.




A Vortex Viper is no worse at zero retention than then vast majority of “high end” scopes made. The LHT’s have nearly identical performance from impacts as Vipers- so are LHT’s junk?

The drop test is a zero retention test. Call it what you want, you drop it, if it shifts, it “fails” and that’s the end of your test. A 36” drop isn’t a long term answer to normal to hard use, it’s outside the “norm” for a rifle scope as an aiming device. It is however a zero retention test. The incessant posts on here are always about zero retention and if a rifle holds a zero.

You have no idea how I hunt or test my gear, so not sure what you’re pontificating other than always attacking those that don’t agree with you.

Lower end scopes are known to lose zero and the person I was responding to was talking about a viper with a crosshair cant from shooting.

I know this drop test is your claim to fame, and you’ll defend it with great vigor and veiled insults, but this just shows that everything fails and there is no bulletproof setup. It’s a valuable lesson to anybody that uses that uses their equipment hard which the OP obviously does. If you drop your rifle, assume there was a POI shift until you verify differently. And it doesn’t matter what caused the shift, a shift is a shift.

 

[Formidilosus]

The drop test is a zero retention test. Call it what you want, you drop it, if it shifts, it “fails” and that’s the end of your test.

This is false. Have you actually read any of them?

A 36” drop isn’t a long term answer to normal to hard use, it’s outside the “norm” for a rifle scope as an aiming device.

Again- you have no idea what you are writing.

Have you read this?

Scope Field Eval Explanation and Standards

This will be about the “why” of the field evaluations- specifically the drop “tests”. Let’s have a thought experiment. Let’s say you have spotted a buck across a valley, planned and executed a stalk which when you get to the last little knob up ahead, will put you within 400-450 yards of the...

rokslide.com

It is however a zero retention test.

It is partly that.

The incessant posts on here are always about zero retention and if a rifle holds a zero.

Thats correct.. isn’t that the point of a projectile weapon?

You have no idea how I hunt or test my gear,

You have stated multiple times that you will not test your rifles, you have a buddy in this forum that has called you out publicly to do so and refused. Is that not correct?

so not sure what you’re pontificating other than always attacking those that don’t agree with you.

Quote a single post of me attacking “someone”. I very much will address incorrect or illogical points, but you will not find me attacking anyone, and I do not resort to passive aggression suck as “you know who”.

Lower end scopes are known to lose zero and the person I was responding to was talking about a viper with a crosshair cant from shooting.

Most upper end scopes also lose zero. And for people that have actually tested it, at about the same rate and shift.

I know this drop test is your claim to fame,

Fame? That’s the logical point- that I am seeking fame?

and you’ll defend it with great vigor and veiled insults,

Please quote in context an “insult”.


To “defend” it, one would have to have experience in it.

but this just shows that everything fails and there is no bulletproof setup.

Everything does fail. However you question that there isn’t a difference or that you can’t know the difference. That is false.

It’s a valuable lesson to anybody that uses that uses their equipment hard which the OP obviously does. If you drop your rifle, assume there was a POI shift until you verify differently. And it doesn’t matter what caused the shift, a shift is a shift.

If I shot rifle setups that I hadn’t tested, I would believe that too.

 

[Wiscgunner]

The drop test is a zero retention test. Call it what you want, you drop it, if it shifts, it “fails” and that’s the end of your test. A 36” drop isn’t a long term answer to normal to hard use, it’s outside the “norm” for a rifle scope as an aiming device. It is however a zero retention test. The incessant posts on here are always about zero retention and if a rifle holds a zero.

You have no idea how I hunt or test my gear, so not sure what you’re pontificating other than always attacking those that don’t agree with you.

Lower end scopes are known to lose zero and the person I was responding to was talking about a viper with a crosshair cant from shooting.

I know this drop test is your claim to fame, and you’ll defend it with great vigor and veiled insults, but this just shows that everything fails and there is no bulletproof setup. It’s a valuable lesson to anybody that uses that uses their equipment hard which the OP obviously does. If you drop your rifle, assume there was a POI shift until you verify differently. And it doesn’t matter what caused the shift, a shift is a shift.

I don't necessary agree that "it doesn't matter what caused the shift, a shift is a shift". Certainly a shift in the field is not wanted but what caused the shift certainly is valuable information that can help eliminate the shift in the future. Scope move in the rings? Glue it in the rings. Barrel cant in the receiver from sloppy threads and poor interface? Buy better. Action move in stock? Bed it properly or glue it. You really seem to be adamant that no one has any ability to interpret differences between what is tested and what just happened. If YOU cannot differentiate, that is perfectly ok. NO one will judge you for have zero trust in how you setup your equipment but they will judge you for brow beating everyone else to have your level of insecurity.

Of course testing hunting equipment does not provide a guarantee that I will get 16% off my car insurance and no one has claimed these tests guarantee wealth and sexual vitality either. No one says crash testing automobiles guarantee you won't die in a car accident but boy really have helped make cars safer to be in during a crash. If you are afraid to drop your own rifle so see if YOUR Loctite is cured or that YOU used enough torque or YOUR favorite brand scope can take it, then don't. Simple as that. Really no one cares if your rifle performs for you without testing for failure because there is simply no value in there. Most of us do care though, how other people did get their equipment to not fail so we can improve our setups.

At this point you are really sounding like those fuddy-duddies that lecture people who regularly shoot 1000yrds that anything past 100 is unethical because they personally can't shoot that far. Just because you can't get up the courage to test the limits of your system doesn't mean someone else isn't smarter for testing theirs. I applaud anyone and everyone that tests their equipment beyond normal use. This is ethical, logical and prudent behavior for people looking for success.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I don't necessary agree that "it doesn't matter what caused the shift, a shift is a shift". Certainly a shift in the field is not wanted but what caused the shift certainly is valuable information that can help eliminate the shift in the future. Scope move in the rings? Glue it in the rings. Barrel cant in the receiver from sloppy threads and poor interface? Buy better. Action move in stock? Bed it properly or glue it. You really seem to be adamant that no one has any ability to interpret differences between what is tested and what just happened. If YOU cannot differentiate, that is perfectly ok. NO one will judge you for have zero trust in how you setup your equipment but they will judge you for brow beating everyone else to have your level of insecurity.

Of course testing hunting equipment does not provide a guarantee that I will get 16% off my car insurance and no one has claimed these tests guarantee wealth and sexual vitality either. No one says crash testing automobiles guarantee you won't die in a car accident but boy really have helped make cars safer to be in during a crash. If you are afraid to drop your own rifle so see if YOUR Loctite is cured or that YOU used enough torque or YOUR favorite brand scope can take it, then don't. Simple as that. Really no one cares if your rifle performs for you without testing for failure because there is simply no value in there. Most of us do care though, how other people did get their equipment to not fail so we can improve our setups.

At this point you are really sounding like those fuddy-duddies that lecture people who regularly shoot 1000yrds that anything past 100 is unethical because they personally can't shoot that far. Just because you can't get up the courage to test the limits of your system doesn't mean someone else isn't smarter for testing theirs. I applaud anyone and everyone that tests their equipment beyond normal use. This is ethical, logical and prudent behavior for people looking for success.

Maybe fair, but I did buy this scope because of the reviews by RS members including @mxgsfmdpx and I’ve killed multiple animals over 800 yards.

My point is that some on here preach the gospel of the drop test like it’s the be all end all and the reality is, it isn’t. There are too many variables on a drop, rings, rail, stock, scope, torque values, etc. I stand by my comment. Drop your shit, confirm zero. I don’t care if you paint it with purple nail polish and torque to your special secret specs, a dropped rifle should be assumed to be an inaccurate rifle.

 

[Wiscgunner]

Maybe fair, but I did buy this scope because of the reviews by RS members including @mxgsfmdpx and I’ve killed multiple animals over 800 yards.

My point is that some on here preach the gospel of the drop test like it’s the be all end all and the reality is, it isn’t. There are too many variables on a drop, rings, rail, stock, scope, torque values, etc. I stand by my comment. Drop your shit, confirm zero. I don’t care if you paint it with purple nail polish and torque to your special secret specs, a dropped rifle should be assumed to be an inaccurate rifle.

I totally get the ignorance of those that think someone else’s system passing means their system will pass. However, there is much to learn from this on how to bulletproof a rifle system. ALL variables are able to be eliminated except the scope. Repeating procedures shows whether they are reliable or not. Putting gunpowder in a closed container will kill people every time…unless it doesn’t. Through extensive testing we have extremely repeatable results with making bombes that go off safely.

If you don’t believe unpredictable results can become predictable results then I suggest you stop shooting because at any moment everything thing you k ow and love could be destroyed in an instance because there is no way to get predictable results from so many variables associated with firearm ammunition.

I assume correctly you believe horseless carriages are safe enough for daily use without bursting into flames? Or do you do a full disassembly/reassembly and testing each time you drive to work?

I assume you have central heating and don’t think it needs a recertification every time the thermostat wants to kick on to avoid blowing up the house?

I assume you believe alcohol can be made for human consumption that doesn’t immediately cause death and blindness?

Do you recommend crawling under a truck to test the performance of a trailer hitch attachments to the frame before ever attaching something to the ball in the field? I mean we can’t assume its still reliable after all those potholes.


If a rifles is glues and torqued, hell, welded together and an aiming device is made to reliable take 50ft drops onto concrete and hold zero, would you still deem it “an inaccurate rifle” in need of verification if it fell off the couch 18” onto the carpet?

Obviously I am being extreme because you don’t even believe the logic train you are advocating but in fact there is a tolerance you are willing to accept in so many things even in a rifle.

I would wager even you wouldn’t double check your zero if your rifle fell 1” onto a new down pillow. So…there is an amount of abuse you feel is acceptable without test firing the rifle. And before you say it, yes a 1” impact with a down pillow is abuse, just acceptable abuse.

 

[Jimbee]

Anyone having ejected brass hit the windage cap? My Maven is in Sportsmatch T084 and frequently brass bounces back into the chamber. 6/7prc. Removing the cap is the fix. I'm thinking about grinding the cap down, just haven't brought myself to do it yet.

 

[NSI]

@Ucsdryder I’m not sure what industry you’re in, but are you familiar at all with the concept of an “AST” or accelerated stress test?

-J

 

[HighUintas]

Anyone having ejected brass hit the windage cap? My Maven is in Sportsmatch T084 and frequently brass bounces back into the chamber. 6/7prc. Removing the cap is the fix. I'm thinking about grinding the cap down, just haven't brought myself to do it yet.

Is that a 7prc case? Have you tried working the bolt faster or slower to see if it's more likely one way or the other? Perhaps you could shift the scope forward or rearward just enough to fix the problem.

 

[sndmn11]

Anyone having ejected brass hit the windage cap? My Maven is in Sportsmatch T084 and frequently brass bounces back into the chamber. 6/7prc. Removing the cap is the fix. I'm thinking about grinding the cap down, just haven't brought myself to do it yet.

Find a vinyl cap nipple thing before you start grinding and tape it on.

 

[Jimbee]

Is that a 7prc case? Have you tried working the bolt faster or slower to see if it's more likely one way or the other? Perhaps you could shift the scope forward or rearward just enough to fix the problem.

Yes, it's a 7prc case. It seems to cause issues fast or slow. I did move the scope forward with no improvement.

 

[Jimbee]

Find a vinyl cap nipple thing before you start grinding and tape it on.

View attachment 760153View attachment 760154

But then what would I do with my cap?