The Shoot2hunt Podcast

[Brandon.miller.4]

Enjoyed the podcast.

However, I was a little disappointed with the lack of naming brands out loud for everyone to hear. I dislike when people intentionally leave things out. If a company makes a product that doesn't work they should be called on it, likewise for ones that do work.

Why are we protecting brand names on the podcast but not on rokslide? Is there a problem with speaking plainly about what works and what doesn't?

 

[Ryan Avery]

Enjoyed the podcast.

However, I was a little disappointed with the lack of naming brands out loud for everyone to hear. I dislike when people intentionally leave things out. If a company makes a product that doesn't work they should be called on it, likewise for ones that do work.

Why are we protecting brand names on the podcast but not on rokslide? Is there a problem with speaking plainly about what works and what doesn't?

Maybe to get people to come to Rokslide........

 

[Formidilosus]

Enjoyed the podcast.

However, I was a little disappointed with the lack of naming brands out loud for everyone to hear. I dislike when people intentionally leave things out. If a company makes a product that doesn't work they should be called on it, likewise for ones that do work.

Why are we protecting brand names on the podcast but not on rokslide? Is there a problem with speaking plainly about what works and what doesn't?

No one is protecting anyone. That podcast wasn’t really about which scope work and which don’t- that was tangential. The conversation was about the drop eval and how we ensure that it is repeatable, relevant, and know that it works.

 

[ElPollo]

No one is protecting anyone. That podcast wasn’t really about which scope work and which don’t- that was tangential. The conversation was about the drop eval and how we ensure that it is repeatable, relevant, and know that it works.

I think the podcast achieved covering the drop test procedures well and I don’t think you need to name the companies that fail. You explicitly list the ones that don’t and point them to the forum for more info. The people who want to know will figure it out. The people who don’t will continue to use Leupold and Vortex and wonder why they missed that deer.

 

[Reburn]

I think the podcast achieved covering the drop test procedures well and I don’t think you need to name the companies that fail. You explicitly list the ones that don’t and point them to the forum for more info. The people who want to know will figure it out. The people who don’t will continue to use Leupold and Vortex and wonder why they missed that deer.

I agree.

At some point testing can become bashing.
The testing is polarizing, and further polarization should be avoided.
Just facts. No fluff. If you want to know who failed you can come here and read it.
I think form was plenty clear that he would shoot a leupy out of preference if they would make one that works.

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

Maybe to get people to come to Rokslide........

I had thought might be a way to generate traffic. I like that reasoning.

No one is protecting anyone. That podcast wasn’t really about which scope work and which don’t- that was tangential. The conversation was about the drop eval and how we ensure that it is repeatable, relevant, and know that it works.

Fair enough. A good name drop might help achieve the long goal of scope companies prioritizing holding zero

 

[Ryan Avery]

I agree.

At some point testing can become bashing.
The testing is polarizing, and further polarization should be avoided.
Just facts. No fluff. If you want to know who failed you can come here and read it.
I think form was plenty clear that he would shoot a leupy out of preference if they would make one that works.

Exactly

It's true that we could have mentioned all the scopes we tested, but if someone isn't interested in learning, then it's just like preaching to the choir. The podcast was intended to encourage people to think about why they have to reset their zero so frequently.

 

[ElPollo]

I do think that one of the benefits of this was to help people realize that the methods are not that extreme. People hear drop tests and think Sage Dynamics dropping stuff from shoulder height on concrete. This stuff is powder puff by comparison.

I am also glad you brought up the loss of zero from washboard roads. This was the thing that turned the light on for me. I had a bird dog that could not resist going after coyotes so I started carrying a rifle in the truck while bird hunting in the desert. Every time I pulled that gun out to shoot it, it was 1-6” off at 100. And it didn’t matter which gun or scope. Most people don’t put that many washboard miles on a rifle so they don’t put two and two together. But I will do 25-100 miles of washboards, arroyos, and sand dunes a weekend for 4 months out of the year. I started wondering what was the point of carrying a rifle that printed like a shotgun.

 

[Formidilosus]

Fair enough. A good name drop might help achieve the long goal of scope companies prioritizing holding zero

I am not into drama, he said-she said nonsense, or internet BS. My base goal with all of this isn’t to force manufacturers to do anything. It has little or nothing to do with the companies, instead it’s about the consumers and end users. Once people understand or see what is really happening, they get to decide what to do with companies.

 

[Clark33]

I mean he did mention the 3 brands he’d recommend to someone looking for a reliable hunting scope. A perfect way to let people know which ones don’t work… by leaving them out. I enjoyed the podcast.

 

[4th_point]

34. Drop it like it's hot? - Shoot2Hunt

If you don't drop your scope this podcast is for you. Learn how to build a gun that never looses zero.

shoot2hunt.com

Talking dropping scopes with the one and only @Formidilosus

Formi and Ryan, thanks for the podcast and ongoing scope evals.

I like Jake's questions too. And not just this episode. Things like "why should I care" and "how does that relate" are helpful for listeners. Good job making things relatable.

 

[DangerRanger]

Solid podcast, bit wandering but there’s so much wrapped up in it and so much explaining each part that it will be near impossible for it not to be. Good listen

I kinda want to bond one of my rifles in

 

[Stumpy208]

I enjoyed the podcast. I liked the tazer comment about how much magnification is actually needed. Got a good laugh from it.

 

[cmahoney]

Just listened, great info, specifically the brief mention of probability numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rbutcher1234]

I very much enjoyed the podcast. The discussion of variability reminded me of when we played with WEZ at work and blew some other people's minds about how low their ability to perform on demand could really be.

Great job everyone. I hope this advances common hunter/consumer priorities to where manufactures start making scopes that work across the board.

Im probably not the only one who could sit around and listen to Form go on about all the things he and his group have learned over the years.

 

[03mossy]

Very informative podcast and was fun to listen to. It does however have me second guessing my scope choice and thinking of upgrading to a Nightforce or Trijicon on my main gun.

 

[Grundy53]

Great podcast. Well worth the listen.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[fwafwow]

As others have said, the podcast was great. But I have questions.

1. Is it “Leo pulled” or “Lou polled”? (I heard both)
2. My world is turned upside down again. I used to think Tikka was “Teeka”, then a post on RS said “Ticka” (and that “Sako” is “Socko” instead of “Sayko”). I’ve been imperiously correcting tons of rubes, while proselytizing about the RS Special, but someone on this podcast said “Teeka”. Do I need to make amends?
3. Will the next podcast be on TMKs please?

 

[Macintosh]

First S2H podcast I’ve listened to. I appreciated the lengthy explanation about repeatability of the eval, eliminating variables, the likelihood of a negative versus likelihood of a positive, and correlating the short functional eval with long-term actual use, etc. Thats the “fine print” that has always been there, but seems to get skipped over a lot.

Also listened to a bit of the “we suck at shooting” episode. Im interested to hear the upshot of what the actual difference, if any, is between a 10-round zero versus a “10 separate cold bore shots” zero.

 

[id_jon]

As others have said, the podcast was great. But I have questions.

1. Is it “Leo pulled” or “Lou polled”? (I heard both)
2. My world is turned upside down again. I used to think Tikka was “Teeka”, then a post on RS said “Ticka” (and that “Sako” is “Socko” instead of “Sayko”). I’ve been imperiously correcting tons of rubes, while proselytizing about the RS Special, but someone on this podcast said “Teeka”. Do I need to make amends?
3. Will the next podcast be on TMKs please?

I'd bet money that it's "teeka"