Sorry guys, I wrote a long answer to your gentle rebukes
but it disappeared into the ether, so I'll start again.
A recent Nightforce ad I've found claims they can withstand virtually anything, including blistering heat. Shouldn't that mean paint inside will stay where they put it?
Seductive is a word, jimmyp, that has application to your brain, as well as your jimmy.
While I am sure using machine guns to tot up the immense punishment NF claims their scopes have gone through makes sense, the mass and recoil absorption of those weapons is likely to be so great that the effect on a scope would be more akin to the vibrations of a massive engine than, say, a 10lb 505 Gibbs. However, the 20mm Vulcan I referred to is seen on p2 of their 2017 catalogue with the shooter, a Mr John Buhay. It is a very long tactical rifle with the long-objective scope I referred to mounted on top.
I am chuffed that you all like Nightforce so much, because the brand may be as Australian as Bushnell is American, and I suspect it is a fair bit more reliable. I would just like a bit more honesty from the whole optics industry about that 60-year-old elephant in the room, constantly centred reticles. Makers are always telling us about the marvellous new improvements they've made to fix it - but never exactly why they were needed.
The said catalogue (p23) shows an erector tube spring that spends two weeks in a polishing tumbler before going into their NXS model, "to assure there are no rough spots or burrs to interfere with perfectly smooth operation." Why is that necessary? Well, it is my belief that if ever a scope is wound to the edge of one of its turret adjustments (as is the new rage in long-distance shooting) the spring(s) may be compressed on a far-from-optimal arc against the outer tube. If there is any hesitation in its moving around that outer wall, the adjustments may not track properly and breakage of a contorted spring under heavy recoil becomes more likely. Even though the eulogy to that spring takes up a longish paragraph, no mention is made of these matters.
Similarly, two of the large pages are devoted to the Precision Benchrest line (p52/53). The scope photo stretches 40cm and everything you can imagine is explained EXCEPT that little knob at 7.30 on the turret bulge, at the central focus of the double-page spread. Perhaps it is ignored because the patent belongs to Burris, but they could have explained why it was needed (eg if you put this scope on a massive tactical rifle, the erector tube will really get jumping if you don't fasten it in place, somehow). I hope it works - and John Buhay seems to attest that it does, though I know of another guy who has wrecked three Burris Posi-Lock scopes on a 416 Rigby.
