Rifle scopes you'd love to see Form test

[fwafwow]

Appreciate the tangent and discussion. Thanks guys.

If there are manufacturers listening, and agreeing, I would hope and expect to hear from them. At least one manufacturer I communicated with recently thinks all of the testing is useless, heresy, etc.

 

[TX_Diver]

@Formidilosus

Any plans to test one of the new batch of SWFA 3-9s that just came into stock? I'm assuming you or your buddies had a few on backorder... Any reason to think they'd be less durable than the past ones?

I'm sure they're from the same OEM but being out of stock for so long makes me wonder if there weren't part availability issues or material substitutions that had to be made?

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus

Any plans to test one of the new batch of SWFA 3-9s that just came into stock? I'm assuming you or your buddies had a few on backorder... Any reason to think they'd be less durable than the past ones?

I'm sure they're from the same OEM but being out of stock for so long makes me wonder if there weren't part availability issues or material substitutions that had to be made?

I will of someone sends one. I don’t have any reason to be believe that they are any different.

 

[35WhelenAI]

As SDHNTR said, not a bad thing to be shooting off the bench similar to same way we shoot in the field. I guess front and rear bags are so yesterday they could never work today.

Looking forward to seeing more scope tests.

 

[mcseal2]

Are they in pic rings? If so, there's a good chance you could rezero with very few shots.

I'm with @fwafwow on wondering why folks are reluctant to test their own stuff or allow it to be tested. You could always run through the protocol yourself, it genuinely takes less than ten minutes and 7 shots.

What are the protocols? I did some looking on here just now and must have missed it. I saw Form's post on the drop height test of 18" and 36", but I don't think I'm on the same page as the 7 shot test? Please send me a link to the protocols if you can. If I think me and my equipment are capable of doing a good job of it I'd be willing to give it a try. I know my limits and won't BS anyone if I'm not the right person for the job.

I just saw the post from someone here asking about Huskemaw when looking at other forum threads and shared my experience with them. I have not been following this test long term and am pretty ignorant on the whole conversation honestly. I just shared what I've seen from field use, not any testing protocol.

For a little background on my situation, my 264 win mag and 300 win mag with Huskemaw scopes I've shot extensively to 600 yards, somewhat less extensively to 800 yards. I don't trust the bullets from my 300 to expand properly to much past 600 yards on game, they just lose to much speed for me to risk it. I shot my whitetail this year at 400 yards and prefer to get closer. My scopes are on an 8.5lb (300 win) and 11lb (264 win) hunting rifles with Talley and Leupold rings, not on rail mounts.

 

[sndmn11]

What are the protocols? I did some looking on here just now and must have missed it. I saw Form's post on the drop height test of 18" and 36", but I don't think I'm on the same page as the 7 shot test? Please send me a link to the protocols if you can. If I think me and my equipment are capable of doing a good job of it I'd be willing to give it a try. I know my limits and won't BS anyone if I'm not the right person for the job.

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

12). Drop evaluation. A correctly sized target is placed. On soft ground- standard grass range- a half inch padded shooting mat is placed down. The rifle is dropped once on each side (left, right, top) from 18 inches with a confirmation shot taken after each drop. Any shot that misses the sized target is noted. If it loses zero- that is a shot does not hit the sized target, then it is immediately shot on another target to check if the drop bound up the erector and if the recoil from the next round settled. If it does or does not, it is noted. Then the exact same procedure is conducted at 36 inches. Any errors noted. Then the scope/rifle is dropped three times on each side from 36”, for a total of nine drops for this portion and zero is checked. The total a out of drops from both 18” and 36” is fifteen (15).

 

[mcseal2]

Thanks, I'll give it a shot when I can. That's the information I was looking for.

 

[Billy Goat]

If there's interest I can offer up a Trijicon TR22G. Accupoint 2.5-10×56, green triangle post.

Not the reticle everyone would use, but it's the one that is gunless currently. SFP also.

Let me know if there's interest and I'll submit it.

 

[morgaj1]

If there's interest I can offer up a Trijicon TR22G. Accupoint 2.5-10×56, green triangle post.

Not the reticle everyone would use, but it's the one that is gunless currently. SFP also.

Let me know if there's interest and I'll submit it.

I'd like to see that one tested.

 

[prm]

I’m waiting for shot show to see if Trijicon offers anything new that fits my desires and be suitable for a test. Or anyone else I suppose.

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Figured there would be a NXS 2.5-10x42 review somewhere on here.

 

[eoperator]

Figured there would be a NXS 2.5-10x42 review somewhere on here.

I don't remember specifically where but I believe form described the nxs 2-10 as one of the most durable

 

[gphil]

Does anyone have any experience with the arken epl4? Ffp in moa and mil, looks like a usable reticle on low power, the glass is supposed to be decent, they claim ELD japenese glass but I believe they are a Chinese scope. They look like they are built heavy duty. they claim 23.7oz.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[Mountainrancher]

Does anyone have any experience with the arken epl4? Ffp in moa and mil, looks like a usable reticle on low power, the glass is supposed to be decent, they claim ELD japenese glass but I believe they are a Chinese scope. They look like they are built heavy duty. they claim 23.7oz.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

I believe that form has one or is getting one to test

 

[Dobermann]

At least one manufacturer I communicated with recently thinks all of the testing is useless, heresy, etc.

Call them out! Call them out!

 

[Dobermann]

Does anyone have any experience with the arken epl4? Ffp in moa and mil, looks like a usable reticle on low power, the glass is supposed to be decent, they claim ELD japenese glass but I believe they are a Chinese scope. They look like they are built heavy duty. they claim 23.7oz.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Lots of experience ...

Arkens come up in every YouTube shill video that gets "promoted" to me ...

 

[mj23polaris]

Burris xtr III 3-18

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

 

[mj23polaris]

Primary arms GLX 4-16

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

 

[jamesmc8]

@Formidilosus I believe you already have a Sightron S-TAC to test. If not I will have one freeing up soon that I can send in.

 

[Clark33]

I wouldn’t mind seeing a Burris xtrii or xtriii.