Rifle scopes you'd love to see Form test

[ResearchinStuff]

the mil version will definitely be worth a test.

 

[dreamingWest]

Looks pretty good but I want to see a 2-10x40 or 3-15x42.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[6.5x284]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Drop that sexy biatch!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZAR EC]

I'm very intrigued by this one, as I have 2. A 4-20 & 5-27. There is lots to like when compared to my ATACRs (4-16 & 5-25 F1s) but the durability is still an unknown for me.

 

[Helislacker]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

If this eval goes sideways the entirety of SnipersHide is going to implode

 

[ElPollo]

Maybe this dates me and/or labels me as white trash, but that ZCO scope costs almost 10 times what I paid for my first car.

 

[BjornF16]

If this eval goes sideways the entirety of SnipersHide is going to implode

 

[Helislacker]

View attachment 598259

It’s all worth it though.

Worst case Ontario, Form is going to have an army of maxed out Credova users with bad cardio and freshly cerakoted 46lb Dashers headed his way.

 

[longrange13]

Any plans to test the new revic scope? Revic Acura rs-25i.

 

[Wiscgunner]

It would be interesting to see Burris XTR 3 would pass

 

[4th_point]

If this eval goes sideways the entirety of SnipersHide is going to implode

You might be right. I'd like to see a few ZCO samples pass, but will settle for just one to start. I don't own any, but have considered the 420.

This is just speculation on my part, but I suspect that a lot of ZCO and TT end up on heavy rifles (i.e. low recoil) so if warranty returns are low due to those applications then the manufacturer doesn't get much input for improvement.

Apparently there have been some ZCO with stiff parallax adjustments, but I don't know much about it. Just heard chatter. Might be excessive grease or some other simple explanation.

Broken parallax mechanism is a bigger concern. Not a ton of samples and all recoil induced (i.e. not impact) as far as I know. Don't know round counts but it doesn't sound like infant mortality.

The drop eval is an accelerated life test in some ways, so if there is a design or assembly issue with the parallax then hopefully it shows itself quickly.

 

[4th_point]

It would be interesting to see Burris XTR 3 would pass

+1. I'd like to see an XTR II as well. I think that they had a design or process change not too long ago. That sort of went under the radar. At least for me.

 

[Helislacker]

You might be right. I'd like to see a few ZCO samples pass, but will settle for just one to start. I don't own any, but have considered the 420.

This is just speculation on my part, but I suspect that a lot of ZCO and TT end up on heavy rifles (i.e. low recoil) so if warranty returns are low due to those applications then the manufacturer doesn't get much input for improvement.

Apparently there have been some ZCO with stiff parallax adjustments, but I don't know much about it. Just heard chatter. Might be excessive grease or some other simple explanation.

Broken parallax mechanism is a bigger concern. Not a ton of samples and all recoil induced (i.e. not impact) as far as I know. Don't know round counts but it doesn't sound like infant mortality.

The drop eval is an accelerated life test in some ways, so if there is a design or assembly issue with the parallax then hopefully it shows itself quickly.

I had debated between the ATACR 4-20 and the ZCO for a long time, I settled on the ATACR and it’s been a no headache deal that just works. That said, the ZCO has a better reticle at lower magnification than the Mil C and is more compact. If it survives the drop test and 3k rounds I may give it another look

 

[4th_point]

I had debated between the ATACR 4-20 and the ZCO for a long time, I settled on the ATACR and it’s been a no headache deal that just works. That said, the ZCO has a better reticle at lower magnification than the Mil C and is more compact. If it survives the drop test and 3k rounds I may give it another look

Good deal, thanks for the info. I am/was in a similar boat - ZCO vs ATAC-R.

 

[ZAR EC]

I had to send in my ZCO420 due to the elevation turret locking mechanism not engaging properly. I also had to send in my ATACR 4-16x42 as the parallax completely broke and the scope was unusable. I'm at an even score right now with both brands. Very quick and efficient service repair from both. I have 2 of each brand so not much of a sample but some data nonetheless.

 

[SwiftShot]

Burris Veracity PH Rifle Scope 30mm Tube 4-20x 50mm​

I want to see if the digital readout works with the ballistics app like it says.

Basically your supposed to use the app to upload your ballistics to the scope. Then you can turn the turret and the small digital readout inside the scope displays the yardage compensation. Ie range your deer at 615 yards then dial the turret to 615.

Burris Veracity PH Rifle Scope 30mm Tube 4-20x 50mm

 

[Helislacker]

Good deal, thanks for the info. I am/was in a similar boat - ZCO vs ATAC-R.

And assuming the ZCO works, I still think for most people ATACR + Tikka .223 (if they don’t own one already) or ATACR + more ammo wins most of the time. The ATACR works, and only if the cost difference between doesn’t impact their ammo budget should they go with the ZCO in my opinion.

 

[BjornF16]

 

[Helislacker]

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.

The thing with this is people need to understand that they’re testing their system, not necessarily the optic. Form and Ryan have put so much work into removing variables that most people don’t even consider. For instance, how do you know a .2mil shift isn’t from the action shifting slightly? What type of caliber are we shooting and how stable is the cone relative to barrel life? Do we all have confirmed bulletproof scopes that we can use as a control? How competent and consistent is the shooter behind the gun?

They’ve reduced and mitigated variables down to such a level that it’s possible to actually make informed choices on optics based on the results, despite the small sample size.

That’s not to say don’t drop test. Like you say, you’ll be able to see how reliable your system is and probably optic. But it’ll just be harder to nail down precisely what’s doing what and how.

That reminds me, I need to make a donation to their PayPal ammo fund. There is no way these guys should be out so much money for doing the lord’s work.