Why cant people accept the fact that some people dont need a drop tested scope?

[Jimbee]

We should. But I don’t think you can call it “delivery system” anymore. I heard it’s going to be auto corrected to “******* ******” very soon.

I nominate you to start the thread. A person could photograph or video whatever drop test version that they are comfortable with and post their information and results.

 

[SDHNTR]

Mpbr and X” high at 100 is very forgiving for “zero retention”. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

 

[fwafwow]

For those who haven't done so, I think it's good to read this thread - https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/scope-field-eval-explanation-and-standards.246775/ - specifically post #2. I'm not saying that will change someone's mind (one way or the other), but knowing how the test is conducted can narrow the points of debate. IMHO.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I nominate you to start the thread. A person could photograph or video whatever drop test version that they are comfortable with and post their information and results.

If somebody hasn’t started a thread before I get home from business travel, I’ll get it going.

Edit: Does it have to be drop test exactly? I think replicating what Form is doing is not easy. Lots of variables at play. For me personally it would be more reporting on how the “system” is performing through continued field use over time. I’m not a rifle dropper on purpose kind of guy. I appreciate those that can/do for the “DaTa” though.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Some of you are going to love the thread title.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Some of you are going to love the thread title.

Based on your new profile picture I'm sure it'll be fun.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Based on your new profile picture I'm sure it'll be fun.

Us WKPs gotta stick together.

 

[Jimbee]

If somebody hasn’t started a thread before I get home from business travel, I’ll get it going.

Edit: Does it have to be drop test exactly? I think replicating what Form is doing is not easy. Lots of variables at play. For me personally it would be more reporting on how the “system” is performing through continued field use over time. I’m not a rifle dropper on purpose kind of guy. I appreciate those that can/do for the “DaTa” though.

I'd just be interested in how folks determine (if at all) that their bullet delivering device is dependable/reliable. Also, I'm looking for attention and validation from strangers on the interwebs.

 

[Billy Goat]

I think something along the lines of a 1" sticker, and keeping all bullets in it for a week. Cold bore, should be easy with a 1/2 moa gun.

Carry rifle in your vehicle all week.

 

[Marbles]

If somebody hasn’t started a thread before I get home from business travel, I’ll get it going.

Edit: Does it have to be drop test exactly? I think replicating what Form is doing is not easy. Lots of variables at play. For me personally it would be more reporting on how the “system” is performing through continued field use over time. I’m not a rifle dropper on purpose kind of guy. I appreciate those that can/do for the “DaTa” though.

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

 

[Billy Goat]

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

Baby steps.

Not everyone needs a scope that can be dropped on a seat cushion.

 

[Flyjunky]

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

The hard part with that is controlling every last variable. I don’t have a completely bonded rifle to eliminate everything but the scope.

If the main theme is about a scope holding up to general field use then that’s what it should be about…riding in vehicles, carried through the woods, being shot at the range/field, ie, field use. How to keep a running thread about that I don’t know.

 

[Jimbee]

[/QUOTE]

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

I think that's fair. But how many of the failed scopes didn't pass the knee high drops? Failing riding in a vehicle, or failing lighter, shorter drops would be meaningful information. This whole thing would just probably be redundant. I'd be really surprised if any new information was presented or if anyone changed their mind.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

Hmmmm. I don’t think I agree on this one.

My rifles don’t really ever leave whatever vehicle I’m driving. They ride around like this or laid across the back seat…



They get used some weeks daily and some weeks a couple days. The roads travelled vary from everyday roads and highways to something more like this…



And everything in between.

They are then taken out and use to shoot and/or kill very often. Thrown back in the vehicle and off we go again.

I also carry them year round on scouting trips, backpacking trips etc as I love shooting predators that are no limit no season. So they cruise around the mountains and trails being hand carried or sometimes strapped to a backpack.

That type of use, to me, is tangible data when a rifle and scope is used in those conditions. Does it replace Forms drop test? Not at all. But I still think it’s another good testament to a working or non working “system”.

Again. You see patterns show up with certain devices when they get used like this. Sometimes it takes a really long time (and that’s the beauty of Forms drop test, accelerating field use).

I think there’s a lot of benefit to a thread where folks can post updates of how their “systems” are performing through field use updates. With regular shots taken to confirm potential POI shift.

 

[ddowning]

I honestly think some of it is to offer the best advice for people present and future reading the forum.

If guys insist X brand is reliable, but aren’t willing to prove it with bullets on paper and a padded drop I think it’s fair to point out the gap in their reasoning. Especially when the reasoning often boils down to ‘I’ve killed a gazillion game animals over half a century so I know it works’ and they don’t seem to realize that they could achieve all of that with a scope that has a wandering zero for the average ranges and vital zone sizes for the animals they hunt.

But also it’s the internet so we all like to argue over the littlest things.

I dropped a scope from roughly 8 ft onto ice. It was a 14-15# gun and landed on the elevation turret. I'm not sure how it didn't break it off as the drop cracked the boyds wood stock. I put superglue in the stock cracks and shot 6 shots into a 1 inch faster at 100 yards the next morning. I killed 10 more coyotes with that gun and then went to develop a load for a new bullet. It was shooting a 3" group at 100 yards. The scope was indeed broken. The shots were just close enough/lucky enough that I didn't miss;-)

 

[Marbles]

I think something along the lines of a 1" sticker, and keeping all bullets in it for a week. Cold bore, should be easy with a 1/2 moa gun.

Carry rifle in your vehicle all week.

I already lost that.

The hard part with that is controlling every last variable. I don’t have a completely bonded rifle to eliminate everything but the scope.

If the main theme is about a scope holding up to general field use then that’s what it should be about…riding in vehicles, carried through the woods, being shot at the range/field, ie, field use. How to keep a running thread about that I don’t know.

But, the entire point to me is that the system can take it, no just the scope. It is also because those of us that like the drop test also need to put-up or shut-up. We are starting to sound like the scope brand fanboys. We ask them to drop scopes, or take offers of money, no one will offer us money, but if your rings move, or your action shifts (or stock breaks), that is as much a problem as having a scope that shifts. Honestly, in my system the shooter is the weak link at present, based on my current 30 round groups, there is a 10% "I suck at shooting" factor (that or inserting a magazine in my Tikka randomly causes POI shift." So, if one shot out of 10 is outside my crappy 2 MOA base, then I have to shoot 20 more and 3 of those are allowed to be outside the group.

I just became a member at the local gun club, so hopefully with practice I improve.

I think that's fair. But how many of the failed scopes didn't pass the knee high drops? Failing riding in a vehicle, or failing lighter, shorter drops would be meaningful information. This whole thing would just probably be redundant. I'd be really surprised if any new information was presented or if anyone changed their mind.

We can have a peewee category for those that are not willing to go above 18". Then a primadonna category for those who just leave their gun in the back seat for 200 miles (at least 10 of which must be on dirt).

Hmmmm. I don’t think I agree on this one.

My rifles don’t really ever leave whatever vehicle I’m driving. They ride around like this or laid across the back seat…

View attachment 660729

They get used some weeks daily and some weeks a couple days. The roads travelled vary from everyday roads and highways to something more like this…

View attachment 660730

And everything in between.

They are then taken out and use to shoot and/or kill very often. Thrown back in the vehicle and off we go again.

I also carry them year round on scouting trips, backpacking trips etc as I love shooting predators that are no limit no season. So they cruise around the mountains and trails being hand carried or sometimes strapped to a backpack.

That type of use, to me, is tangible data when a rifle and scope is used in those conditions. Does it replace Forms drop test? Not at all. But I still think it’s another good testament to a working or non working “system”.

Again. You see patterns show up with certain devices when they get used like this. Sometimes it takes a really long time (and that’s the beauty of Forms drop test, accelerating field use).

I think there’s a lot of benefit to a thread where folks can post updates of how their “systems” are performing through field use updates. With regular shots taken to confirm potential POI shift.

Go for it then, my squirrel brain an't sticking around for the ride. I only red the entire 223 thread because I thought the concept was stupid. Now that I'm largely converted, I don't follow it consistently. I'm already converted on drops.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I’ll do the same.

1. Establish 10 round zero at 100
2. Conduct a drop test where the rifle is leaned against an object and is tipped over onto grass.
3. Confirm zero or lack thereof.
4. Repeat 2 and 3.
5. Cinch rifle to pack and roll it around
6. Repeat 3.
7. Repeat 5 and 3.
8. Uncased in back seat of vehicle on washboard gravel.
9. Repeat 3.
10. Repeat 9 and 3.
11. Potentially replace scope with a different brand.

 

[wyosam]

I think the point is dropping it at least 9 times from 36" as done in the tests. No drop, and you are at the same point as "my X brand scope has worked for 20 years."

I can only give my reasoning why I’m not conducting drop tests on my scopes. An individual scope may pass the tests, but that ninth drop might be the last one it’s going to put up with before it fails. I really appreciate those willing to punish scopes, or offer up their own for punishment. The two vx6HD 2-12s on my twin tikkas were recently replaced with credo 2.5-15s based in large part on how well they did on the drop tests. That being said, one of the vx6’s has been dead reliable for the 3.5 years it was on my primary hunting rifle. That one never came off the rifle, and once it was broke in and loads settled on, it never moved. Zero was reset frequently, between the hunting load zero and lead core practice/steel/target zero. Repeatable changes (always 3clicks left and 1 up going from copper to lead and opposite the other direction). About 700 rounds on the rifle when I pulled that scope. It bounced around Wyoming for a year or so back and forth to the range, then rode in a soft case in my gun safe with all the others with a few blankets stuffed in to take up dead space for the moved to Alaska (up the alcan in a semi trailer). The other one always seemed reliable, though that rifle got switched between barrels a lot and played with a lot more different loads so I don’t have anyway to really know if it held zero consistently.

I switched for two reasons- durability. For my use case, I hadn’t personally seen a reason for this, but feeling how my flat bottom jet boat rides on wind chop made me concerned- it’s a beating in a gun boot. The other was wanting adjustable parallax with a lower end under 3.

I do suspect that if I dialed more, I’d have given up on the leupolds sooner. Shooting fairly flat cartridges inside 600 (then 300 hinder after I moved to AK) doesn’t test dialing much.


Edit- both actions devcon bedded to mesa precision stocks with pillars relieved to ensure no bolt contact, both use sports match rings. Group centers compared to point of aim whenever a group was put on paper.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MuleyFever]

Hmmmm. I don’t think I agree on this one.

My rifles don’t really ever leave whatever vehicle I’m driving. They ride around like this or laid across the back seat…

View attachment 660729

They get used some weeks daily and some weeks a couple days. The roads travelled vary from everyday roads and highways to something more like this…

View attachment 660730

And everything in between.

They are then taken out and use to shoot and/or kill very often. Thrown back in the vehicle and off we go again.

I also carry them year round on scouting trips, backpacking trips etc as I love shooting predators that are no limit no season. So they cruise around the mountains and trails being hand carried or sometimes strapped to a backpack.

That type of use, to me, is tangible data when a rifle and scope is used in those conditions. Does it replace Forms drop test? Not at all. But I still think it’s another good testament to a working or non working “system”.

Again. You see patterns show up with certain devices when they get used like this. Sometimes it takes a really long time (and that’s the beauty of Forms drop test, accelerating field use).

I think there’s a lot of benefit to a thread where folks can post updates of how their “systems” are performing through field use updates. With regular shots taken to confirm potential POI shift.

And here we are right to the title, and point, of the thread. Someone does all this with a Vortex or Leupold and says it works for them and someone else has to insist they do the drop test.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Yup. A lot of fuss over forms drop tests on the scope but not a lot of discussion on bedding/action screw torque, free float, bonding rails, rings and torque. All that stuff can and does present an issue. But most guys are not finding a true 100 yard zero and tracking it.

Call me a parrot but this parrot also has learned to do the shit that form is preaching and shockingly it works.

The delivery system matters and the scope is one aspect of that which seems to get the most attention.

I've been saying this since the first couple pages of this thread with respect to rings and bases, didn't bring up bedding because that's another story to itself.

The drop tests and subsequent shots would seem to have more potential to be affected by the mounting system and bedding. The RTZ test to my mind, after the drop tests, would be a good indicator of internal problems as a result of the drop tests or as a flaw with the scope internals that is there regardless of dropping.

I do not believe scopes are tested for out of the box RTZ like they are after the drop test, would give a clear indication if there is potential for repeatability from the get-go.

It's a bummer the SWFA scopes are most of the time on B.O.. I have a mind to get one and play with it a bit. See how it works for me with eye relief, glass quality, etc. Could be a keeper or a resell here in a short minute.