Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44mm SHR-Mil Q&A

[sndmn11]

@sndmn11 Are we using tunneling the same way? I had understood tunneling was when the field of view stops changing before you reach the end of magnification adjustment. Ive seen it most often on the low power where fov stops getting wider at (for example) 4x, but the scope magnification still goes down to 3x. You said “picky”, so Im wondering if you are referring to something different?

This was a boating forum and it was a random question—no one there is talking about the scope, it was something he had heard elsewhere (unspecified).

I think of it as a significant black ring around the FOV that changes size as magnification changes and that looks like seeing the interior of the rifle scope.

I perceive it in the same manner as the eye box because I haven't used any scopes that exhibit it terribly. So, my "tunneling" seems to be different than yours and most likely most people's definition. Regardless, I don't see my definition or yours, Cindy, and the kid didn't have any difficulty behind it either.

 

[Kimber7man]

BUNDLES ARE BACK....

 

[kodyshriver]

BUNDLES ARE BACK....

Yup, there went 1k I had no intention of spending this morning

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I think of it as a significant black ring around the FOV that changes size as magnification changes and that looks like seeing the interior of the rifle scope.

I perceive it in the same manner as the eye box because I haven't used any scopes that exhibit it terribly. So, my "tunneling" seems to be different than yours and most likely most people's definition. Regardless, I don't see my definition or yours, Cindy, and the kid didn't have any difficulty behind it either.

The only reason somebody would have “tunneling” issues with this scope at any magnification is if they don’t know what they are doing.

Either a faulty unit or user error would be the answer.

 

[willfrye027]

Did some field shooting with mine yesterday. Nasty uphill angle into the sun…scope seems to handle glare well enough. I’m liking the reticle. No issues with a fairly precise wind hold and the .5 mil spacing (.223 at 650 yards). Directly compared to my benchmark bushnell lrhs 4.5-18…optically they are similar, I prefer the reticle in the maven otherwise they feel interchangeable. Which is a good thing.

 

[cowdisciple]

Yup, there went 1k I had no intention of spending this morning

Yeah, I guess I'm all in on these. Bought a second one.

 

[Formidilosus]

I saw a question on another site about this scope, someone mentioned having heard this scope had a tunneling issue. Any of you folks who have used it, can you comment? I did not see any mention of tunneling in the eval, any feedback on this? @Formidilosus ?

There is no tunneling at all.

 

[Formidilosus]

Eval updated.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Eval updated.

Awesome!

 

[Mike D Texas]

I searched but didn’t see it answered but how much of the reticle is illuminated? Is it just the center dot or the entire reticle?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Jimbee]

I searched but didn’t see it answered but how much of the reticle is illuminated? Is it just the center dot or the entire reticle?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Just the center

 

[Formidilosus]

I searched but didn’t see it answered but how much of the reticle is illuminated? Is it just the center dot or the entire reticle?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Read the eval.

 

[Darryle]

For a scope that road around in a bed drawer for 6-8000 miles it looks remarkably well.

Anything unusual or extraordinary about how they finish these out?

 

[Dobermann]

Nope! Not when they are 4 miles long. Too much noise.

Here's the direct link to Form's eval post where he addresses visibility at low magnification, in case that's helpful: https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/maven-rs1-2-2-5-15x44mm-field-eval.338756/#post-3398781

 

[Formidilosus]

For a scope that road around in a bed drawer for 6-8000 miles it looks remarkably well.

Which one? The prototype that got the use, was wrapped up the entire time- look at the pics.

 

[Darryle]

Which one? The prototype that got the use, was wrapped up the entire time- look at the pics.

I did, it's not wrapped on the gas gun and I didn't think Ryan's 6UM rifle has been around 6-7 months. The reason I asked.

 

[Formidilosus]

I did, it's not wrapped on the gas gun and I didn't think Ryan's 6UM rifle has been around 6-7 months. The reason I asked.

These pics there when it was brand new without tape-






It did have a scope cover over it most of the time, because it was prototype. The first pic to Ryan-




And when it had tape, even with a scope cover, starting to look ragged-






Covered as normal-






There isn’t anything special about the anodizing. The scope was wrapped in vet wrap, and generally had a stretch cover over it.

The 6UM I referenced is mine here, and these were taken right now-

 

[Dobermann]

Love it that when Form wraps a scope in vet wrap, and uses a scope cover ... it still gets trashed. This is sooo much different from all those scope 'evaluations' out there where someone puts a scope on a mount, looks at their neighbor's house, and tells us they 'like it quite a bit' ...

 

[Formidilosus]

Love it that when Form wraps a scope in vet wrap, and uses a scope cover ... it still gets trashed. This is sooo much different from all those scope 'evaluations' out there where someone puts a scope on a mount, looks at their neighbor's house, and tells us they 'like it quite a bit' ...

It’s interesting to me when people say they’ve used a rifle or scope “hard”, or even “abused” it, and yet the scope looks brand new. Scopes are the most exposed item on a rifle and take more impacts and get rashed up more than any other part.

 

[Dobermann]

It’s interesting to me when people say they’ve used a rifle or scope “hard”, or even “abused” it, and yet the scope looks brand new. Scopes are the most exposed item on a rifle and take more impacts and get rashed up more than any other part.

What?? So lining up six scopes on a board that are sent for free, comparing their 'glass', saying which company you think are 'good guys', pointing out which scope you 'like quite a bit', not shooting them, and then sending them all back to the companies in good enough condition that they'll accept them after this 'T&E' ... isn't evaluation? Say it isn't so ...