Revic Acura RS25i Riflescope Review

[PanhandlePilgrim]

@Ryan Avery do you have a some kind of Venmo or even a gofunme account set up so the community can chip in? I'm sure if more people knew how to contribute ( or where) they would.

 

[NSI]

View attachment 647329

@Ryan Avery do you have a some kind of Venmo or even a gofunme account set up so the community can chip in? I'm sure if more people knew how to contribute ( or where) they would.

Scope Evaluation Donation

Getting several PMs about donations for more scope evaluations. If you want to send a scope to get evaluated we can do that but no guarantees it's coming back undamaged. PM me If you want to send a scope. If you want to donate to the cause, our PayPal is [email protected]. Make sure to put...

rokslide.com

 

[PanhandlePilgrim]

Scope Evaluation Donation

Getting several PMs about donations for more scope evaluations. If you want to send a scope to get evaluated we can do that but no guarantees it's coming back undamaged. PM me If you want to send a scope. If you want to donate to the cause, our PayPal is [email protected]. Make sure to put...

rokslide.com

Well I feel dumb. I didn't know that was there.

 

[safarihunter]

A bonded rifle is unnecessary. Education has to start somewhere. We needn’t chuck out the 80% we can do because the 20% we can’t is too expensive/time consuming.

-J

The bonded rifle is necessary (or else some other way to assure that nothing in the rifle will shift POI). If you don't have a rifle that is rock solid, then you are drop testing the entire system and not just the scope. That's why the review states "something moved". It's not a guarantee that the scope was actually the cause of the shift, since with an unproven rifle it could have been something else within the system that moved.

While there could be some value to drop testing your own entire system, that's not really the goal of a scope review (or scope drop test).

 

[NSI]

The bonded rifle is necessary (or else some other way to assure that nothing in the rifle will shift POI). If you don't have a rifle that is rock solid, then you are drop testing the entire system and not just the scope. That's why the review states "something moved". It's not a guarantee that the scope was actually the cause of the shift, since with an unproven rifle it could have been something else within the system that moved.

While there could be some value to drop testing your own entire system, that's not really the goal of a scope review (or scope drop test).

My assumption is that someone who is doing reviews for Rokslide would own a rifle system which does not shift zero when dropped. That would be known as a "proofed system" which could then have a single set of variables (optics + known good mount package) changed for a review.

The whole point of the firearms side of this site is to spread the gospel of reliable rifle systems before all else. It stands to reason that someone doing reviews for said site would own one or more of said systems.

-J

 

[MT_Wyatt]

My assumption is that someone who is doing reviews for Rokslide would own a rifle system which does not shift zero when dropped. That would be known as a "proofed system" which could then have a single set of variables (optics + known good mount package) changed for a review.

The whole point of the firearms side of this site is to spread the gospel of reliable rifle systems before all else. It stands to reason that someone doing reviews for said site would own one or more of said systems.

-J

I’d say that’s a pretty recent phenomenon. I’m going to disagree - but with all the vitriol (insert Leupold Mark 4 thread here) on this site lately, I do have to emphasize I’m not doing it because I’m into arguing with people I’ve never met on the internet - I can just tell by the manner in which you write we can actually disagree cordially. I just do not agree with the tone you’re striking here, but I DO partially agree with the end goal you’re looking for. The “community” isn’t cohesive on this issue, at all (again, mark 4 thread) - so when you say “community” it’s still a subset of members, albeit active ones. For the record - I’m all for the drops, the field evals, and learning. It’s been a huge change the last ~18mo.

“The whole point” is a bit strong in my opinion, as is the assumption on everyone on Staff writing optic reviews owning a rifle system to these proofed standards. The collective Staff here is a pretty big cross section (just read the staff 2023 gear info). Some people aren’t there yet.

Or are we doing magazine-style feature reviews here?

Your expectations and criticism don’t seem to align with historical reviews on here. Many of them aren’t overtly critical; the issues that are pointed out are typically worked in tactfully. I’ll admit I’ve read a few of them scratching my head, but I personally didn’t feel the need to light Robby or the writer up over it. There’s a big difference between a forum discussion like @Ryan Avery is talking about vs the front page stuff.

My opinion - we’re here sharing information and experience. A big thing in the past has been showing field experience and not just repeating what you’ve read or heard (not saying you’re doing that) when talking about and recommending gear, etc. That was almost a previous “wave” or focus like the firearms stuff is now. The absolute manner you’re framing this rifle stuff takes “ownership” of something no one really owns. Having been on here a bit, when I read you getting after staff or owners about it, I have to say it bothers me, enough to say something about it.

I don’t mean anything negative by it, I just think the expectation needs to be tempered a bit.

 

[northernalpine]

I thought this was a good review overall by @SNelson - The importance of certain features is going to shift from one person to the next with the exception being dependability. I’ve had one for a few months and have put a reasonable amount of rounds through mine in a variety of environments.

I’ll add this to the thread but feel free to remove, it’s an excerpt from a post I made on a different forum.

…I drug mine through the Big Hole valley for three weeks for deer and elk season in temps from mid forties to single digits with snow, NC deer season which included a few monsoons, and shooting competitions in TX, VA, and NC.

- super intuitive subtensions on the reticle
- maintained zero through 480 rounds of 300WM spread over ~90 days, 6x shots on animals plus varied distance 3-7 shot strings during closed competition use
- also maintained zero through four different airline trips, which is kind of a wildcard in itself from being tossed around in the pelican case
- turret adjustments performed to dialed MOA spec at 100/600/1000/1200 yards with box drill adjustments
- color contrast was on par or slightly better (subjective) to my NX8 2.5-20x when comparing at 20x side by side
- very little chromatic aberration or focal disturbance at edges at all zoom levels

- parallax took more tinkering than usual to get dialed in (probably me)
- eye relief is good but at max power (25x) the exit pupil is pretty tight; if I had an inconsistent cheek placement I could tell immediately

- furthest distance I tested was with 6.5 PRC@1377 yards, still had ~47 MOA of elevation travel left using a 20 MOA rail
- I haven’t used the custom BDC/yardage dial function as I was switching between two rifles and haven’t had the time until recently to start personal load development

**As an add on to original:
- I didn’t drop my scope, but I watched an airline worker launch my pelican case onto the load ramp, watch it fall off the conveyor from about 5’ and then then get tossed back on…no issue with zero outside of environmental effects at location
- the reticle isn’t super friendly to vertical alignment with a plum bob during scope alignment, but I am a Neanderthal in this regard
- it’s heavy (34.9oz), more than I prefer for hunting (subjective) but I hike around a lot

I think I prefer the lower zoom range of the NX8 for hunting but the Revic is pretty slick for shooting in general.