Scope Field Eval Explanation and Standards

[roosiebull]

You are evil. I'm an engineer and can't resist this type of testing...ahhhhhh. I hope the scopes I have don't fail!!!!!!

The only problem with tests like this on an Internet forum is some get offended if their scope of choice doesn’t do well… I personally don’t care if one of my scopes fails miserably, I would rather know if something I have has a high failure rate, and plan on doing a smaller scale test on my rifles.

I’m glad Ryan Avery is going to make these tests a sticky, because Form is putting a lot of effort into these tests, doing testing most of us don’t have the means to do, and I could see some members making the tests more trouble than they’re worth when their feelings get hurt when their scope doesn’t do well.

They are all tools to me, I don’t beat stuff up on purpose, but no weapon has an easy life with me, and if I have something prone to failure, I assume know rather than be in denial that everything I have bought is awesome.

I have seen plenty of very good reviews on stuff I have owned that was complete garbage for heavy use, but if someone uses something different, it may be awesome to them, but run it through the ringer, it fails easy and often, from weapons, accessories, clothes, boots, etc…. It would really be nice if people didn’t take it personally when something they own doesn’t do well in testing.

My rifles/scopes get beat up, but my heavy use will never compare to Form’s version of heavy use… I shoot 200-400 rounds out of my hunting rifles annually, and the rest of the “heavy use” for me is packing my rifles around, and I have had more than one rifle lose zero between shooting sessions… never way off, but enough it could cause issues outside 200yds.

I put huge value on confidence in my ability and equipment, lack of confidence in either is bad news in the woods

 

[mi650]

Tag.

 

[TNKnoxville]

The only scope I ever had fail was due to FEDX smashing my Boyd case and putting a huge crack in it. My Zeiss V4 looked okay but wouldn't hold zero. Sent it back and they sent me a new one!

All my other scopes have been great so far, I'm not FORM hard but don't baby them either. This kind of info is interesting. Most likely wouldn't change a scope unless Forms tests showed it was horrible! Won't hurt my feelings but may hurt my wallet...lol.

 

[Lawnboi]

Get it over with and test the mk5 and other leupolds. You might be better off just insulting their mothers.


Jokes aside, appreciate you doing this. Scope problems suck. Had I know back then I’d have saved a lot of wasted range trips and time.

 

[mi650]

Did I miss the list or link to the scopes being tested?

 

[ElPollo]

I had a scope lose zero by 3 MOA back in October. I’m tagged in on these tests.

 

[Wacko]

"....because heavier weight equals more failures."

Yep......this was mounted on a howa 1500 when I took a spill . I ditched the rifle before I impacted....but lady luck was not on my side. Howa's ain't light.....

To SWFA's credit... they replaced it under warranty - even though I told them it was my fault.

No it did not retain zero....lol....

 

[Dobermann]

Get it over with and test the mk5 and other leupolds. You might be better off just insulting their mothers.

Especially after their marketing guy was on a recent podcast and claimed something along the lines that lighter scopes were more reliable ... don't quote me on it, but the podcast is out there if you want his exact words (not going to post it here, as I respect the hosts too much).

 

[eamyrick]

Tag.

 

[Formidilosus]

"....because heavier weight equals more failures."

Yep......this was mounted on a howa 1500 when I took a spill . I ditched the rifle before I impacted....but lady luck was not on my side. Howa's ain't light.....

To SWFA's credit... they replaced it under warranty - even though I told them it was my fault.

No it did not retain zero....lol....

This is what Carl was speaking about. Almost all scopes, even most of the ones that work well and take some abuse will snap the ocular if they take a sufficient hit directly to it. Drop a rifle and scope on a large rock or concrete from 4-5 feet and this will happen.

 

[Wacko]

This is what Carl was speaking about. Almost all scopes, even most of the ones that work well and take some abuse will snap the ocular if they take a sufficient hit directly to it. Drop a rifle and scope on a large rock or concrete from 4-5 feet and this will happen.

"Luckily" I was just going up a steep, grassy, rock filled slope.........maybe a touch wet too......

Yeah, sometimes I fall........

Yes, my rifles still have the swfa's on them.........sold the howa and got some tikkas too....they are lighter....

 

[Carl Ross]

Not fun when it happens to you Wacko, but everything can be broken.

Some things I've thought of since the first time I saw this Form...

The difference in impact force between a 10lb setup and a 20lb setup is 2x, all else being equal. There is a linear relationship between the weight and the impact force. This is pretty easy to account for, but if someone wanted to do this test independently and compare notes as accurately as possible, having the rifle weights be similar would be important.


The trickier part is trying to compare the surface the rifle impacts, because as the distance the impact is spread out over goes to zero, the impact force goes to infinity. Just saying that as your surface gets harder and approaches concrete, the impact force will increase exponentially. Which is probably why my tests years ago lead me to not trust much of anything, as they were essentially just landing on concrete, and I wasn't testing mil spec NF's. I'm sure it's why I was busting up stuff too, similar to what Wacko experienced. Despite not having a great solution there to make it 100% repeatable from location to location, I think the overall test is entirely worthwhile and I haven't seen anything more systematic to test scope reliability.

I have seen more fun ways, like when Frank was tossing rifles off walls and blowing them up with Tannerite in the good old days on the Hide...

 

[Dobermann]

I know we're going to be limited at this point to what Ryan can provide form, but here's my wishlist:

• ZCO - with Jeff behind it, and listening to his discussion of the internals, I'd expect them to do well.
• Bushnell XRSIII and DMRIII - I think Form mentioned that some of the folks behind the original Elite Tactical line left, and he started to see some QC issues towards the end of the last iteration of scopes; would be interesting to see what the new ones are like.
• Bushnell LRHS 2 - only available through GAP; would be interesting to see if they both retained the old internals, as well as current QC.
• Zeisss LRP S5 - as it's had good reports so far, but I haven't seen any drop tests; personally, I'd love for Zeiss to get their scopes up to scratch.
• As others have stated, the new Leupy - Form has said he'd love to see Leupold do well; again, it's picking up traction in the comp world, but then they also have sponsored shooters. More important to me is that Jacob at RO has recently been singing their praises ... would be good to know one way or another.
• While we're at it, I guess the new Razor Gen-whatever ... ho-hum.
• NF SHV F1 - I know Form has said he's generally found them reliable, but they're probably the best entry option for NF, so would be good to have a documented test.

 

[Mike Islander]

The average guy wants the clearest glass, everything else is a distant 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc.

True and sad, because seldom does glass quality determine bad outcome, pretty much last after holding zero, return to zero, dialing repeatability, etc.

 

[HaydenLane]

I know we're going to be limited at this point to what Ryan can provide form, but here's my wishlist:

• ZCO - with Jeff behind it, and listening to his discussion of the internals, I'd expect them to do well.
• Bushnell XRSIII and DMRIII - I think Form mentioned that some of the folks behind the original Elite Tactical line left, and he started to see some QC issues towards the end of the last iteration of scopes; would be interesting to see what the new ones are like.
• Bushnell LRHS 2 - only available through GAP; would be interesting to see if they both retained the old internals, as well as current QC.
• Zeisss LRP S5 - as it's had good reports so far, but I haven't seen any drop tests; personally, I'd love for Zeiss to get their scopes up to scratch.
• As others have stated, the new Leupy - Form has said he'd love to see Leupold do well; again, it's picking up traction in the comp world, but then they also have sponsored shooters. More important to me is that Jacob at RO has recently been singing their praises ... would be good to know one way or another.
• While we're at it, I guess the new Razor Gen-whatever ... ho-hum.
• NF SHV F1 - I know Form has said he's generally found them reliable, but they're probably the best entry option for NF, so would be good to have a documented test.

I believe @Ryan Avery said he’d take donations. I bet if enough people want to see something tested, it could happen.

EDIT: and it looks like I missed his post about this a minute before

 

[Bubblehide]

...
The difference in impact force between a 10lb setup and a 20lb setup is 2x, all else being equal. There is a linear relationship between the weight and the impact force. This is pretty easy to account for, but if someone wanted to do this test independently and compare notes as accurately as possible, having the rifle weights be similar would be important. ...

This is not correct, if I understand what you are saying above. What I mean is that if you take two identically sized and shaped objects, but different weights, and drop them from the same height, the heavier object with h

Not fun when it happens to you Wacko, but everything can be broken.

Some things I've thought of since the first time I saw this Form...

The difference in impact force between a 10lb setup and a 20lb setup is 2x, all else being equal. There is a linear relationship between the weight and the impact force. This is pretty easy to account for, but if someone wanted to do this test independently and compare notes as accurately as possible, having the rifle weights be similar would be important.

...

Actually, if you drop 2 objects the exact same shape and size, from the same exact distance from the ground, but one is heavier than the other, the heavier object will hit the ground first. Their acceleration rate, when dropped is different. So it is more than a 2x impact. From the heights Form is dropping from is not anywhere close to terminal velocity (the object reaches max speed in its decent toward the ground), as such, I would not expect this to result in any huge difference over 2x impact force, but it will be larger than 2x impact force, based on weight alone in both being dropped from the same height.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I believe @Ryan Avery said he’d take donations. I bet if enough people want to see something tested, it could happen.

EDIT: and it looks like I missed his post about this a minute before

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...

www.rokslide.com

 

[Cactus kid]

This is not correct, if I understand what you are saying above. What I mean is that if you take two identically sized and shaped objects, but different weights, and drop them from the same height, the heavier object with h

Actually, if you drop 2 objects the exact same shape and size, from the same exact distance from the ground, but one is heavier than the other, the heavier object will hit the ground first. Their acceleration rate, when dropped is different. So it is more than a 2x impact. From the heights Form is dropping from is not anywhere close to terminal velocity (the object reaches max speed in its decent toward the ground), as such, I would not expect this to result in any huge difference over 2x impact force, but it will be larger than 2x impact force, based on weight alone in both being dropped from the same height.

This is 100% wrong. Everyone is now dumber for having have read this.

All objects free fall at the same rate regardless of mass. That rate is 9 M/S/S.

 

[Bubblehide]

This is 100% wrong. Everyone is now dumber for having have read this.

All objects free fall at the same rate regardless of mass. That rate is 9 M/S/S.

You know what, you're right, I don't know what I was thinking.

 

[Cactus kid]

You know what, you're right, I don't know what I was thinking.

Just giving you shit on the "everyone is now dumber for having read that." Billy Madison reference.