Scope field evaluations on rokslide

[L2land]

That's a lot of abuse in that video. It's also different than abusing a mounted scope and testing for absolute zero. To the skeptic, a lot could be disguised in that video. To the optimist, they'll feel pretty good about their odds of staying on target at closer ranges if they drop their gun.
I wonder what is actually going on with many of the scopes moving from their zero on the RS tests and how much is related to the mount. Is there something that is just completely different or overbuilt on NF scopes that seem to make all of them resilient to abuse regardless of the model? I'm not familiar with their internals but it seems like there's something there and probably with other tactical scopes that perform the same that they have in common.

 

[bultinkle]

That's a lot of abuse in that video. It's also different than abusing a mounted scope and testing for absolute zero. To the skeptic, a lot could be disguised in that video. To the optimist, they'll feel pretty good about their odds of staying on target at closer ranges if they drop their gun.
I wonder what is actually going on with many of the scopes moving from their zero on the RS tests and how much is related to the mount. Is there something that is just completely different or overbuilt on NF scopes that seem to make all of them resilient to abuse regardless of the model? I'm not familiar with their internals but it seems like there's something there and probably with other tactical scopes that perform the same that they have in common.

Everytime a scope fails at manufacturer suggested ring torque due to slippage he remounts them at 18,20in lbs with thread locker just like all the scopes that he has that pass.

Some of them then pass and he considers them good to go, and that the mounts/mount specs were not adequate. But when they fail the same exact mount that a 200$ Swfa is passing with …. Yeah it's just a fail.

Specific mounts/rings have also been singled out with scopes failing in them and then passing in more tested reliable mounts/rings

• Nightforce models pretty much all pass
• Japanese Swfa models pass (fixed and hd models)
• Trijicons have passed
• S&B Klassik pass(pm2 not tested but claimed solid)
• There is a Zeiss lrp s3 that hasn't failed yet but it's not complete
• I think he said bushnell elites have done well but maybe not tested since his more formal protocol was set

Either way, he definitely isn't scared to say a scope passed, and when they fail at low ring torque he always gives them a shot at higher torque/with mounts that have shown to be reliable


Fwiw the rifle used is glued and screwed in the chassis and the pic rail is permanently bonded, and is a 308 or 223 to reduce possibility of barrel wear being a variable

 

[Quicksilver338]

He also says ring manufacturers saying to torque very little is a cop out for a poorly built scope in general terms, weight equals reliability. All the nightforce line, well almost all are like 28oz and above. You'll find other scopes passing the tests to follow along the same general principles. At this point it almost seems not possible to lose weight and keep reliability. Now I'm sure there are plenty of RTZ and tracking passes in lighter scopes, but the drop tests is where they usually go to die. Take that how you will.

 

[Barehandlineman11]

I do have to wonder why these people are all so ridiculously uncoordinated, that they are constantly dropping their rifles to?
Thank God they don't have babies, or carry eggs in from the car!
But I wouldn't let them use anything of mine, and I'm usually an extremely sharing person.
But no way I would lend them anything, not my ATV, snowmobile, guns, rangefinder, dishes, laptop, cellphone, or anything else, because they are incapable of being at all careful, or even coordinated enough to carry, or ride anything.
I was in Nursing school with a guy like this years ago, he was always dropping stuff, tripped while walking, and I soon distanced myself from him. If I ever drop my rifle, it would make me do some deep self evaluation. It would likely make the decision to never have kids easier to, because it would seem logical that I would also be dropping my baby.
Hopefully you droppers have a great case on your phone, we all know how delicate iphone screens are. I've seen them break even from a gentle fall.
When I get so old that I'm dropping my rifles, I will know that its time to stop hunting, and take up bingo.....

Two years ago i set my rifle against side by side elk hunting. Then my buddy decided to move it before we took off down the canyon he backed over the top of my lapua buried my atacr through 12 inches of snow into the dirt. I killed my bull at 1280 yards the next morning. This year i slipped on a rock running down mountain to cut off a buck running in timber. 18 inches of snow on ground and i ate it hard bruised from tail bone too knee. Granted gun didnt touch ground but it could have easily. Pretty easy to drop a gun in real world backcountry hunting in steep ground

 

[L2land]

He also says ring manufacturers saying to torque very little is a cop out for a poorly built scope in general terms, weight equals reliability. All the nightforce line, well almost all are like 28oz and above. You'll find other scopes passing the tests to follow along the same general principles. At this point it almost seems not possible to lose weight and keep reliability. Now I'm sure there are plenty of RTZ and tracking passes in lighter scopes, but the drop tests is where they usually go to die. Take that how you will.

That's where I'm at. I think tube construction is a big factor on these drop tests. Thick, single piece billet tubes along with tight tolerances on parts and fitment. You can make a mid weight scope that sucks but you can't make one that's bombproof and really light. Linear shock from recoil would be able to be dealt with on lighter scopes without issues but when they experience the side impacts the tubes are flexing or deforming.

 

[bultinkle]

Schmidt klassik 21 ounces
Trijicon credo 23 ounces
Swfa 3-15 24 ounces
Swfa 3-9 20 ounces
Swfa fixed 10/6 20 ounces


All passed.

It does seem that going for ultralight weight first is not going to work. But there are "light" scopes that work and pass still

It does seem like it a scope company tells you not to go over 16 in lbs it might be a red flag…

 

[adk hunter]

I've had good luck with scopes holding zero year after year, particularly with older vari-X-IIIs and Monarchs. 2 of 5 Swarovskis have held zero, as have 3 Zeiss. Although they've not seen enough years to prove themselves, several Tract Torics and a LRHSi have also been stellar in holding zero and dialing. Because I do a lot of shooting/load development, I would immediately notice a change in point of impact.

I have several SWFA scopes that track/hold zero, but I can't get used to the step down in glass quality….even the HD variety. I'll probably sell them to fund new purchases

What Form's testing has done is make me rethink future purchases…. For everyday use where and how I hunt, I'm not convinced being able to withstand a 36" drop test is truly required. My instate hunting is just outside the front door. For my annual western hunts, I always have at least one back up rifle ready to go in camp, or in a hard case in the truck/sxs. If I take a fall, another rifle will be used until I can check zero….because peace of mind matters a lot.

If was still capable hunting deep in the back country, I'm certain Form's tests would have me packing a NF around…again for the peace of mind. Similarly, if I had the ability to practice a ranges longer than the 360yds available on my place, I'm certain I'd pay more attention to scopes that track perfectly at a 1000yds or more. As it stands, I'm completely comfortable using my equipment to <550yds using the reticle or old fashioned hold over.

I do appreciate Form's evaluations and look at them every few weeks. He and many on this and other forums are extraordinary in their willingness to share knowledge.

Perfectly conveyed my thoughts to a tee

 

[Pdvdh]

Schmidt klassik 21 ounces
Trijicon credo 23 ounces
Swfa 3-15 24 ounces
Swfa 3-9 20 ounces
Swfa fixed 10/6 20 ounces


All passed.

It does seem that going for ultralight weight first is not going to work. But there are "light" scopes that work and pass still

It does seem like it a scope company tells you not to go over 16 in lbs it might be a red flag…

Thanks for summarizing.

Is there a summary page on RS, or did you have to read through all the individual scope test reviews?

I read a number of individual scope test reports. But it seemed like I'd have to read every one in order to get a summary of all scopes tested to date.

 

[Joe-boy]

The reaction to my 0.3 mrad was no surprise. What I meant is that if you shoot a group in each month of the year, some of them might be .1 or .15 mrad left and another one .1 or .15 mrad right. I think in real life this is the kind of deviation we have to live with. By checking the zero before the hunt one can reduce that, but as the conditions, clothing, support, grip etc change, there's always a teeny tiny shift in POI and we just need to live with that and verify it is of acceptable magnitude.

Of course I encourage everyone to check zero and I personally of course confirm zero whenever possible. One should still be pretty confident about it being within a click or two from where it's supposed to be and be very worried if it's not for no reason.

I could live with less than perfect optical quality or haul an extra ounce of weight, but a rifle that doesn't hold a zero is what I never want to experience again when hunting. I've had ****** optics and ****** rings that have failed me and I have learned. The gun needs to be pillar bedded and I want to use decent quality scope on decent quality mount. There is plenty of decent scopes and decent rings that get the job done just fine.

 

[bultinkle]

Thanks for summarizing.

Is there a summary page on RS, or did you have to read through all the individual scope test reviews?

I read a number of individual scope test reports. But it seemed like I'd have to read every one in order to get a summary of all scopes tested to date.

Unfortunately there is no cheat sheet, they want you to read them all.

I only mentioned the lightweight passers, all the nightforces passed as well, the minox zp5 passed, Swfa 5-20hd is beloved but I'm not sure he's technically gone through the whole test with one but he directly recommended it to me.

 

[Small Lady]

What scope does the Bureau prefer?

Leupold of course!!!

They have your tax dollars, so can afford the very best.

 

[Barehandlineman11]

No leupold is all they can afford because they give away our money too iran ukaraine and whoever else wants it

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Don't forget the people employed by Uncle Sam to infiltrate, disrupt and in some way attempt to criminalize the working tax paying Americans.
Gigantic waste, but another small step toward flipping a good thing over on its back.
So it will beg for help.

 

[Markga]

Could be, I don't tend to just fall down doing regular things like walking. In winter I love to run on slippery downhills, and then do what I call 'boot skiing '.
I don't drink alcohol much, and believe that helps. Had 1 beer so far in 2023, and also don't use drugs. Worked in Emerg frequently for years. Saw a lot of slip and falls by people who had been drinking, or using drugs.
Then we had trampoline users. Considering how few people own a trampoline, they sure caused a lot of Emerg visits. But nothing can beat out alcohol impairment, for falls coming into Emerg. Mix stairs and alcohol together, that is a bad combination.

Yes but it doesn't hurt near as bad if you're loaded