FrankieP1988
WKR
It all started when they didnt sponsor this site
jk sorry ryan
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And meanwhile, with a Trijicon or Maven 1.2, plus other good scopes, I can have 4 different plane rides with the case being handled each flight, 1-2000 miles of driving, hiking, shooting, etc. and it’s still punching the bullseye when I’m all done.I think a lot of people that love them think that re-zeroing your rifle every fall is normal because that's the way they've always done it...That doesn't make it right, just the devil they know and have grown accustomed to
This is going to sound pedantic, but it's definitely "scientific" even if it's not as precise or high-tech as you might want. The methods are documented, they can be reproduced, and other possible variables are controlled for and isolated as much as possible. The guy from Mythbusters wasn't far off when he said "the difference between science and screwing around is writing it down".Even so, I think it important to recognize that the testing was not done scientifically.
This is 100% spot on. It shows tendencies and maybe "worst case scenarios", which is all I'm really interested in. I don't care specifically about an actual drop, I just want a proxy that can tell me which one is better at holding zero. As long as the test shows consistent results across makes/models, that's useful to me....the results should only be used to draw a general idea of how robust a particular scope line may be.
That could be really interesting. I don't trust that an industry standard wouldn't fall short and get gamed for marketing purposes though. If the test becomes so specific that they design around the test rather than actual use, or depending how they quantify the results (like Leupold's durability tests), it might not be as useful as the real basic "slap it around and see if the zero moves".I would like to see a standard developed similar to the waterproof ratings for electronics (IP ratings) but the scope mfgs don't seem to be interested.
That sounds way more appealing to me! NF and Trijicon have treated me well in the same ways, worth the peace of mind to have that confidence when it counts!And meanwhile, with a Trijicon or Maven 1.2, plus other good scopes, I can have 4 different plane rides with the case being handled each flight, 1-2000 miles of driving, hiking, shooting, etc. and it’s still punching the bullseye when I’m all done.
I still tap on scopes after adjusting them. Call it childhood trauma. Doesn't matter if it's a $79 Bushnell or a $2000 Zeiss or my one NF.The inconsistent adjustments go back as far as I can remember. Since “Leupold makes great scopes”, I thought that it was normal to tap on a scope with a screwdriver handle to “make sure the adjustment took”
When it comes to ammo, most Americans are like the most parsimonious quartermasters in history. People love to brag about how little they shoot. Saving ammo is a virtue.
I'm listening...Some sort of ammo harlot.