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

[mxgsfmdpx]

lol. Uhh like multiple a year. We back pack hunt in the snake area (hells canyon). Backpack hunted in Wyoming this year as well. I spent basically all of oct-nov in the woods just this year. Can’t get much steeper and gnarlier in the lower 48. Steep, deep, fluffed out etc. me wanting 25 power scopes, tuning rifles that can reach out and shoot something means I don’t hunt hard? I don’t have to prove shit to you but you have zero idea what I do or who I am

Was asking a genuine question. Nobody said that you wanting “tuned rifles” and one million power zoom meant you don’t “hunt hard”. Only person who said that is you.

 

[OSU Fisher]

Was asking a genuine question. Nobody said that you wanting “tuned rifles” and one million power zoom meant you don’t “hunt hard”. Only person who said that is you.

Well I replied to a post by you that said something like - be honest, how often do I kill things in steep broken country, and something like base on your description probably not many or at all.

How should someone take that?

Because I like well tuned nice rifles and a scope that goes above 15X means all of this. Cause that’s the shorten version of what I said before you replied. You have no clue what I do. Which is way more than the average or most here. I’m fortunate to be able to take off a couple months a year to hunt but I/we earn everything we get. I like hunting country most won’t touch. It pays off but it’s hard work.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Ok. Sure. There’s sorta some options but not really. I simply said I wish they woulda made it a little higher mag then all of the sudden people are jumping down my throat. If I don’t jump on some band wagon I’m not a real western mtn hunter blah blah blah. Just ridiculous. I can pretty much guarantee I hunt more and harder than a lot on here. Infact I usually don’t work oct-nov just so I can hunt. That’s fine is people want a replacement for that scope but what’s so bad with me wanting something? Anyways, I’m over this thread. Have a good one.

It’s all good. Mainly was saying seems like you got sone options already to nitpick over and those of us wanting a 20oz ffp have extremely limited options so far. Not really a band wagon thing as much as being frustrating it’s an ignored market. Yours may need refinement but it’s not ignored.

 

[OSU Fisher]

It’s all good. Mainly was saying seems like you got sone options already to nitpick over and those of us wanting a 20oz ffp have extremely limited options so far. Not really a band wagon thing as much as being frustrating it’s an ignored market. Yours may need refinement but it’s not ignored.

All good, just kinda pissed me off when a couple people were making accusations that were far from the truth because I made one short post saying I wished it woulda went to 24 on the top end and covered everyone’s wants. And get that but this new maven is still 26.5 oz and not super small, correct? so I guess I felt it’s still in that nx8 and alike market so I wasn’t sure what your really gaining by keeping it at 15x since it’s not super short and light

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Well I replied to a post by you that said something like - be honest, how often do I kill things in steep broken country, and something like base on your description probably not many or at all.

How should someone take that?

Because I like well tuned nice rifles and a scope that goes above 15X means all of this. Cause that’s the shorten version of what I said before you replied.

The question was in regard to using a scope in steep/broken terrain where finding animals in binoculars is difficult enough, let alone then breaking off the binos and getting a sight picture on the animal.

It was a question in regards to actually hunting with a scope not questioning how amazing you are; which you were very quick to let us all know.

Anyone I’ve guided or hunted with in the last 20+ years, has had nothing but major issues getting onto animals and making kill shots when using far too much magnification in a rifle scope. I’ve seen it hundreds of times. I’m a victim of it myself coming from competitive varmint shooting.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

All good, just kinda pissed me off when a couple people were making accusations that were far from the truth because I made one short post saying I wished it woulda went to 24 on the top end and covered everyone’s wants. And get that but this new maven is still 26.5 oz and not super small, correct? so I guess I felt it’s still in that nx8 and alike market so I wasn’t sure what your really gaining by keeping it at 15x since it’s not super short and light

Correct it’s not light so you probably were more spot on saying go ahead and make it more if already 26oz. You just caught our frustration that manufacturers keep jumping past what some of us are wanting trying to appease all and in the end none.

 

[OSU Fisher]

The question was in regard to using a scope in steep/broken terrain where finding animals in binoculars is difficult enough, let alone then breaking off the binos and getting a sight picture on the animal.

It was a question in regards to actually hunting with a scope not questioning how amazing you are; which you were very quick to let us all know.

Anyone I’ve guided or hunted with in the last 20+ years, has had nothing but major issues getting onto animals and making kill shots when using far too much magnification in a rifle scope. I’ve seen it hundreds of times. I’m a victim of it myself coming from competitive varmint shooting.

I’m not that awesome, I just hunt hard and difficult country and am fortunate to be able to dedicate the time as well. You asked I answered. So you’re a guide, and a competitive shooter. I guess I’m not the only awesome one… from talking to my friends who are guides, they see a lot of people who have the $ to be there and the $ for the toys but typically aren’t the ones who are practicing with the toys so it doesn’t surprise me you saw issues with them and that situation. But for people who spend a lot of time behind a rifle it can be a little different.

 

[OSU Fisher]

Correct it’s not light so you probably were more spot on saying go ahead and make it more if already 26oz. You just caught our frustration that manufacturers keep jumping past what some of us are wanting trying to appease all and in the end none.

All good. Glad we could hash this out in a normal adult fashion. I have multiple rifles that would love a reliable scope like your wanting. I guess I also took it being under the “long range hunting” portion a little to serious. Now a days I tend to build my rifles in the 8.5-10 lbs range and capable from 50 yds to 1k in the mtns. Still light enough to be strapped to my pack with all my gear but still shootable. After building a dozen or so rifles in the last 12 years I’ve found what I like but I understand it’s not what everyone likes. I also am fortunate to be able to shoot weekly which allows me to be comfy with something that may require more practice.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

But for people who spend a lot of time behind a rifle it can be a little different.

Agree 100%. And you are awesome. Have a great night.

 

[Dobermann]

Right. Now that that's sorted ... anyone else got any questions about the Maven?

 

[OSU Fisher]

Agree 100%. And you are awesome. Have a great night.

you too!

 

[Moose83]

Anyone in Canada picked up one of these yet? Curious as to the total cost to get one here so I know how much I gotta budget

 

[OSU Fisher]

Right. Now that that's sorted ... anyone else got any questions about the Maven?

Now that the drama is over… sorry. I do. How does the overall fit and finish look/feel. #1 reliability is at the top with a few things behind it. But… I have an atacr, nx8’s, gen3 rzr, a lot of mark5’s, couple athlons and have had others. I bought 2 maven rs3.2’s awhile back. Have yet to mount them. They are still sitting in the box’s. May sell them but I did pull one out and play with it. The overall feel was kinda cheap to me. The turrets, zoom etc just didn’t seem to compare to the others. I am interested in this new 1.2 for my light kimber and a couple others. Just curious on what’s others takes are. Obviously it can be looked past if it does its job. Thanks.

 

[4th_point]

Man, all that freaking effort by Mr. Avery and Formi to get Maven on board with this, and some want lighter and others want more magnification.

On a more serious note - add me to the list of whiners!

• I would rather have less features and lighter weight for less money - $700 to $800. An "updated SWFA 3-9x" as mentioned above. Perhaps that would get more product into the hands of new customers?
• I don't know many dudes that feel the need to spend $1200 for medium range hunting (they have and use SWFA, or heaven forbid BDC). This is really a medium range forum anyway, right?
• Those that do spend more than $1k, want more than 15x. No matter how good the image quality is at 15x.

My hat's off to Maven on this model. And to the impartial members willing to report on the good and bad. I remain cautiously optimistic. 14-16x is plenty for me - I have five scopes in that range to try in Q1, but I think it's like no man's land though. I chose them for my personal reasons but I think the 4-20x really does have more interest. I could be wrong!

 

[JCMCUBIC]

Picture below stolen from Form's testing results post for reference.

I like the reticle. The open dot and equal spacing should work very well for precision and bracketing. Love that Maven listened and worked to implement the reliability. I'll be supporting them when they're back in stock...wish I'd ordered earlier.

A question out of curiosity for any/all who use a reticle to hold windage (or elevation)... Do you prefer to have numbered markers, such as the 1/2/3/4/5 pictured below, or do you prefer an unnumbered reticle?

I'm not set on one or the other but in most cases I prefer unmarked if the design is clear enough to differentiate. A numerical reference isn't a bad thing, but unless someone isn't familiar with the reticle, it is unneeded. If someone feels it is needed, is it needed on both sides for windage?

 

[Marshfly]

I prefer marked, at least every 2. The last thing I want to be doing is counting while in the scope.

 

[Formidilosus]

Picture below stolen from Form's testing results post for reference.

I like the reticle. The open dot and equal spacing should work very well for precision and bracketing. Love that Maven listened and worked to implement the reliability. I'll be supporting them when they're back in stock...wish I'd ordered earlier.

A question out of curiosity for any/all who use a reticle to hold windage (or elevation)... Do you prefer to have numbered markers, such as the 1/2/3/4/5 pictured below, or do you prefer an unnumbered reticle?

Numbered, if it isn’t very clearly delineated. The SHR-Mil probably benefits from it. I don’t necessarily prefer it, however it’s obvious that lots of people need it.

I'm not set on one or the other but in most cases I prefer unmarked if the design is clear enough to differentiate. A numerical reference isn't a bad thing, but unless someone isn't familiar with the reticle, it is unneeded. If someone feels it is needed, is it needed on both sides for windage?

It is not needed on both sides. It is extremely common to have someone grab a rifle/scope and ask “what do the ticks mean”- having them labeled is a good thing. So, it becomes a conflicting desire to not have the FOV cluttered, yet have it marked so people can easily figure out with the marks are. The compromise becomes marking one side.

 

[Balderdash]

Picture below stolen from Form's testing results post for reference.

I like the reticle. The open dot and equal spacing should work very well for precision and bracketing. Love that Maven listened and worked to implement the reliability. I'll be supporting them when they're back in stock...wish I'd ordered earlier.

A question out of curiosity for any/all who use a reticle to hold windage (or elevation)... Do you prefer to have numbered markers, such as the 1/2/3/4/5 pictured below, or do you prefer an unnumbered reticle?

I'm not set on one or the other but in most cases I prefer unmarked if the design is clear enough to differentiate. A numerical reference isn't a bad thing, but unless someone isn't familiar with the reticle, it is unneeded. If someone feels it is needed, is it needed on both sides for windage?

As stated, for me it depends on the reticle. I generally don't mind them, but I find that I don't really need them either, and if given the choice I'd probably leave them off, especially on a hunting scope.

Might just be my brain-eye coordination, and I understand that such a subject will likely be highly equivocal, but it seems intuitive to me to look and immediately know where I'm at. Looking at the number almost seems like it takes longer.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Picture below stolen from Form's testing results post for reference.

I like the reticle. The open dot and equal spacing should work very well for precision and bracketing. Love that Maven listened and worked to implement the reliability. I'll be supporting them when they're back in stock...wish I'd ordered earlier.

A question out of curiosity for any/all who use a reticle to hold windage (or elevation)... Do you prefer to have numbered markers, such as the 1/2/3/4/5 pictured below, or do you prefer an unnumbered reticle?

I'm not set on one or the other but in most cases I prefer unmarked if the design is clear enough to differentiate. A numerical reference isn't a bad thing, but unless someone isn't familiar with the reticle, it is unneeded. If someone feels it is needed, is it needed on both sides for windage?

The numbers aren’t needed but when you’re scrambling in the field, building a position for a shot, and trying to get something killed before you lose your chance, it is handy to have the numbers there. One less thing to “think” or “worry” about.

I personally prefer the SWFA mil reticle for the horizontal and vertical hold indicators. I prefer this reticle for everything else.

 

[prm]

Speaking of clutter and design considerations. What is the reasoning behind 5 MIL windage before increasing size, or even having a 10 MIL marker? This reticle isn’t too bad honestly. If I were designing my reticle it would stop at ~3 MIL. That’s a lot of wind correction!

Count me as one of those who prefers, perhaps even needs, the markings. Just one or two so I know the pattern. I’m not very smart.