Rifle scopes you'd love to see Form test

[Ryan Avery]

Can you provide links, for both?

Another scope manufacturer was throwing scopes off of the roof of their HQ or adjacent building. But that petered out for reasons that I am not privy to.

That stated, throwing a scope on the ground doesn't tell us much. Unless it's an obvious fail.

When I was doing product dev, we didn't have a drop requirement, but did it anyway with production representative models. This was considered severe abuse, but we used it for advertising. And customers expected it, but it was simply due to over-engineered products setting an unrealistic expectation in the past.

I left that industry, but now have clients that do drop tests for Hi-Rel and MIL-STD. I make sure that they don't make unfounded claims. You'd be surprised how many don't understand the complexity of a drop test.

It was a question.

I haven't seen either company publicly drop a scope. But take Trijicon, for instance. "Drop Tested" is in their marketing... an educated guess would be that they have dropped a few.

It's like baking a cake. You pick the ingredient. Some optics companies prioritize durability as their first ingredient, while others don't.

 

[Ryan Avery]

No I haven't. Are they scopes only, or mounted scopes? Tell NF they need a reticle that doesn't suck for hunting while you're at it.

We can agree on that, NF reticles do suck.

 

[JGRaider]

We can agree on that, NF reticles do suck.

What's the answer to the other question I asked you?

 

[Ryan Avery]

What's the answer to the other question I asked you?

I answered it above

 

[JGRaider]

Don't see where you answered if NF and Trijicon scopes were mounted and chunked around, or just chunked around on their own? Maybe I missed it.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Don't see where you answered if NF and Trijicon scopes were mounted and chunked around, or just chunked around on their own? Maybe I missed it.

We don’t know exactly how they test them. What we do know is that they prioritize durability.

 

[JGRaider]

We don’t know exactly how they test them. What we do know is that they prioritize durability.

I know that, but he suggested that NF and Trijicon do their own drop tests so I asked for verification. Turns out there is none apparently.

 

[Frozenlead]

Here’s a video nightforce posted years ago. They discuss their impact testing near the end of it. Pretty much the same as gunwerks. Just beating the bare scope. They have another one out where they freeze the scope and beat it around and then mount and shoot it. Advertising for sure, but it hits the target.

 

[JGRaider]

I've seen that one, thank you. Some dude on youtube tied an Arken to the back of his UTV and drug it around through the mud, gravel, and everywhere else. He then mounted it and it had maintained zero. Evidently these RS scope mounted drop tests are much more severe. Ryan Avery made it sound like NF and Trijicon did drop tests, which is why I asked what I asked.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I know that, but he suggested that NF and Trijicon do their own drop tests so I asked for verification. Turns out there is none apparently.

The verification is in the end products (and, for the ACOG at least, in the fine print in the original military contracts).

 

[JGRaider]

The verification is in the end products (and, for the ACOG at least, in the fine print in the original military contracts).

That wasn't the question. Leupold and Vortex have, or have had military contracts.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

That wasn't the question. Leupold and Vortex have, or have had military contracts.

The contract specified how the ACOG would be tested. That included passing drop tests, immersion tests, etc.

I don’t know the details of the Leupold or Vortex contracts.

 

[eric1115]

I went and picked a fight on SH, it's going as expected. Asked for actual reasoned, evidence based critique of the drop tests and the straw men and ad homenims came out of the woodwork. I was actually hoping for real discussion, but I'm apparently the most naive person on the internet. It's turning into a dumpster fire, but if anyone is interested in further exploring the "expert" opinions refuting the evals it's all there

 

[JGRaider]

Thought I asked an honest question too. Turns out to be a bunch of guessing.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Thought I asked an honest question too. Turns out to be a bunch of guessing.

Not really guessing, NF and your buddy at Revic are testing side impacts on a collimator. Trijicon is doing something right because all of them have passed the Rokslide eval. But none of this matters to you cause you have never had a rifle scope lose zero in your life.. correct?

 

[JGRaider]

Not really guessing, NF and your buddy at Revic are testing side impacts on a collimator. Trijicon is doing something right because all of them have passed the Rokslide eval. But none of this matters to you cause you have never had a rifle scope lose zero in your life.. correct?

Uh, negative. I've had two 1" tube Swaro's got tits up (erectors both times), and a VX3. That's it. I take the RS drops with a grain of salt, and find them somewhat interesting, nothing more. AD's a pube.

 

[RockAndSage]

AD's a pube.

Not sure sexually oriented vulgar name-calling is welcome behavior on Rokslide.

 

[JGRaider]

Didn't realize it was either one of those. It's a single hair, a short one.

 

[fwafwow]

The drop tests are clearly living in someone’s head. Rent free.

 

[Bubblehide]

That wasn't the question. Leupold and Vortex have, or have had military contracts.

Have you read them?