Rifle scopes you'd love to see Form test

[ResearchinStuff]

Plenty of gravity. Low on dinero for fixing scopes damaged via drop test

If form damages it you're in the same situation.

I really, really appreciate what form and Ryan are doing for us here, but I also think it's essential that we each test our own stuff. If anything, these tests have shown that the weakest link varies, and if you're not testing your stuff to verify function you're not really increasing your systems reliability.

 

[Ram94]

Very cool, definitely tons of experience and woodscraft. Combine that with top tier gear and you can stack up trophy class animals.

…….you lost me

 

[TxLite]

So you would rather not know if it actually works?

I intend to use it like it’s meant to be used. I don’t actively go out of my way to push my stuff to its limits and see if it breaks. I appreciate the work and dedication that everyone involved puts into these field evals and enjoy reading how the testing goes. As I’m sure most here enjoy getting an idea of how their models of scopes perform without breaking their own

 

[ResearchinStuff]

…….you lost me

Yup, that was a pm.

 

[Reburn]

As I’m sure most here enjoy getting an idea of how their models of scopes perform without breaking their own

Respectfully, If thats what you have taken away from all these test you have missed the point.
A couple 36" drops shouldn't break your system. Especially not with a scope that shouldnt fail. If you do it onto a padded mat at 36" you shouldnt even scratch it. If it does break then it could have broken on you on a hunt. The rifle system is just a much prone to break as the scope. I am in the process of dropping all of my guns 3 - 36" just to verify they are good. It can be done without damaging anything.

 

[fwafwow]

But if you send it to Form to do the test, then we all benefit from the results!

 

[TxLite]

A couple 36" drops shouldn't break your system. Especially not with a scope that shouldnt fail. If you do it onto a padded mat at 36" you shouldnt even scratch it. If it does break then it could have broken on you on a hunt.

Fair point

Edit to add: my hesitancy probably stems from using garbage scopes previously that either failed entirely or lost zero while being babied. (Vx5, viper pst gen 1)

 

[Reburn]

Fair point

Edit to add: my hesitancy probably stems from using garbage scopes previously that either failed entirely or lost zero while being babied. (Vx5, viper pst gen 1)

Fair point
But you said previously which means your reformed. Good job on not acting out of emotion. Drop that shit like it's hot. Better to fail during practice and not on a hunt. I dont drop mine alot. 2-4 times total should expose any flaws.

 

[ARK_Ginger]

After you intentionally drop it a few times and your scope works you feel quite liberated from babying equipment. It’s worth it.

 

[grappling_hook]

I really, really appreciate what form and Ryan are doing for us here, but I also think it's essential that we each test our own stuff. If anything, these tests have shown that the weakest link varies, and if you're not testing your stuff to verify function you're not really increasing your systems reliability.

Great point. And furthermore, just because Scope Model XYZ passed this test when Formidilosus did it, that doesn’t automatically mean that my scope of the exact same model will pass the exact same test. Testing the one I bought is the only way to tell if I might have the rare dud on an otherwise excellent model— or alternatively, if I ended up with an unusually durable scope from a model that is hit-and-miss and maybe even failed when someone on this forum did it.

 

[JPeters218]

Those of you that have dropped your own rifles, are you doing it with your suppressor on? Or unscrewing it for the drops and then putting it back on. Because I am tempted to try it, but it feels like a bad idea doing it with the suppressor on.

 

[Formidilosus]

Those of you that have dropped your own rifles, are you doing it with your suppressor on? Or unscrewing it for the drops and then putting it back on. Because I am tempted to try it, but it feels like a bad idea doing it with the suppressor on.

I would suggest doing it bare muzzle. Not because of messing the treads up or anything, it’s that the suppressor is another variable that doesn’t need to be there for this.

 

[DangerRanger]

It’s also a royal pain in the ass to replace

 

[Reburn]

Those of you that have dropped your own rifles, are you doing it with your suppressor on? Or unscrewing it for the drops and then putting it back on. Because I am tempted to try it, but it feels like a bad idea doing it with the suppressor on.

Unscrew it.
Screw on thread protector.
Drop once. rescrew on can.
Verify its still in the cone.
Unscrew can and thread protector on
drop a couple more times 2 or 3 and then verify last time with can on.

 

[PompdUpFishin’]

I made a really long winded post but decided to keep this short and sweet. One of the main reasons Rokslide started was because of a scope review I read in a hunting magazine that was complete BS. I truly believe the drop test will change how scope companies make LR scopes. If you've been a RS member for awhile you will remember the backpack cliff test. I know that changed how some backpacking companies made frames because they told me so.

Right now on my rifles I am using two NX8 4-32, NXS 4.5-22 and two X5s. I have several other scopes but these are what I primary use for hunting. I would take any of these on a BC hunt.

IMO the companies above don't listen to the LR hunting community. That is why I think it's critical we keep talking to companies like Maven. They do listen and they can make the perfect LR Hunting scope or at least one that fills 90% of our needs.

Something else I wanted to address. I was sent a few links from other forums saying that I'm a NF shill. I've never gotten one scope from NF directly. I have paid for all of them. Lots of other optics companies pay RS for advertising NF is not one of them. So one could say its counter productive for me to use NF..... just saying!

Scopes I would like to see tested

Kahles 3.5-18
MK5 3.6-18 we have one on the way
Any ZCO
RS.5 retested
Riton 3-18
NF NX8 2.5-20


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much every “best rifles/optics” review I’ve read online or in magazines is complete and total BS. It’s almost always scopes that have no business whatsoever being on a “best” list, aside from maybe a best under whatever modest dollar amount list. I just yesterday stumbled across this forum.

 

[fwafwow]

Pretty much every “best rifles/optics” review I’ve read online or in magazines is complete and total BS. It’s almost always scopes that have no business whatsoever being on a “best” list, aside from maybe a best under whatever modest dollar amount list. I just yesterday stumbled across this forum.

Similarly - I stopped all of my magazine subscriptions, and I don’t read the ones still delivered as they run out. They are just long form advertisements.

 

[alpine_troop]

The just-announced Revic Acura RS25i scope ought to be on the test list. The product site says a Mil reticle is “coming soon.” Appears to be a THLR-style FFP reticle.
https://www.revicoptics.com/acura-rs25i-tech-specs

 

[ResearchinStuff]

Too bad its a moa reticle.

 

[alpine_troop]

Too bad its a moa reticle.

Right. It appears they intend to release a mil version too though.

At 35 oz 14+ inches long and 5-25x magnification range I still don’t think it’s “the” scope we are all looking for, but maybe a step in the right direction. If it works, of course.

And at its price and specs, personally I’d probably save up a little more and order a ZP5 THLR.

 

[Helislacker]

The just-announced Revic Acura RS25i scope ought to be on the test list. The product site says a Mil reticle is “coming soon.” Appears to be a THLR-style FFP reticle.
https://www.revicoptics.com/acura-rs25i-tech-specs

Not a horrible price point, especially if this thing is bombproof and the mil reticle is the same as the MOA.