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="Paladin300" data-source="post: 2976800" data-attributes="member: 115299"><p>Did you use a different set of rings or change the base? I have seen a Pentax do that but it had a broken windage adjustment. Scope had thousands of rounds through it. Any scope can break under the right circumstances. There are just so many variables that come into play. Certainly some scopes are better than others. Certain models from one brand can be worse than others because of the materials used, say brass verses stainless steal, aluminum verses steel, polymers verses glass, all various materials used at various price points. Tube diameter is another issue. The larger the tube the more complex the internals become, the greater chance for a failure. There is a reason 30 and 34 have become the standard. The more compact the more complex, in regards to length. For every innovation you introduce a new complexity. In theory, the shorter, lighter and larger the tube diameter the greater chance for failure. Add in cheap materials and the best laid plans of mice and men will fail. I think the test have merit, however there are flaws which have been pointed out. Interestingly every scope that passed with flying colors are long, 34 mm tubes or smaller with steel components and glass lenses an etched reticles, there in may lay your answer. All of them are fairly heavy. If you want to go lite and durable without compromising some reliability you are going to have to give up a little adjustment, light transmission and image quality most likely. When talking long range hunting that doesn't translate into a good thing. PRS is a brutal test of a shooter's equipment, nothing on earth not even military applications pushes the limits of reliability like the sport of PRS does. Those rifles are banged around from stag to stag every weekend for months and see thousands of rounds a year. Most hunting rifle never see a thousand rounds. A good measure of scope durability wound be to see which ones professional PRS shooters use. However, chances are you aren't going to like the weight of those scopes for a hunting rig anymore than the rifles. Lugging a fifteen to twenty pound rifle around the mountains is not fun for most people. That said, a 5-6 lbs rifle is less than most shooters can handle accurately under stress. The balance lies somewhere in the middle. I use one set of criteria for my competition setup and another for my hunting rifles, though there is cross over, each platform is mission specific. I buy the best equipment I can afford for the task at hand. If you told me you were going to hunt elk and wanted a light weight reliable scope around a $1000, I would most likely put you in a VX5 or LHT and not think twice. If you told me you could afford to spend twice that it might be an NX8. If there were no budget and you were willing to spend 3K it would be a Schmidt. Less than $500 probably a used older Luepold. Again, we're talking LRH scopes not PRS or Tactical scopes which most of the scopes that passed represent. JMO&Ts</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Paladin300, post: 2976800, member: 115299"] Did you use a different set of rings or change the base? I have seen a Pentax do that but it had a broken windage adjustment. Scope had thousands of rounds through it. Any scope can break under the right circumstances. There are just so many variables that come into play. Certainly some scopes are better than others. Certain models from one brand can be worse than others because of the materials used, say brass verses stainless steal, aluminum verses steel, polymers verses glass, all various materials used at various price points. Tube diameter is another issue. The larger the tube the more complex the internals become, the greater chance for a failure. There is a reason 30 and 34 have become the standard. The more compact the more complex, in regards to length. For every innovation you introduce a new complexity. In theory, the shorter, lighter and larger the tube diameter the greater chance for failure. Add in cheap materials and the best laid plans of mice and men will fail. I think the test have merit, however there are flaws which have been pointed out. Interestingly every scope that passed with flying colors are long, 34 mm tubes or smaller with steel components and glass lenses an etched reticles, there in may lay your answer. All of them are fairly heavy. If you want to go lite and durable without compromising some reliability you are going to have to give up a little adjustment, light transmission and image quality most likely. When talking long range hunting that doesn’t translate into a good thing. PRS is a brutal test of a shooter’s equipment, nothing on earth not even military applications pushes the limits of reliability like the sport of PRS does. Those rifles are banged around from stag to stag every weekend for months and see thousands of rounds a year. Most hunting rifle never see a thousand rounds. A good measure of scope durability wound be to see which ones professional PRS shooters use. However, chances are you aren’t going to like the weight of those scopes for a hunting rig anymore than the rifles. Lugging a fifteen to twenty pound rifle around the mountains is not fun for most people. That said, a 5-6 lbs rifle is less than most shooters can handle accurately under stress. The balance lies somewhere in the middle. I use one set of criteria for my competition setup and another for my hunting rifles, though there is cross over, each platform is mission specific. I buy the best equipment I can afford for the task at hand. If you told me you were going to hunt elk and wanted a light weight reliable scope around a $1000, I would most likely put you in a VX5 or LHT and not think twice. If you told me you could afford to spend twice that it might be an NX8. If there were no budget and you were willing to spend 3K it would be a Schmidt. Less than $500 probably a used older Luepold. Again, we’re talking LRH scopes not PRS or Tactical scopes which most of the scopes that passed represent. JMO&Ts [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Scope field evaluations on rokslide
Top