The Shoot2hunt Podcast

[Wiscgunner]

I got involved in the comment section on the Youtube version of his podcast as Caylen doesn't seem to grasp the hypocrisy of his stance. AI rifles are build better but whatever rifle you use for test is not good. Can we use and AI, would that eliminate that variable? Unertl scopes were very delicate but the military replacement was way more reliable. So some scopes are better than others? Nope all scopes are good, shooters are bad. But then tells a story about a Primary Arms scope being junk. He got butt hurt when I accused him of either sponsor bias or not fully understanding the tests which he read only as accusing him of sponsor bias.

I am willing to glue an action into an XLR chassis and glue a stock into rings then use the full length integrated arca rail to clamp it to a concrete bench if that will satisfy naysayers who says it the shooter or the rings or whatever. This fixture would show extreme repeatability and the chassis to rail has not connection, no butt stock error. Personally i am very happy with the info easily seen in Form's test but if we want to pressure companies to build better, we need to get the masses to approve of the testing.

If it is shooter error that makes scopes look like they are loosing zero, then that would be eliminated if he took Ryan up on his offer and came and did the shooting.

 

[swavescatter]

But, sub 20 would make my gun so front heavy it wouldn't point worth a damn.

What to do?

2026 Rokstock Bullpup Tikka chassis.

 

[fwafwow]

I got involved in the comment section on the Youtube version of his podcast as Caylen doesn't seem to grasp the hypocrisy of his stance. AI rifles are build better but whatever rifle you use for test is not good. Can we use and AI, would that eliminate that variable? Unertl scopes were very delicate but the military replacement was way more reliable. So some scopes are better than others? Nope all scopes are good, shooters are bad. But then tells a story about a Primary Arms scope being junk. He got butt hurt when I accused him of either sponsor bias or not fully understanding the tests which he read only as accusing him of sponsor bias.

I am willing to glue an action into an XLR chassis and glue a stock into rings then use the full length integrated arca rail to clamp it to a concrete bench if that will satisfy naysayers who says it the shooter or the rings or whatever. This fixture would show extreme repeatability and the chassis to rail has not connection, no butt stock error. Personally i am very happy with the info easily seen in Form's test but if we want to pressure companies to build better, we need to get the masses to approve of the testing.

If it is shooter error that makes scopes look like they are loosing zero, then that would be eliminated if he took Ryan up on his offer and came and did the shooting.

Thanks for mentioning the posts you made. IMHO you are laying it out and being respectful. He seems to be a bit defensive and angry (the “unfollow” point - meh) although I could see how he got his hackles up when you referred to sponsors. Maybe you two can get to some understanding and he can go shoot or watch the drop tests. It would at least be of interest for him to respond to the logical points you made.

 

[bojangles808]

Listened to latest episode.

So.... There's a wood rokstok that is going to be designed by Form and a "guy" and then scanned and a mold will be made. This however is not the rokstok lite. No other info

The rokstok lite goal is sub 20oz.

I might be wrong but how I took it is form and the guy doing wood rokstocks are going to make the rokstock lite proto with wood and then once it's dialed scan that for the mold for stockys to produce. Iirc the negative comb isn't going to be as pronounced on RS lite so it might just be easier for form to dial it in with wood vs go full bondo again like they how they came up with the first RS proto.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I got involved in the comment section on the Youtube version of his podcast as Caylen doesn't seem to grasp the hypocrisy of his stance. AI rifles are build better but whatever rifle you use for test is not good. Can we use and AI, would that eliminate that variable? Unertl scopes were very delicate but the military replacement was way more reliable. So some scopes are better than others? Nope all scopes are good, shooters are bad. But then tells a story about a Primary Arms scope being junk. He got butt hurt when I accused him of either sponsor bias or not fully understanding the tests which he read only as accusing him of sponsor bias.

I am willing to glue an action into an XLR chassis and glue a stock into rings then use the full length integrated arca rail to clamp it to a concrete bench if that will satisfy naysayers who says it the shooter or the rings or whatever. This fixture would show extreme repeatability and the chassis to rail has not connection, no butt stock error. Personally i am very happy with the info easily seen in Form's test but if we want to pressure companies to build better, we need to get the masses to approve of the testing.

If it is shooter error that makes scopes look like they are loosing zero, then that would be eliminated if he took Ryan up on his offer and came and did the shooting.

The simplest explanation is he thought he'd talk about it off the cuff without looking into it and now it would be too embarrassing to admit he didn't do his research (or got fed bad information from his Leupold contact). Occam's Razor is just pride in this situation.

 

[GoatPackr]

Apparently the waves are getting noticed if these manufacturers are hiding behind their influencers and putting them upto these half ass stands to try and sway the public to not look at their products in detail and see they are lacking and not worth the high prices they charge.
We just need to keep the pressure on them and maybe they will biuld these things the right way.

Someone got a meme with a kid looking out from behind mommy's dress?

 

[HighUintas]

Avery should get the Hornady guys to test a few scopes with some sort of fixture in their lab. They'd probably initially say we're all stupid for dropping our scopes, but would test it anyway because they seem to love to test ideas and crunch numbers. I'm guessing they'd express the results in a more "scientific" manner and potentially get some people like that MDS host to consider it a little more seriously.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Avery should get the Hornady guys to test a few scopes with some sort of fixture in their lab. They'd probably initially say we're all stupid for dropping our scopes, but would test it anyway because they seem to love to test ideas and crunch numbers. I'm guessing they'd express the results in a more "scientific" manner and potentially get some people like that MDS host to consider it a little more seriously.

Why? We have scopes that can pass on demand, which makes people's "feelings" about the test irrelevant to me.

 

[khuber84]

Avery should get the Hornady guys to test a few scopes with some sort of fixture in their lab. They'd probably initially say we're all stupid for dropping our scopes, but would test it anyway because they seem to love to test ideas and crunch numbers. I'm guessing they'd express the results in a more "scientific" manner and potentially get some people like that MDS host to consider it a little more seriously.

That'd be great, but Hornady spending time/money to test something totally irrelevant to their products, highly unlikely. 3rd party would have to pony up the ammo, and test when employees aren't on the clock.

I think there's some good stuff on the MDS network, but yes they're very brand affiliated. Khales, Leupod, Hornady, Krg all get lots of plugs over there. Both those optic manufacturers don't hold zero and are not durable to real world abuse. Now that Caylen has likely gotten an AI at a deep discount, I'm sure they'll be getting repped too. I have an ATX, it's a fn tank, a very durable and reliable tank. Once AI gets into peoples blood, most become these cultish fan boys. I for one would sell mine in a heartbeat if I could get 75% what I paid.

 

[Formidilosus]

Wasn’t clear on the wood Rokstock situation mentioned, assuming a new cheaper priced version compared to the custom ones already offered? @Ryan Avery

I believe they were talking about the process for the wood ROKStok light. Done in wood first (as opposed to 3d printed plastic), then scanned and made into carbon fiber.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I believe they were talking about the process for the wood ROKStok light. Done in wood first (as opposed to 3d printed plastic), then scanned and made into carbon fiber.

Yeap

 

[Dobermann]

I might be wrong but how I took it is form and the guy doing wood rokstocks are going to make the rokstock lite proto with wood and then once it's dialed scan that for the mold for stockys to produce. Iirc the negative comb isn't going to be as pronounced on RS lite so it might just be easier for form to dial it in with wood vs go full bondo again like they how they came up with the first RS proto.

@Ryan Avery - can we get a 'Go Full Bondo!' Rokstok shirt.

Can we? Can we? Can we?

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

I call dibs on the whittled away wood Rokstok lite prototype

 

[HighUintas]

Why? We have scopes that can pass on demand, which makes people's "feelings" about the test irrelevant to me.

They influence the market. The more people understand that the drop testing provides value and that there are scopes that actually function correctly ,the more likely companies are to listen and provide us more options.

That's the only reason I care what influencers and purchasers think. Give me more options. Make a functional scope the common offering.

 

[Dobermann]

I call dibs on the whittled away wood Rokstok lite prototype

I think @Formidilosus has called dibs waaaaay before you.

 

[Formidilosus]

They influence the market. The more people understand that the drop testing provides value and that there are scopes that actually function correctly ,the more likely companies are to listen and provide us more options.

That's the only reason I care what influencers and purchasers think. Give me more options. Make a functional scope the common offering.

This is based on your belief that the “influencers” are desiring the truth. The very people that yall are taking about have the scopes and rifles in hand, and some teach classes and shoot all over, all the time supposedly- but can’t (won’t) zero a rifle and simply drop to see what happens…

They are not interested in the truth or they would do so.

 

[Tom-D]

It almost seems like there is more effort being put into discrediting the test than it would take to just build a reliable scope that passes.

I know this isnt relevant to the majority on this site but it is actually illegal to shoot targets or sight in your rifle when hunting public land where i am from in Aus so shooting rocks all day is not an option for me. Thats why i find the data in the tests super valuable.

 

[Reburn]

It almost seems like there is more effort being put into discrediting the test than it would take to just build a reliable scope that passes.

I know this isnt relevant to the majority on this site but it is actually illegal to shoot targets or sight in your rifle when hunting public land where i am from in Aus so shooting rocks all day is not an option for me. Thats why i find the data in the tests super valuable.

Admitting the test is valid and their scopes dont hold zero is never going to happen. Can you imagine the public backlash for them saying we have been building scopes that dont work. Thanks for the money. No refunds.

We can hope that they will quietly change their ways to building new scope lines that DO work. However leupold proved they arent doing this with the failure of their newest scope.

 

[Dave_S]

It almost seems like there is more effort being put into discrediting the test than it would take to just build a reliable scope that passes.

I know this isnt relevant to the majority on this site but it is actually illegal to shoot targets or sight in your rifle when hunting public land where i am from in Aus so shooting rocks all day is not an option for me. Thats why i find the data in the tests super valuable.

This is a really good point. I’d need to check the regs but I’m pretty sure that on public land around me, state owned not federal, you also can’t go around discharging firearms unless you’re the in specified areas or while shooting at game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jsmalls273]

This is a really good point. I’d need to check the regs but I’m pretty sure that on public land around me, state owned not federal, you also can’t go around discharging firearms unless you’re the in specified areas or while shooting at game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same in Texas. Which makes it extremely difficult to get the practice some people do. At least without spending lots of money.

Sent from my SM-S921U using Tapatalk