Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Scope field evaluations on rokslide
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="nksmfamjp" data-source="post: 2961193" data-attributes="member: 1951"><p>I've been following Form for a couple years. I like what he is doing. The test protocol may not be perfect, but it seems reasonably consistent. Oddly, he has a very high failure rate.</p><p></p><p>I was at an NRA show, last time it was in IN. While Nightforce was banging an optic loudly on a steel plate in the background and retesting it as a demo, I spoke to another optic maker about these tests. My point was simply that this is a valid use case and you should get ahead of this by showing what punishment your optics can take. The guy literally goes off on me about how these tests are unrepeatable, unrealistic and just stupid. He simply went so far as to claim he knows Form is paid for those reviews by the winners! I simply said, so you have never fallen in the field in your life? You don't fly? He kept pushing how a good owner always checks zero after an incident. Sadly, I lost a lot of respect that day.</p><p></p><p>What is crazy about this is falling is real. I fell once and the optic remained zeroed. Also, with the half decent optics I run, I don't need to rezero after hunting or after flying, even though I do check. So, my experience does not align to most optics cannot hold zero over a forest service road.</p><p></p><p>I find it odd that companies who report their products as shockproof refuse to prove it under real conditions. I also see it as a huge opportunity to get ahead of this and show your optics achieve x,y, or z. I don't even care if I bought optics yesterday that cannot sustain a 2" fall onto a pillow! I just want a test with a number that I can use to spend my money better next time.</p><p></p><p>Actually, I find optics sales as smoke and mirrors. The companies surely are using optical data internally to define good at a price point and also to confirm shipping conditions. They cannot just design these things and look through the and pull a price out of the air….then trust some one else to give it the old calibrated eyeball to ship.</p><p></p><p>Personally I believe this all to be a huge coverup by the optics makers that allow them to use subpar lower quality parts in expensive optics, then back them with a warranty that customers think is great. Well, if I make a scope for $100, sell it for $500, I can afford to give away a lot of warranty replacements. Where most products are $250-$300 to make for a $500 sales price.</p><p></p><p>Can you believe we spend $2000-$5000 on things we cannot objectively state a performance spec for clarity or holding zero? Imagine buying a car and your buddy asks how much power does it have….and your answer was….good…well they don't say. I guess they didn't want to tell me. They did show me I paid twice as much as your car, so it must be more good'r, right?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="nksmfamjp, post: 2961193, member: 1951"] I've been following Form for a couple years. I like what he is doing. The test protocol may not be perfect, but it seems reasonably consistent. Oddly, he has a very high failure rate. I was at an NRA show, last time it was in IN. While Nightforce was banging an optic loudly on a steel plate in the background and retesting it as a demo, I spoke to another optic maker about these tests. My point was simply that this is a valid use case and you should get ahead of this by showing what punishment your optics can take. The guy literally goes off on me about how these tests are unrepeatable, unrealistic and just stupid. He simply went so far as to claim he knows Form is paid for those reviews by the winners! I simply said, so you have never fallen in the field in your life? You don’t fly? He kept pushing how a good owner always checks zero after an incident. Sadly, I lost a lot of respect that day. What is crazy about this is falling is real. I fell once and the optic remained zeroed. Also, with the half decent optics I run, I don’t need to rezero after hunting or after flying, even though I do check. So, my experience does not align to most optics cannot hold zero over a forest service road. I find it odd that companies who report their products as shockproof refuse to prove it under real conditions. I also see it as a huge opportunity to get ahead of this and show your optics achieve x,y, or z. I don’t even care if I bought optics yesterday that cannot sustain a 2” fall onto a pillow! I just want a test with a number that I can use to spend my money better next time. Actually, I find optics sales as smoke and mirrors. The companies surely are using optical data internally to define good at a price point and also to confirm shipping conditions. They cannot just design these things and look through the and pull a price out of the air….then trust some one else to give it the old calibrated eyeball to ship. Personally I believe this all to be a huge coverup by the optics makers that allow them to use subpar lower quality parts in expensive optics, then back them with a warranty that customers think is great. Well, if I make a scope for $100, sell it for $500, I can afford to give away a lot of warranty replacements. Where most products are $250-$300 to make for a $500 sales price. Can you believe we spend $2000-$5000 on things we cannot objectively state a performance spec for clarity or holding zero? Imagine buying a car and your buddy asks how much power does it have….and your answer was….good…well they don’t say. I guess they didn’t want to tell me. They did show me I paid twice as much as your car, so it must be more good’r, right? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Scope field evaluations on rokslide
Top