Would you buy this scope?

[Ohiohuntr]

Yes

 

[RockAndSage]

I'm not an optics manufacturer, but my assumption is that the secret sauce for Trijicon/Nightforce is in the specifications. A production agency won't design your scope for you; the design agency delivers a set of specifications with tolerances.

I think the ruggedness of a scope is driven by a mixture of certain design features and the right specifications. NF and Trijicon have figured this out, but I think the Maven RS1.2 accidentally hit the right balance.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you can just call up LOW and say "Give me a rugged scope." Especially if it's significantly different than what's already on the market. Who knows how many iterations it would take to prototype and tweak specs, with each unit taking 6+ months to produce.

These may be some good points, but LOW also almost certainly has some preferred design firms they could recommend. People they've worked with, and who know how to work with them.

 

[Gettin’by]

Yes, but would prefer 14-18x for the top end

 

[ElPollo]

Scope specs:

FFP 3-12x40 to 3-12x44mm

Consistently holds zero through 3-foot drops and 3,000 rounds of constant use.

The reticle is specially designed for 25 to 600 yards, with bold outer posts and correct center aiming references.

Zero Stop

Low profile top turret.

Capped windage.

Large eye box

Good glass

20oz


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ryan—Can you share anything about how the company you are talking with viewed the responses to your thread here? Were they surprised, responsive, or dismissive?

 

[nephewjephew]

Scope specs:

FFP 3-12x40 to 3-12x44mm

Consistently holds zero through 3-foot drops and 3,000 rounds of constant use.

The reticle is specially designed for 25 to 600 yards, with bold outer posts and correct center aiming references.

Zero Stop

Low profile top turret.

Capped windage.

Large eye box

Good glass

20oz


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

yes

 

[roosiebull]

All:

It’s a serious question from Ryan. This is not just a feeler post. No presale or other nonsense.


If a 3-12x40’ish mil/mil scope was offered that was consistently reliable and durable, was tested heavily, had multiple reticles that were truly usable/visible from 3-12x, a good/great eyebox and DOF, low profile zero stop elevation and capped windage; and was under $1,500- would you buy it?

Yes, I need another scope soon, assuming this isn’t a random question, I might wait and see how this unfolds

 

[OneGunTex]

Skipped some of the pages. But yeah I'd put one on a rifle.

Ideal for me is 4-16x44 non-illum

 

[OneGunTex]

Also, can someone point me to the thread where everyone decided low power was better than high power? Not being sarcastic, legit interested because I've always been on the side of "aim small, miss small"

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Also, can someone point me to the thread where everyone decided low power was better than high power? Not being sarcastic, legit interested because I've always been on the side of "aim small, miss small"

Too high of a power reduces field of view and increases the likelihood you loose sight picture on the shot. If you didn't see what happened with the shot you've lost valuable information and also loose time reacquiring the animal in the scope. Apples to apples, more animals are likely lost or rodeo's created IF that first shot doesn't do the job and a follow up shot is needed while folks struggle (and probably zoom out) to find the animal again. Also when folks loose the animal while setting up for the shot, have to zoom out and find it and then zoom back in for "aim small" they waste time and potentially loose opportunities.

Aiming to within a 1/4" or whatever is relevant for punching paper, its not relevant for hunting big game where aiming within 1" or whatever is completely suitable for practicality.

 

[dmm08300]

~1k definitely in for several

 

[ClunesAdventures]

In all seriousness, why would you not buy a scope that fit those parameters for 99.9% of true world hunting scenarios (insta-hunter 1,000 yard animal shots excluded)?

Pending you can get them to me up in Canada I would likely be buying 2, if we can keep them around $2K CAN.

 

[2-Stix]

Too high of a power reduces field of view and increases the likelihood you loose sight picture on the shot. If you didn't see what happened with the shot you've lost valuable information and also loose time reacquiring the animal in the scope. Apples to apples, more animals are likely lost or rodeo's created IF that first shot doesn't do the job and a follow up shot is needed while folks struggle (and probably zoom out) to find the animal again. Also when folks loose the animal while setting up for the shot, have to zoom out and find it and then zoom back in for "aim small" they waste time and potentially loose opportunities.

Aiming to within a 1/4" or whatever is relevant for punching paper, its not relevant for hunting big game where aiming within 1" or whatever is completely suitable for practicality.

On this note...I shoot just as accurate at 100 to 600 with my x10 and my x15...it just doesn't seem as accurate from the rifle...but out on the target it is. It takes some of the wiggle out and I think there is a bit more confidence in the shot.

 

[Felix40]

There are already a bunch of high magnification options too. Most of what nightforce makes. It adds a bunch of cost and weight though. There’s very limited options for reliable, fairly lightweight, no frills, affordable hunting scopes.